38 réponses à ce sujet

[Frenetic Pony]

Please, ditch any notion of Dragon Age 3 having "action" oriented combat.

Oh it's not that I don't like action oriented combat. A lot of people do, I know. But I also like tactical combat games, and honestly you really can't have both. It might sound good, in hypothesis. Like Max Payne 3 having "cover based combat if you want it." But Max Payne 3 ended up being all cover based combat, just because it was there. And I don't want another action oriented combat game, and no one really needs another game like that.

If someone wants to play that they can go get (off the top of my head): Diablo 3, Torchlight 2, God of War, DOTA, Skyrim, League of Legends, Fable 4, Heroes of Newerth, Real of the Mad God, Monster Hunter, Dragon's Dogma, Dark Souls, Terra, DOTA 2, Wanderlust: Rebirth, Dishonored...

Ok, the list is too long already. And you'll notice I restricted myself SOLELY to games that not only have action oriented combat, but are also still highly popular today or coming out, that have a fantasy setting, and that have RPG like mechanics. Tactical combat is fun, tactical combat is great! I want to use my brain, to think about how each battle will go, to plan ahead and manage everything. I can get my action elsewhere.

Edit- So, from the responses I gather, a mix of the two? A tactically focused combat, but fast and responsive and interesting without having to control a mage like DA2. That's what I got anyway.

Modifié par Frenetic Pony, 30 août 2012 - 03:50 .

[wsandista]

I think that the DAO combat would be a good system to use as a base. I just want the enemy to have health that is close to mine, deal damage close o the party's, and follow the same rules(armor, attack, etc) as the party.

[Eilaras]

 The combat in DA2 was one of the things that really annoyed me. I did like the more direct gameplay, that when i pushed a button the character immediatly swung its sword or cast a spell. I also liked that a character with a large weapon could hit several enemies at the same time. But, there where some elements that made feel like i was playing an action game, and a bad one as well. Let me sum up:

1. Exaggeration. In DAO, a shield bash would make an enemy tumble and fall, or  being pushed back a couple of feet. In DA2 , a shield bash sends multiple enemies flying and spinning several meters. Seeing an enemy explode when hit by a knife was also kinda lame.

2. Enemies spawning in mid air. This has been debated  a lot of times. Don`t have to do it again. 

3. Repetetive. Many times , combat was all about pushing the a button for a loooong time. It looked kinda lame when my character and an enemy threw blows at each other for two minutes, blood spilling for every blow. If they want more dynamic combat, at least add the option of  dodging/parrying. They did a great thing in Legacy with the genlock alpha. If you attacked from the front, it would parry with his huge shield, but if you managed to attack him form the rear he would die like a fly. I want more of that in future games!

4. " Cool and awesome" moves.   The "roundhouse kick the bottle " move was an alltime low. Ok in a Teenage mutant ninja turtles movie, but not in a mature game like DA.

Since the whole events in DA2 is told by Varric, i can forgive the lame combat, thinking, " That guy didn`t really explode when Hawke touched him, it`s just Varric exaggerating." 

But, in the next game i want combat to be more like DAO, with the few positive things DA2, added, this being:

1. More direct. It was a bit annoying that in origins you always had to click on the enemy you wanted to attack. Sometimes,  the character did´t react or attacked the wrong guy. In DA2, you could move and attack more directly, that was good. 

2. Large weapons being able to hit two or three enemies with each swing. 

3. The  tactic elements they added in  Legacy. (the genlock alpha, the fight with Corypheus, use of traps, etc)

[Crypticqa]

I agree, i prefer combat from DAO, for me DA2 combat was too much fast,unreal and pretty much felt like from some anime cartoon :/

[Boss Fog]

Here's what I want..

1. Don't force me to rely on cross class combos to kill mobs. My PC and companions should be able to kill mobs without combining their attacks. I'm fine with cross class combos if they're designed to be used solely on bosses and large creatures, but not for everyday raiders/templars/bandits/etc.

