289 réponses à ce sujet

[wsandista]

I believe that DA3 should meet these criteria in terms of combat

• Enemies should follow the same rules as the party. Foes should use the same ruleset as the party, instead of behaving like Final Fantasy monsters with huge globs of health but low damage output. All opponents need to attack at the same speed as party members, use the same attack/defense mechanics as the party, draw from the ame Talent/Spell trees as the party, and damage like a party member of the same class.(The only exception are monsters, which have no class)
• Combat speed should be closer to the speed in DAO. While I thought that combat in DAO could get a little slow(particularly with a Two-Handed Warrior), DA2 was much too fast for my liking. I think using the DAO combat speeds as a base, then multiplying basic attack speeds by a factor of .8 would be a sufficient pace for combat.
• Multipliers for weapons need to be more diverse than in DA2, but more uniform than in DAO. Attribute multipliers should depend on the weapon style like in DAO, while unlike DAO, most weapons shouldn't have speed or attribute modifiers(the speed modifier on maces made them unusable)
• Bosses should just be extremely powerful enemies with high resistances(or immunities), not actiony fights that require the PC to move around into awkward positions while some attack is charging. Many of the boss fights in DA2 seems like they would fit in more in a Zelda game than an RPG.
• Traps should have much more of an impact. In both DAO and DA2, traps were more of an annoyance than a danger, I believe this should change. Traps need to have disastrous effects when triggered that can result in characters getting killed.

[Ylhaym]

1. Agree
2. I prefer a combat speed slower but closer to DA2 (But I agree a combat speed between DAO and DA2 is a sweet spot)
3. Agree
4. If I remember correctly, DA2 bosses have high resistances. A boss without any kind of mechanic to it is kind of boring to fight against. But that's just my opinion.
5. Agree. Not to the point of killing characters but should have enough impact to be kind of important.

[The Bellybutton]

1. Good point.
2. DA1: Just a little too slow. DA2: Loved the intensity! But a little too fast to fully utilize the abilities and strategies available to yourself and party members. Example: I got excited that I could use Silence on an en enemy mage as a templar. Most of the time, somebody else killed the mage before it was really of any use. Just found myself spamming other abilities. I loved having more player control during combat in DA2 though.
3. Yup
4. I liked the boss battles way better in DA1. I loved both games but something was definitely missing from the boss battles in DA2.
5. lol I agree. I would just plow through traps thinking "Silly traps! What a bother!" and be none the worse.

[TopcatPlayer]

Bring back finishers! Anyone remember the 1st time they killed that Ogre in DAO? I also liked the cross class attacks (staggered, disoriented, brittle) in DA2 simple to follow and fun to use. I just want combat to have WEIGHT to it again! It was fun being in an anime but that aint Dragon Age! They should use what they learnt from DA2 and use it for a template for a new, anime style game property... either that or Jade Empire 2

[The Bellybutton]

TopcatPlayer wrote...

Bring back finishers! Anyone remember the 1st time they killed that Ogre in DAO?

Yes, yes, and yes! I about peed myself when that happened for the first time. The finishers just made your character look crazy awesome. Although it was kind of comical when I made Wynn an arcane warrior and she jumps onto a high dragon's head in her robe and silly hat with a sword and aggressively chops it's face after spinning through the air.

[Face of Evil]

I disagree with Point #1 for a couple reasons. First, I believe that party members and PCs should be treated differently than enemies because it helps reinforce that these are exceptional people, not simply random NPCs who managed to get to a really high level.

Secondly, allowing NPCs to use party tactics was what led to silliness like archers spamming Scattershot in DAO. Can you imagine a group of enemies setting up a cross-class combo in DA2? You'd have TPKs occuring within a few seconds.

Also, I'm not sure you can increase the lethality of traps significantly.

Modifié par Face of Evil, 25 mai 2012 - 08:03 .

[brushyourteeth]

The Bellybutton wrote...

2. DA1: Just a little too slow. DA2: Loved the intensity! But a little too fast to fully utilize the abilities and strategies available to yourself and party members. Example: I got excited that I could use Silence on an en enemy mage as a templar. Most of the time, somebody else killed the mage before it was really of any use. Just found myself spamming other abilities. I loved having more player control during combat in DA2 though.

You too? Urgh I absolutely hated that about DAII! What's the point of being a Templar if you never get to put those robes in their proper place before killing them? Intensity is the perfect word for it. DAIII needs intense combat but it shouldn't feel as though it's completely out of your control. At least most of the time.

