134 réponses à ce sujet

[Allan Schumacher]

Firky wrote...

Well. I'd just like to say I thought the waves in DA2 were fantastic. It was a refreshing change and supported the changed turn-based/action hybrid thing, IMO. I found an unknown volume and timing of enemies dropping really difficult to deal with, which was nice, and because cooldowns were so long. I found myself moving the party much more than I've ever had to do in a party game. I'd be happy enough to see it used less, but I found it really enjoyable. (And *heaps* more "strategic." Though I did miss the glut of abilities in Origins, having less made it more difficult again.)

This is actually very similar to how my best friend felt too.

What does "timing the player" mean? I'm confused. Are you still talking about combat. (Man, I loved Ultima VII. The main questline was actually fairly short but it required travelling very large geographical distances, so every incentive was to explore rather than progress, in my experience.)

This is why I'm not a writer...

By timing I mean, some sort of time restriction.  In the original Fallout if you waste too much time, settlements you help are just defaulted to being destroyed by the super mutants, and there's even time restrictions based on the water chip and the vault.  There's even a good choice and consequence in that if you seek outside help for the water chip, it reduces the time until the vault is discovered.

I actually enjoyed it, but such time restrictions are rarely well received I find.

[AngryFrozenWater]

I am not a fan of waves of foes, because the DA-franchise is supposed to have a strategic element with its party based combat. BW already said that they would cut down on that in the future.

In Legacy it was indeed improved, but BW was still unable to get rid of it entirely. Old habits and such. I remember completely clearing a room and when I left the room that same one was filled sometime later with another group of foes speeding towards me. Sure, this time they didn't drop from thin air, but the effect was the same.

But I think waves of foes are not the only problem with DA2's combat. The characters had a tendency to jump around the battlefield. That makes it hard to steer your crew to strategic locations. The battlefield would be changed completely when they arrived there.

Also, the omission of the strategic view limited that strategic aspect. The camera was unable to get a proper view of the battlefield because of that.

Another one was that it was harder, in comparison to DA:O, to control the tactics panel. Also it was hard to temporarily disable tactics. The latter is important when you want to preserve mana/stamina or simply force your characters to wait without doing anything.

Another problem are the huge health bars that some characters have. Killing them becomes tiresome. For me it is more fun to fight against smart foes than to smash them for 10 minutes.

Some foes were invulnerable when they were still able to damage you. That's especially annoying when there is no place to hide. The quest with the gazillion dragons comes to mind.

The long cool down times of health/mana potions and spells was another problem. Running around until the timers were in the clear is not my idea of fun.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 01 juin 2012 - 02:17 .

[Firky]

@Allan Aha. Gotcha. People didn't like that in Fallout? I think I've heard it held up as a good thing, but it's always hard to tell on reception/features etc.

I can see why that might stress out different kinds of players. I do think quest failure is important, but - was it Mark of Assassin where you failed something where you moved to the next area? I think the player moving on or making a decision which then makes a quest fail is probably the middle ground.

To segue back to combat, how the waves were timed in DA2 ended up becoming a key part of how I dealt with encounters. There appeared to be ways you could delay the next wave, or take a breather, for example. (But it's been a while. There was a tremendously hard early fight with a commander and assassins that came later and manipulating the timing of the waves was the only way I won that, from memory.)

Modifié par Firky, 01 juin 2012 - 02:19 .

[wsandista]

If there are waves, make it relative to the encounter. For instance if you are combating demons, more could come from rips in the Fade or if fighting Darkspawn, they could burst out of the ground.

Although I do believe there should be a check of some sort to detect foes, maybe a cunning-based skill?

Modifié par wsandista, 01 juin 2012 - 02:19 .

[TEWR]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Another problem are the huge health bars that some characters have. Killing them becomes tiresome. For me it is more fun to fight against smart foes than to smash them for 10 minutes.

To me, the problem stems not from enemies having more health but from the party being restricted to having 300 points of health.