2. Bring enemy health down to the same level as the PC/companion health. It shouldn't take 10 swings from a greatsword to kill a normal mob and I shouldn't have to pop cleave/assail just to do noticeable damage while all enemies do noticeable damage by slowly swinging their weapons. It makes it seem as if I have to work 10x harder than the enemy to land a kill.

3. Tone down the animations; there's no need for ninja flips and roundhouse kicks. If Dragon Age were an asian themed game then it would make sense, it is not however.

4. More weapon variety; this is an absolute must. I was so annoyed and dissapointed when I saw the Duelist symbol featuring a rapier only to find out there was no such weapon in the game Take a cue from Demon's/Dark Souls and give us a crazy amount of weapon variety.

5. Enemy mages need to be redone completely IMO. There needs to be less insta kill your entire party with a single AOE spell and lore breaking abilities like that stupid teleport. Make them more like they were in DA:O. They don't need to use the exact same spells as PC/companion mages, but please don't make them so far removed from everything else.

[Reznik23]

I've always thought that combat style similar to that in Demon's/Dark Souls would be a good thing for a controlled character. Not too actiony, but still dynamic, responsive & enjoyable.

[The Six Path of Pain]

Honestly the more I think about the combat in DAII the more angry I get.I mean it was suppose to be the spiritual successor of Baldur's Gate,then they turned it into that.What the hell were they smoking that made them think that all the changes made in DAII were good ideas...Anyways since DA:O was the more successful of the two games it's only logical to make future DA games more like DA:O.

[TheCharmedOne]

Im a big fan of the faster action and action graphics from DAII. if it went back to Origins I would be sorely disappointed

[Xerxes52]

TelvanniWarlord wrote...

Here's what I want..

1. Don't force me to rely on cross class combos to kill mobs. My PC and companions should be able to kill mobs without combining their attacks. I'm fine with cross class combos if they're designed to be used solely on bosses and large creatures, but not for everyday raiders/templars/bandits/etc.

2. Bring enemy health down to the same level as the PC/companion health. It shouldn't take 10 swings from a greatsword to kill a normal mob and I shouldn't have to pop cleave/assail just to do noticeable damage while all enemies do noticeable damage by slowly swinging their weapons. It makes it seem as if I have to work 10x harder than the enemy to land a kill.

3. Tone down the animations; there's no need for ninja flips and roundhouse kicks. If Dragon Age were an asian themed game then it would make sense, it is not however.

4. More weapon variety; this is an absolute must. I was so annoyed and dissapointed when I saw the Duelist symbol featuring a rapier only to find out there was no such weapon in the game Take a cue from Demon's/Dark Souls and give us a crazy amount of weapon variety.

5. Enemy mages need to be redone completely IMO. There needs to be less insta kill your entire party with a single AOE spell and lore breaking abilities like that stupid teleport. Make them more like they were in DA:O. They don't need to use the exact same spells as PC/companion mages, but please don't make them so far removed from everything else.

Agreed on all points.

I would also add this:

6. Return to fixed item stats and tiers. For example: If you have an Iron Sword that does 7 base damage at Level 1, it should still do 7 base damage at Level 35 with STR providing a damage modifier.

[PainS]

Way faster than Origins, but no jumping half-way across the battlefield like DA2. You can do that, but it has to be a skill, like a "dash-and-damage" type of skill.

What i didn't like in Origins was the fact that when an Ogre comes near my mage, the obvious choice is to move your mage away right? - especially if you're freezing spell is on cooldown or you just happened to run out of mana

But if you do that after the Ogre swings his hand upward, even though you're a mile away from the monster, the damage still counts, which is quite stupid. The Ogre is big and hard to kill at higher difficulties, but the game makes the Ogre's attack speed slow so that you can dodge and not die that often. Origins totally denied me of the evasive maneuvers i always use.