[ashwind]

Enemies following the same rule as party might not be a good thing. Player skills are designed to be flamboyant and powerful, a bunch of archers ambushing on high ground raining arrows on your party could kill your party instantly, or a bunch of mages doing combos on you from far and high. Fights will no doubt be more frustrating, realistic but it will be less epic.

Attack speed, Movement speed and Combat speed has nothing to do with the chaotic combat in DA2 and DAO. There are games with faster pace combat that is perfectly tactical and orderly. Bioware just did a very poor job with combat in both DA.

Traps. now this the enemies will have to follow the rules of the players: you step on a trap, it snares you, it does not matter if you are PC or NPC. I hate the STUPID implementation that enemies can dance on traps and not get snared just because its their trap. DA's trap implementation is bad, stupid and dumb in the most epic way doable by mortals.

[Gibb_Shepard]

The enemies having the same rule set as the party is a must IMO. In dao ithat was the case, and the combat was so much mor versatile for it. You didn't know whether or not the Mage would use a buff or debug, or a straight out attack. And even then you didn't know what attack itd be.

Look at da2. We have teleporters with 2 friggin abilities. Takes the fun out of it completely.

[Wulfram]

1. I'm not going to be picky about whether enemies follow exactly the same ruleset, but allowing them to use many of the same talents as the PC is good. And having a similar scaled HP would allow more sensible Friendly Fire.

2. Combat speed, I don't know. 2 handed was too fast, otherwise DA2 was OK.

3. Not bothered, as long as it's fairly balanced.

4. DA2 bosses were a bit too heavy on the actiony stuff, yeah. Though I don't think that's without it's place, it could just do with being a bit less dominant - maybe give bosses one big dodgable attack to break things up, while the rest is more normal.

5. Traps are silly and should be used a lot less. They're almost never fun, and mostly seem to exist as a way to force you to have a rogue. And there's no reason they should be so ubiquitous story wise.

[MichaelStuart]

1.Disagree, I don't want to be fighting clones of myself. Agree about the health.

2.Disagree, I found combat dragged on way to long in both games. This may be due to the health of eneimes.

3.They should get rid of attributes altogether.

4.Disagree, the ability to move and doge attack the combat mildly better. (Dragon age 2 combat was nothing close to how Zelda games are played)

5.somewhat agree, only if I can throw enemies into they own traps

Modifié par MichaelStuart, 25 mai 2012 - 11:14 .

[Jerrybnsn]

I missed tearing through a group with one or two hits against weaker enemies. It really made me feel like I was finally becoming the BBA everyone was expecting me to be. In DA2, all the enemies seemed to level up with you and it still took eight to fifteen hits to kill one.

I agree with bringing back the finishing moves too. They were a sweet touch.

[MissOuJ]

• Disagree. Somewhat: enemies having party tactics might not end so well for the reasons already mentioned above. However, having PC tallents plus better AI, that I can get on board with.
• Disagree. Strongly. I don't know about PC gamers, but as a console gamer, the combat of DA:O is boring, too slow and in general just dull. Faster combat, better battle animations and cross class combos were one of the best improvements DAII had. Playing dual wielding rogue actually felt like Hawke knew his/her way around daggers, in stead of random stabbity-stab-stab of DA:O. Also, DAII mage battle animations + Haste = Awesomeness.
• Agree. Not really a make-or-break question for me, but yes.
• Kinda Disagree. I think Yahtzee said it best in one of his reviews: Boss battles are supposed to be "final exams" on what you're learned up to that point, not a regular enemy that just had a pile more protein bars than the rest of the bad guys. When we play, we(or at least I) fall into a certain pattern pretty quickly, depending of the class of the PC, the party, and the playstyle. Boss battles are supposed to snap us out of those patterns, re-examine how we can use the game mechanics to our advantage in this unique situation to win the fight. Resistances and immunities play a part in this, but that's not the whole story. For example: think about how easy Arishok battle would be without his charge/impale abilities. He'd be just boring old rogue with extra big knives/swords/whatever those things are, resistance to fire and electric damage, plus ridiculous amount of hitpoints and a large health potion pool.
• Agree. If we're going to have traps, the penalty for stepping into one should be a bit more than missed XP.