If generic mook #3539 has 3000 points of health but I'm the Champion of Kirkwall who has only 243 health, does that make much sense? Nope.

I'd prefer the FFXII method of leveling up to be used in conjunction with what DA already does. In that, when you level up your health and mana/stamina go up. And for DA, once that happens you could still invest points in Con/Willpower if you so desired -- though the bonus would have to be more then a 5 point increase.

[Face of Evil]

The scenario mentioned earlier about sneaking up on the bandit camp … It's one thing to do that in a game where stealth is a built-in mechanic and stealth is often necessary to defeat enemies. Case in point, the Batman: Arkham Whatever games.

But in a group combat-focused game like Dragon Age, most players are going to run up and attack the bandits. Hell, I'll run up and just attack the bandits, unless there are literally too many to deal with a direct encounter. I wasted way too many time being all stealthy-like in DAO and setting up traps until I figured that I was just better running in and attacking. By Awakening, I was only using traps in like one out of every 10 battles.

I guess my point is that you're ultimately short-changing yourself to include tactics that are only going to be used by a minority of the players.

Modifié par Face of Evil, 01 juin 2012 - 02:30 .

[Dakota Strider]

Face of Evil wrote...

The scenario mentioned earlier about sneaking up on the bandit camp … It's one thing to do that in a game where stealth is a built-in mechanic and stealth is often necessary to defeat enemies. Case in point, the Batman: Arkham Whatever games.

But in a group combat-focused game like Dragon Age, most players are going to run up and attack the bandits. Hell, I'll run up and just attack the bandits, unless there are literally too many to deal with a direct encounter. I wasted way too many time being all stealthy-like in DAO and setting up traps until I figured that I was just better running in and attacking. By Awakening, I was only using traps in like one out of every 10 battles.

I guess my point is that you're ultimately short-changing yourself to include tactics that are only going to be used by a minority of the players.

So who determines who the minority is?

[knarayan]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

...
Another problem are the huge health bars that some characters have. Killing them becomes tiresome. For me it is more fun to fight against smart foes than to smash them for 10 minutes.

Some foes were invulnerable when they were still able to damage you. That's especially annoying when there is no place to hide. The quest with the gazillion dragons comes to mind.

The long cool down times of health/mana potions and spells was another problem. Running around until the timers were in the clear is not my idea of fun.

This. I found the dragon spam in the DA2 High Dragon fight much less satisfying than the one with the High Dragon in DA:O.

[wsandista]

Dakota Strider wrote...

Face of Evil wrote...

The scenario mentioned earlier about sneaking up on the bandit camp … It's one thing to do that in a game where stealth is a built-in mechanic and stealth is often necessary to defeat enemies. Case in point, the Batman: Arkham Whatever games.

But in a group combat-focused game like Dragon Age, most players are going to run up and attack the bandits. Hell, I'll run up and just attack the bandits, unless there are literally too many to deal with a direct encounter. I wasted way too many time being all stealthy-like in DAO and setting up traps until I figured that I was just better running in and attacking. By Awakening, I was only using traps in like one out of every 10 battles.

I guess my point is that you're ultimately short-changing yourself to include tactics that are only going to be used by a minority of the players.

So who determines who the minority is?

Poll results pulled from ass?

[HanErlik]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Had the spawning come in more realistically (i.e. they came running from out of line of sight) would it have been received better?

No. Enemies can spawn realistically in battles (Ostagar, Denerim etc.) or in ambushes; but you can't design all encounters as ambushes or big battles, even the dumbest man in Thedas can see some enemies before being attacked by them.