DA2 however, gave me that chance. I realize that this makes the game a lot easier, but that's hardly the combat system's fault - it's the AI's.

And you can still place some strategy even if it's more "action oriented". I used the same amount of strategies and planning in DA2 as I did in Origins. Just assign what you need/want from that character and press buttons. I don't get why people are so furious about this. I honestly don't get it.
In Origins, my 2h warrior looks like he's having a hard time swinging his greatsword. It looks like momentum was the only thing carrying the weapon from the right side of his body to the left.

I understand that tactical gameplay is a big part in this series. But totally discarding the
action-oriented part of the gameplay is not the answer. Plus, the characters are still in constant motion even if you're not controlling them, it's basically like Origins, the only difference is that you press buttons/ do clicks more often.

[Olmerto]

There is not supposed to be any action in a crpg. Combat should be based on a character's stats, not how fast you can press a button. I can accept the degree of action in DAII if I must, but for god's sake don't go any further.

And make the combat look realistic, not this goofy cartoon shtick with gigantic weapons. Looks childish.

[Shadowvalker]

Combat? In DA 2?

Damn! I thought they were tap dancing!!! It sure looked that way to me.

I am only playing for the story - NOT for pressing buttons while on speed....

[Darji]

PainS wrote...

Way faster than Origins, but no jumping half-way across the battlefield like DA2. You can do that, but it has to be a skill, like a "dash-and-damage" type of skill.

What i didn't like in Origins was the fact that when an Ogre comes near my mage, the obvious choice is to move your mage away right? - especially if you're freezing spell is on cooldown or you just happened to run out of mana

But if you do that after the Ogre swings his hand upward, even though you're a mile away from the monster, the damage still counts, which is quite stupid. The Ogre is big and hard to kill at higher difficulties, but the game makes the Ogre's attack speed slow so that you can dodge and not die that often. Origins totally denied me of the evasive maneuvers i always use.

DA2 however, gave me that chance. I realize that this makes the game a lot easier, but that's hardly the combat system's fault - it's the AI's.

And you can still place some strategy even if it's more "action oriented". I used the same amount of strategies and planning in DA2 as I did in Origins. Just assign what you need/want from that character and press buttons. I don't get why people are so furious about this. I honestly don't get it.
In Origins, my 2h warrior looks like he's having a hard time swinging his greatsword. It looks like momentum was the only thing carrying the weapon from the right side of his body to the left.

I understand that tactical gameplay is a big part in this series. But totally discarding the
action-oriented part of the gameplay is not the answer. Plus, the characters are still in constant motion even if you're not controlling them, it's basically like Origins, the only difference is that you press buttons/ do clicks more often.

the problem with such a fast combat like in DA2 is that you can not control your actions very well. Yes surely it can be a bit faster than Origins but not as fast as DA2. Make it somewhere in the middle.


But that was even not the biggest problem. The biggest problem this game had were that every battle was triggered. You could not ev en surprise attackk people.  You could not lay traps ahead only when the fight was already triggered.

Also DA3 should have no supid respwans. It would make sense for certain events like on a graveyard with skeletons for example  but it makes no sense that they even human enemies can spawn right in your back line which even was postioned against a huge wall or cliff. It made every first encounter to a lucky guess game. You could not normally prepare or even use regular tactics because of this.

[tomorrowstation]

brownboy77 wrote...

Im a big fan of the faster action and action graphics from DAII. if it went back to Origins I would be sorely disappointed

This, simply put. I have no paragraphs to back it up, but I prefer the combat system we got in DA2.

[philippe willaume]

Well I much much preferred the combat in DA:0 than in DA:2.