[Dakota Strider]

1. Absolutely. A world that cannot maintain consistancy in this regard becomes nothing more than a fairy tale, rather than an alternate reality.
2. Even a tad bit slower than DAO would be good. I would prefer a compromise between DAO and NwN. The faster the combat, the "dumber" the monster AI has to be, because even the most deft player is going to be unable to keep up with a computer that is allowed to go at full speed. So at high speeds, a dumber AI is required to give players a chance. This means less tactics, less abilitities, and usually just a repeat of 3 or 4 moves over and over which become predictable. A slower game, means that the AI can have monsters that are given a large menu of tactics and spells, just as the player has. And that is how you achieve goal #1.
3. Weapons do need to be tweeked. There should be a way for them to do something closer to the D&D style they used to use in BG and NwN, without violating copyright laws.
4. Agreed. A human/demi-human boss should be similar to a player character, but perhaps 5-10 levels higher, with something "special", but not something over-the-top, that makes it stand out. Monster bosses should be at the top of the food chain, for their species, but once again, not something that is completely different than the rest of its type.
5. I would be satisfied if traps were like DAO, but making them more severe would be fine. My rogues in DAO messed up some tough bosses with traps, but it took a lot of them.

Anything that makes the game feel more tactical, and less like a fast-twitch clickfest is welcome.

[FaeQueenCory]

wsandista wrote...

I believe that DA3 should meet these criteria in terms of combat

• Enemies should follow the same rules as the party. Foes should use the same ruleset as the party, instead of behaving like Final Fantasy monsters with huge globs of health but low damage output. All opponents need to attack at the same speed as party members, use the same attack/defense mechanics as the party, draw from the ame Talent/Spell trees as the party, and damage like a party member of the same class.(The only exception are monsters, which have no class)

DEAR ANDRASTE YES! That was one of my biggest beefs with DA2... Enemy Blood Magic Spells >>>>>>> PC Blood Magic Spells. Even fully upgraded, the enemy blood mage abilities dwarfed the PC's in power...

[AkiKishi]

wsandista wrote...

I believe that DA3 should meet these criteria in terms of combat

• Enemies should follow the same rules as the party. Foes should use the same ruleset as the party, instead of behaving like Final Fantasy monsters with huge globs of health but low damage output. All opponents need to attack at the same speed as party members, use the same attack/defense mechanics as the party, draw from the ame Talent/Spell trees as the party, and damage like a party member of the same class.(The only exception are monsters, which have no class)
• Combat speed should be closer to the speed in DAO. While I thought that combat in DAO could get a little slow(particularly with a Two-Handed Warrior), DA2 was much too fast for my liking. I think using the DAO combat speeds as a base, then multiplying basic attack speeds by a factor of .8 would be a sufficient pace for combat.
  
• Multipliers for weapons need to be more diverse than in DA2, but more uniform than in DAO. Attribute multipliers should depend on the weapon style like in DAO, while unlike DAO, most weapons shouldn't have speed or attribute modifiers(the speed modifier on maces made them unusable)
  
• Bosses should just be extremely powerful enemies with high resistances(or immunities), not actiony fights that require the PC to move around into awkward positions while some attack is charging. Many of the boss fights in DA2 seems like they would fit in more in a Zelda game than an RPG.
  
• Traps should have much more of an impact. In both DAO and DA2, traps were more of an annoyance than a danger, I believe this should change. Traps need to have disastrous effects when triggered that can result in characters getting killed.

[*]1. Kind of a requirement when you have Friendly Fire. Worst spell in FFXII to have used on you was confuse for the reasons you gave.
[*]2. Works for me.
[*]3. Don't care.
[*]4. Only the ARW felt like it belonged more in something like GoW. Otherwise things just had far too many hp's.
[*]5. Since the only thing that happens with a dealy trap is a reload ,unless the game is tracking those. Not worth the effort.

[Sith Grey Warden]

1. Yes!!! I don't know how much time I wasted trying to find that teleport spell in the level-up screen. If NPCs know a spell or talent, there should be some way for the PC to gain that knowledge.

2. Yes please.

3. *shrugs*

4. Yes. I much prefered the tactical nature of boss fights in DAO to the kiting and running of fighting the Arishok or a dragon or Rock Wraith in DA2.

5. *shrugs*

[Sith Grey Warden]

MissOuJ wrote...

Kinda Disagree. I think Yahtzee said it best in one of his reviews: Boss battles are supposed to be "final exams" on what you're learned up to that point, not a regular enemy that just had a pile more protein bars than the rest of the bad guys. When we play, we(or at least I) fall into a certain pattern pretty quickly, depending of the class of the PC, the party, and the playstyle. Boss battles are supposed to snap us out of those patterns, re-examine how we can use the game mechanics to our advantage in this unique situation to win the fight. Resistances and immunities play a part in this, but that's not the whole story.