All time spawning enemies (no matter how they spawn) kills the reality. For example in Diablo 2, there were far more numerous enemies than in Dragon Age 2 but it didn't bother me. Because it was normal, there was a demon invasion and those demons were roaming in wilderness or in certain places. I could just ignore them, they would be there with me or without me. But in Dragon Age 2; Hawke was the only reason for enemies to exist. That annoyes me, it was screaming like "Hey, it is a video game. We just throw these enemies to you, so  the gameplay can take longer time" and it destroyed all of my sense of roleplay. Also it killed tactics in the game. My party was like a SWAT team in DA:O. I learn the position of my enemies and their types via stealth skill or survival skill and cripple the enemy with a well organised attack but I have not initiative in the second game. All I can do is waiting for enemy waves and killing dozens of critter clones. You can't solve this problem with just place some secret doors or passages on where the enemies come.

[Face of Evil]

Dakota Strider wrote...

So who determines who the minority is?

Market research, playtesting and simple logic.

Modifié par Face of Evil, 01 juin 2012 - 03:14 .

[brushyourteeth]

thats1evildude wrote...

I didn't mind it. Since it gave me more people to kill.

I like killing.

LOL, yeah - that's how I feel too. But I guess that's.... bad? Most people seem to be of the opinion that I'm a terrible gamer for feeling that way, but *shrug* at least we're in it together.

Allan I do think that a big part of the reason people responded so badly to the waves was because of the ceiling drops. Though in areas like Hightown and Lowtown it was really easy for me to just attribute this to attackers swarming down from the rooftops.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

I won't go on a usual tl;dr addressing verisimilitude and holistic game design (waves, hp bloat, power curve, level scaling, animation speed, they are all linked).

But I will say that rather than have a focus or philosophy on simulation within the bounds of the ruleset/universe (which is ultimately the entire point of abstraction based gameplay i.e RPGs, Strategy games, etc); Dragon Age 2 decided to go in the direction of a more Arcade-y philosophy with gameplay elements there seemingly for arbitrary reasons. Random Immunities, the Waves, level scaling, the In/Out of Combat modes, HP Bloat (see: Arishok) and the like.

Not to say that Origins was Mount & Blade in RTwP, but the direction it went in Dragon Age 2 is obvious to most people.

It shares this philosophy with JRPGs which is why I suspect so many people come to the conclusion that DA 2 is JRPG-ish despite not actually looking or playing like a JRPG.

Modifié par CrustyBot, 01 juin 2012 - 03:44 .

[Sabariel]

I thought the waves were a great source of entertainment, especially when they parachuted down from above... while battling in a house. "Roof? What roof? There is no roof!"

[hoorayforicecream]

I didn't mind the wave combat, but I did like the way it worked in Legacy much better, when the spawning was better hidden. I thought it was a good change from DAO, where the first 25% of a battle was typically the actual strategic part (identify and take out high priority targets), and the remaining 75% was just cleaning up (deal with everyone else).

[Melca36]

This is what I don't want to see in the next game



I understand the need for waves but when you see them materialize from the ceiling, it sort of ruins the experience.

Waves are also not very challenging, I would like to see tactics return the way the were in Origins, but with the speed of DA:2.

Modifié par Melca36, 01 juin 2012 - 05:14 .

[Uccio]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Because they wanted to give the player the experience of being vastly more powerful than his enemies, so the enemies had to be weak. Then, to create interesting encounters, there had to be lots of enemies. Then, because the consoles couldn't render enough enemies on screen at the same time while also doing AI calculations, they introduced the enemies in waves.

This sounds plausible.

[Melca36]

Sabariel wrote...

I thought the waves were a great source of entertainment, especially when they parachuted down from above... while battling in a house. "Roof? What roof? There is no roof!"

I tolerated them.  It made me feel like the developers took the gamer for granted. It really diminished the experience for me.

[Melca36]

brushyourteeth wrote...

thats1evildude wrote...

I didn't mind it. Since it gave me more people to kill.

I like killing.

LOL, yeah - that's how I feel too. But I guess that's.... bad? Most people seem to be of the opinion that I'm a terrible gamer for feeling that way, but *shrug* at least we're in it together.

Allan I do think that a big part of the reason people responded so badly to the waves was because of the ceiling drops. Though in areas like Hightown and Lowtown it was really easy for me to just attribute this to attackers swarming down from the rooftops.