I am not sure it is a matter of speed or action vs rpg.
i think it is more a matter of how well the combat scale with the character "efficiency"

DA:0 and DA:2 are just as boring and repetitive if you play optimal build even more optimal team build. (I.e. two mage in DA:0 or anything close to the DA:2 ultimate builds)

DA:0 combat had much more tolerance for suboptimal character and that coupled with the fact that you had effectively two main specialisation allowed people to play something close to the concept the player had in mind.
That was help by the maps having choke points and DA:0 character not having to finish staff twirling before they did what the player asked.
So even if the build was not producing enough net damage, you could compensate that with tactical movements/positioning.

In DA:2 I found that my character/tem was either witling to no end, or mincing straight through. And because the companion feels obligated to finish his animation before starting to use the power you wanted him too the margin between witling and mincing is further reduced.
So I ended up doing less with the team in DA:2 than I did in ME:2….

What I am after I DA;3 is the ability to scout and plan and have effective tactical control of the team and the possibility to use tactical feature of the terrain to that effect.

if we have the aforementioned , I can take a combat can look like the sacred ash trailer and have only vocal commands curing the “in combat phase”. 

Phil

Modifié par philippe willaume, 27 juillet 2012 - 02:33 .

[LeBurns]

The Combat was what stopped me at the Demo. After that I couldn't buy the game, even though I wanted to know the story and all that. Then I noted the art style and was even more determined to not get it. Then I read the real reviews and heard about all the problems in game design and story. Game went to the "Thou shalt not ever touch" hole to the void.

I really want something a little more realistic. What I loved about DAO combat was you could tell that real motion actors did the animations. That real people could do those moves. DA2 went so far from this that Chuck Norris couldn't touch those moves. It just made me sick.

As others have said I really like using my brain and tactics to win a fight, not my button pressing speed.

The problem is that the guys making DA3 did not like DAO, as they have said many times in interviews prior to DA2's release.  Therefore the chance of anything happening to make DA3 a little more like DAO is nil.  They just are not going to make that game.  What we need is a new team making the game.  How the team that made DA2 still have their jobs is beyond me, most the sales DA2 got was from people expecting more DAO.

Modifié par LeBurns, 27 juillet 2012 - 02:00 .

[Merlex]

TelvanniWarlord wrote...

Here's what I want..

1. Don't force me to rely on cross class combos to kill mobs. My PC and companions should be able to kill mobs without combining their attacks. I'm fine with cross class combos if they're designed to be used solely on bosses and large creatures, but not for everyday raiders/templars/bandits/etc.

You didn't really have to use CCCs to take down mobs. Firestorm and Tempest were great for crowd control. Walking Bombs and Scatter could help without their CCC partners. Chain Lightning was a nice AOL even without Chain Reaction. The problem with mob control was more to do with the large enemy healthbars.

I like the CCCs. It's one of the few improvements over DAO. It's a party based system. And one of the few things in combat that you had to be tactical about. Though i'd like to see individual spell/ skill combos comeback as well. (ie. Grease/ Fireball)

2. Bring enemy health down to the same level as the PC/companion health. It shouldn't take 10 swings from a greatsword to kill a normal mob and I shouldn't have to pop cleave/assail just to do noticeable damage while all enemies do noticeable damage by slowly swinging their weapons. It makes it seem as if I have to work 10x harder than the enemy to land a kill.

I agree about healthbars 100%. But i thought that, insta-kills aside, enemies did less damage than the party. Bring down the healthbars, but increase enemy damage. I'd like to see enemies closer to the party in power and health.

3. Tone down the animations; there's no need for ninja flips and roundhouse kicks. If Dragon Age were an asian themed game then it would make sense, it is not however.

Those animation were useless. There was no real point to them.

4. More weapon variety; this is an absolute must. I was so annoyed and dissapointed when I saw the Duelist symbol featuring a rapier only to find out there was no such weapon in the game Take a cue from Demon's/Dark Souls and give us a crazy amount of weapon variety.

Yes please. I'd even go further, blunt weapon should have different effects than slashing weapons. I know that Bioware wanted to distance itself from it's D&D based cRPGs, but different damage types are in a lot of games.