Yahtzee was referring to the direct fights in DE:HR being so radically different from the ways many people played the rest of the game, insinuating that they should have had some option to fight by stealth instead. This is directly contradictory to what you then say that they should snap us out of our playing patterns.

For example: think about how easy Arishok battle would be without his charge/impale abilities. He'd be just boring old rogue with extra big knives/swords/whatever those things are, resistance to fire and electric damage, plus ridiculous amount of hitpoints and a large health potion pool.

So lower the total amount of hit points. Give him a regular attack that makes him dangerous, but that you can deal with face-to-face. I found the Loghain duel in DAO quite a challenging one on some runs, yet he followed all the rules that your companions followed. The most boring moment in the DA series so far for me was when I had to fight the Arishok by running around and taking potshots for half an hour... with a 2H Warrior!

[PsychoBlonde]

1. I agree with this, and I'd like to point out that you don't HAVE to have the situation where gobs of enemies devastate the party with abilities because you can TAKE OUT THE GOBS OF ENEMIES. It's silly for you to be murdering the population of a small village in every fight. Have basic mooks be lower-level, so their points are distributed in the low-tier abilities, and not the high level "hit everything in sight 30 times" abilities. Also, it should be possible to interrupt abilities. This alone adds tactical interest. Oh, and MAGES, EVEN ELITE MAGES, SHOULD NOT HAVE MORE HP THAN WARRIORS. SAME GOES FOR ROGUES. And for god's sake fix the line-of-sight so you don't have mages targeting spells THROUGH WALLS. If I can't target them, they sure as hell shouldn't be able to target me. Heck, you can then put in special abilities that are designed to be thrown out and hit things that are around the corner, a la Hydra from Diablo 1 and 2.

2. I don't really care about this as long as the abilities are designed in a way that's appropriate for the combat speed. I'm playing Diablo 3 at the moment, and it's a way better tactical combat game than DAO or DA2 even though it sometimes feels like the entire game is populated with meth addicts, my character included. What I'd really like would be for them to design the interface so that you really can "lead like a general", instead of it feeling like you're trying to multi-box an MMO. Pausing and switching between the viewpoints of different characters feels a lot, to me, like alt-tabbing or switching to the other keyboard. It breaks flow and is unnecessary. No reason why you can't have the quickbars for all 4 characters up at one time. Heck, they could even make it so that in order to move a given character in combat, you just hold down the number button that (formerly) corresponded with the "switch to this character" option. Then you just click on where you want them to go. Make it so the out-of-combat travel-cam is the standard third-person-over-the-shoulder view, and have a free-moving tactical cam for combat that doesn't focus on any character. Make it hold-number-right-click to center the tac cam on a given character.

3. I think this could be done better by having these modifiers/multipliers rolled in to various abilities, so instead of just having Generic Two-Handed Warrior, you can have Two-Handed Hammer Guy (who would get better multipliers for hammers, and maybe a speed boost), Two-Handed Sword Guy (likewise), Two-Handed Axe Guy, Two-Handed Polearm Guy, etc. You could add several new and interesting trees to the game like this, and have a broad array of abilities to really customize characters.

4. Again, this is a multi-boxing-an-MMO problem. I don't mind fights that encourage you to use the terrain (in the sense of choke points, line-of-sighting, etc.), but what I did mind was the "boss becomes temporarily immune to attacks while spamming adds" stuff. The first fight with the medium-sized dragon in The Bone Pit was actually a much hairier and cooler fight than any of the dragons that came after, and there were NO adds and NO special attacks, just a BIGASS DRAGON KICKING YOUR BUTT. But yes, in a game where moving 4 characters at once in any kind of concerted, rational manner is not just difficult but sometimes impossible, the Attacks-you-must-dodge thing needs to GO. And the traps-you-must-time-to-get-through need to go, also.

5. I really like the way they do traps in DDO. There's a huge variety, they position them cleverly, and the disarming mechanic is fun. Traps should hit everyone without distinction, making them a fun part of tactical usage. In addition, you should not DISARM a trap by CLICKING ON THE TRIGGER. I can't tell you the number of times my rogue stepped right on the trap after I told her to disarm it. If the pathfinding is the slightest bit dodgy, this is just silly. It'd be nice if they brought back trap crafting, as well. They also need to increase the radius at which you can detect traps, as it was in DA2, the radius was so small that you needed incredible reflexes to stop a moving character before they walked right into it. Maybe base the radius off cunning. It'd also be nice to have traps that you can still disarm AFTER you've accidentally set them off--they keep firing until you turn them off. Any increase in variety would be nice.