There needs to be a reasonable compromise that appeals to all gamers. We all don't want to just hack and slash.

[wsandista]

Melca36 wrote...

This is what I don't want to see in the next game

I don't think anyone does.

Waves are also not very challenging, I would like to see tactics return the way the were in Origins, but with the speed of DA:2.

The enemy AI has to be "dumber" because of the high-speed combat. Having a slower speed makes tactical enemy AI much easier to implemet.

Anyways I would like to see AI for foes be more specific to the group being fought. Templars should focus their energy on mages for example.

[brushyourteeth]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Because they wanted to give the player the experience of being vastly more powerful than his enemies, so the enemies had to be weak. Then, to create interesting encounters, there had to be lots of enemies. Then, because the consoles couldn't render enough enemies on screen at the same time while also doing AI calculations, they introduced the enemies in waves.

Consoles aren't to blame for low numbers of enemies. Maybe the spread of resources to other priorities, but not the limitations thrust upon us by consoles.

Take the game Viking: Battle for Asgard, for instance. You'd run into literally hundreds of enemies and even allies that were in your environment all at the same time and waiting for you when you arrived there. And it played just fine on both XBOX 360 and PS3 while still managing to have stunning visuals and fun combat. It was meh on story, but my point still stands.



http://t3.gstatic.co...PVujqLy8pgE-qfg

http://t2.gstatic.co...4BacpM2VT4hycKJ

Modifié par brushyourteeth, 01 juin 2012 - 05:37 .

[Uccio]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Had the spawning come in more realistically (i.e. they came running from out of line of sight) would it have been received better?

It'd prevent the situation where a foe inexplicably spawns right beside the character.

Spawning is "acceptable" only in certain cituations, even it seems they are all coming from around the corner or next room, so not in every combat. It has to be tied into story, for example, guard makes an alarm and more and more are coming in. Most cases they should be static enemies being visible from the start.

Modifié par Ukki, 01 juin 2012 - 05:56 .

[Red by Full Metal Jacket]

CrustyBot wrote...
It shares this philosophy with JRPGs which is why I suspect so many people come to the conclusion that DA 2 is JRPG-ish despite not actually looking or playing like a JRPG.

People claim that DA2 is like a JRPG but DA2 has very little in common with JRPGs.  In fact are a lot of little things in modern JRPGs (espeically games like Xenoblade) such as UI design that Bioware really needs to take a page from.

[Leon481]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

This is why I'm not a writer...

By timing I mean, some sort of time restriction.  In the original Fallout if you waste too much time, settlements you help are just defaulted to being destroyed by the super mutants, and there's even time restrictions based on the water chip and the vault.  There's even a good choice and consequence in that if you seek outside help for the water chip, it reduces the time until the vault is discovered.

I actually enjoyed it, but such time restrictions are rarely well received I find.

I do like time limits, within reason, as it does add a certain amount of urgency to quests, especially if there are major consequences for failing. Unfortunately, I don't see too many games do this. I've seen plenty of things missed by moving the plot along before finding something, but that's not exactly the same thing.

The only game I've played recently that did the time restriction thing well is Romancing Saga: Minstrel Song for the PS2. There were plenty of major plot quests that just disappeared or were considered failed if you didn't get to them soon enough and there were usually noticible consequences if you missed them. Don't get to the frontier on time, three cities get destroyed and a certain character is presumed dead if not in your party. Don't help the Elemental Lords in a timely manner, and you are forced to kill them instead of getting them as reasonably powerful summons. Fail to retrieve the ever important fatestones and the final boss uses them to power up dramatically (fun fight by the way.) You could also miss out on a ton of potential allies because you never get the quests that introduce them.

Consequences like those really give an incentive to play well and give the game more of a sense of urgency. They both have valid plot value and gameplay consequences that can lead to a vastly different gameplay experience each time you play the game. It can get frustrating if you miss something and aren't ready for the consequences, but depending on the situation, that can also be part of the fun.