[MissOuJ]

Sith Grey Warden wrote...

MissOuJ wrote...

Kinda Disagree. I think Yahtzee said it best in one of his reviews: Boss battles are supposed to be "final exams" on what you're learned up to that point, not a regular enemy that just had a pile more protein bars than the rest of the bad guys. When we play, we(or at least I) fall into a certain pattern pretty quickly, depending of the class of the PC, the party, and the playstyle. Boss battles are supposed to snap us out of those patterns, re-examine how we can use the game mechanics to our advantage in this unique situation to win the fight. Resistances and immunities play a part in this, but that's not the whole story.

Yahtzee was referring to the direct fights in DE:HR being so radically different from the ways many people played the rest of the game, insinuating that they should have had some option to fight by stealth instead. This is directly contradictory to what you then say that they should snap us out of our playing patterns.

You got me there. What I meant was that a boss fights should challenge you to use your existing talents in a new way and change your behaviour so the game mechanics work to your favour. What DE:HR did wasn't as much "use your existing talents and knowledge to win" as it was "we don't care if you're doing a pacifist run, you're going to shoot that boss dead". I think Yahtzee's general point still applies.

For example: think about how easy Arishok battle would be without his charge/impale abilities. He'd be just boring old rogue with extra big knives/swords/whatever those things are, resistance to fire and electric damage, plus ridiculous amount of hitpoints and a large health potion pool.

So lower the total amount of hit points. Give him a regular attack that makes him dangerous, but that you can deal with face-to-face. I found the Loghain duel in DAO quite a challenging one on some runs, yet he followed all the rules that your companions followed. The most boring moment in the DA series so far for me was when I had to fight the Arishok by running around and taking potshots for half an hour... with a 2H Warrior!

Try that fight as a mage. Seriously. If you have even the minimum amount of offensive/debuff spells, it's ridiculously easy and boring. Granted, I haven't tried that fight on Nightmare.

I think what would've made the Arishok fight better would've been a smaller health potion pool - having 1/4th of his HP regen time and time again was what (for me) made that fight frustrating, but those charge/impale moves really put the fear of the Maker in my squishy little mages. I remember my 2H warrior tanking with Dog, throwing tar bombs and sneaking away to chuck health potions, but that might've been on Normal...

I don't know - maybe in RPGs making boss fights where every class/party build has close to equal chances of success and challenge is hard, and having boss-unique powers is there to level the playing field. Then again, if they're boss-unique there's really no way you could prepare for them, and you'd just have to find out through trial and error which of your spells/talents/tactics work against it... which isn't alltogether bad in my opinnion.

Maybe a mix of unique and PC-available talents for bosses?

Modifié par MissOuJ, 25 mai 2012 - 03:15 .

[wsandista]

Sith Grey Warden wrote...

So lower the total amount of hit points. Give him a regular attack that makes him dangerous, but that you can deal with face-to-face. I found the Loghain duel in DAO quite a challenging one on some runs, yet he followed all the rules that your companions followed. The most boring moment in the DA series so far for me was when I had to fight the Arishok by running around and taking potshots for half an hour... with a 2H Warrior!

I remember that battle. I kited for most of it, waited until stamina recharged and cooldowns were finished, spammed some abilities, then kited again.

Also, it seems like kiting is much easier in DA2 than in DAO. Kiting shouldn't be a viable combat option.

[wsandista]

Dakota Strider wrote...
2. Even a tad bit slower than DAO would be good. I would prefer a compromise between DAO and NwN. The faster the combat, the "dumber" the monster AI has to be, because even the most deft player is going to be unable to keep up with a computer that is allowed to go at full speed. So at high speeds, a dumber AI is required to give players a chance. This means less tactics, less abilitities, and usually just a repeat of 3 or 4 moves over and over which become predictable. A slower game, means that the AI can have monsters that are given a large menu of tactics and spells, just as the player has. And that is how you achieve goal #1.

Well I was trying to find speeds a littler bit slower than attacks per round for 3rd edition D&D for a character with a high base attack bonus.

Something like this is ideal for my taste(base speeds, not counting weapon speed modifiers)
Two-Handed: 1 attack every 2.2 seconds
One-Handed(includes shield): 1 attack every 1.8 seconds
Dual-Wield: 1 attack every 1.25 seconds
Archery: 1 attack every 1.8 seconds
Staff: 1 attack every 2 seconds

A tad faster than DAO, but still enough time to avoid having dumb monsters and button mashing.

3. Weapons do need to be tweeked. There should be a way for them to do something closer to the D&D style they used to use in BG and NwN, without violating copyright laws.

Just use the standard style attribute modifiers from DAO(1.5 times attribute bonus for Two-Handed, .75 times attribute bonus for Dual-Wield, flat bonus for everything else), then remove attribute modifiers from weapon types, and limit speed modifiers to only Crossbows, shortbows, and daggers. Generally follows D&D rules for Two-Handed, balances modifier for Dual-Wield( both receive 75% of the bonus instead of main hand receiving full bonus and off-hand receiving half).

[Burnouts3s3]

wsandista wrote...

I believe that DA3 should meet these criteria in terms of combat

• Enemies should follow the same rules as the party. Foes should use the same ruleset as the party, instead of behaving like Final Fantasy monsters with huge globs of health but low damage output. All opponents need to attack at the same speed as party members, use the same attack/defense mechanics as the party, draw from the ame Talent/Spell trees as the party, and damage like a party member of the same class.(The only exception are monsters, which have no class)
• Combat speed should be closer to the speed in DAO. While I thought that combat in DAO could get a little slow(particularly with a Two-Handed Warrior), DA2 was much too fast for my liking. I think using the DAO combat speeds as a base, then multiplying basic attack speeds by a factor of .8 would be a sufficient pace for combat.
• Multipliers for weapons need to be more diverse than in DA2, but more uniform than in DAO. Attribute multipliers should depend on the weapon style like in DAO, while unlike DAO, most weapons shouldn't have speed or attribute modifiers(the speed modifier on maces made them unusable)
• Bosses should just be extremely powerful enemies with high resistances(or immunities), not actiony fights that require the PC to move around into awkward positions while some attack is charging. Many of the boss fights in DA2 seems like they would fit in more in a Zelda game than an RPG.
• Traps should have much more of an impact. In both DAO and DA2, traps were more of an annoyance than a danger, I believe this should change. Traps need to have disastrous effects when triggered that can result in characters getting killed.

[*]
[*]
[*]I agree with all of this.

[Provi-dance]

wsandista wrote...

I believe that DA3 should meet these criteria in terms of combat

• Enemies should follow the same rules as the party. Foes should use the same ruleset as the party, instead of behaving like Final Fantasy monsters with huge globs of health but low damage output. All opponents need to attack at the same speed as party members, use the same attack/defense mechanics as the party, draw from the ame Talent/Spell trees as the party, and damage like a party member of the same class.(The only exception are monsters, which have no class)
• Combat speed should be closer to the speed in DAO. While I thought that combat in DAO could get a little slow(particularly with a Two-Handed Warrior), DA2 was much too fast for my liking. I think using the DAO combat speeds as a base, then multiplying basic attack speeds by a factor of .8 would be a sufficient pace for combat.
  
• Multipliers for weapons need to be more diverse than in DA2, but more uniform than in DAO. Attribute multipliers should depend on the weapon style like in DAO, while unlike DAO, most weapons shouldn't have speed or attribute modifiers(the speed modifier on maces made them unusable)
  
• Bosses should just be extremely powerful enemies with high resistances(or immunities), not actiony fights that require the PC to move around into awkward positions while some attack is charging. Many of the boss fights in DA2 seems like they would fit in more in a Zelda game than an RPG.
  
• Traps should have much more of an impact. In both DAO and DA2, traps were more of an annoyance than a danger, I believe this should change. Traps need to have disastrous effects when triggered that can result in characters getting killed.

I endorse this post.


Also, Bioware, for the love of god, put level scaling where it belongs finally; in the trash can of idiotic ideas.

[AkiKishi]

wsandista wrote...

I remember that battle. I kited for most of it, waited until stamina recharged and cooldowns were finished, spammed some abilities, then kited again.

Also, it seems like kiting is much easier in DA2 than in DAO. Kiting shouldn't be a viable combat option.

DA would calculate the attack and then hit you where ever you moved. DA2 only hit you if you were still in the hit zone. DA had some weird moments , but DA2 was very easy to exploit.