5. Enemy mages need to be redone completely IMO. There needs to be less insta kill your entire party with a single AOE spell and lore breaking abilities like that stupid teleport. Make them more like they were in DA:O. They don't need to use the exact same spells as PC/companion mages, but please don't make them so far removed from everything else.

Agreed.

[Merlex]

Eilaras wrote...

 The combat in DA2 was one of the things that really annoyed me. I did like the more direct gameplay, that when i pushed a button the character immediatly swung its sword or cast a spell. I also liked that a character with a large weapon could hit several enemies at the same time. But, there where some elements that made feel like i was playing an action game, and a bad one as well. Let me sum up:

1. Exaggeration. In DAO, a shield bash would make an enemy tumble and fall, or  being pushed back a couple of feet. In DA2 , a shield bash sends multiple enemies flying and spinning several meters. Seeing an enemy explode when hit by a knife was also kinda lame.

Yea, that what Scatter is suppose to do.

2. Enemies spawning in mid air. This has been debated  a lot of times. Don`t have to do it again. 

Agreed.

3. Repetetive. Many times , combat was all about pushing the a button for a loooong time. It looked kinda lame when my character and an enemy threw blows at each other for two minutes, blood spilling for every blow. If they want more dynamic combat, at least add the option of  dodging/parrying. They did a great thing in Legacy with the genlock alpha. If you attacked from the front, it would parry with his huge shield, but if you managed to attack him form the rear he would die like a fly. I want more of that in future games!

Dodging and Parrying would be a great addition to combat.

4. " Cool and awesome" moves.   The "roundhouse kick the bottle " move was an alltime low. Ok in a Teenage mutant ninja turtles movie, but not in a mature game like DA.

Since the whole events in DA2 is told by Varric, i can forgive the lame combat, thinking, " That guy didn`t really explode when Hawke touched him, it`s just Varric exaggerating." 

The animations have to improve, greatly.

But, in the next game i want combat to be more like DAO, with the few positive things DA2, added, this being:

1. More direct. It was a bit annoying that in origins you always had to click on the enemy you wanted to attack. Sometimes,  the character did´t react or attacked the wrong guy. In DA2, you could move and attack more directly, that was good. 

2. Large weapons being able to hit two or three enemies with each swing. 

3. The  tactic elements they added in  Legacy. (the genlock alpha, the fight with Corypheus, use of traps, etc)

Agreed with all three points. I like a more tactical style of combat.

1. Better chokepoints.
2. Tanks having more presence. Enemies running past a S&S Warrior, in a doorway, with full Bravery on, shouldn't happen.
3. Slow combat movement down some, but keeping the direct move and attack.
4. Please scrap the hold button. Allow for direct orders from the controlled character. (like NWN) Or at least have individual hold buttons for each character.

Modifié par Merlex, 27 juillet 2012 - 02:58 .

[abidingdude117]

I actually think Dragon Age 3 would benefit from becoming more of an action game than a traditional RPG.  Before I get destroyed by everyone, at least let me say why:  It's clear that Dragon Age 2 evolved into the product it was because of the success of Mass Effect, and the desire to bring that kind of experience into the DA franchise.  While I won't say that DA in essence should clone itself against ME, I do think there are lessons to be taken from that series.

1) Player Experience

By Mass Effect 3, the player felt like Commander Shepard in combat.  You could roll, take cover easily, swat turn, aim with scopes, and in general feel immersed within the given context.  In Dragon Age Origins and Dragon Age 2, you feel like you're controlling a puppet.  You click, "Go here, do this" and watch as your character goes there, and does that.  There was an inherent disconnect between player and avatar, even with the faster combat of DA 2, that always reminds you that you are playing as a character in a game.  In contrast, when I play as Commander Shepard, I inhabit that world, and only find myself disconnected from it in moments of frustration.

If DA 3 eliminated the ability to swap freely between characters, and focused solely on giving the player control over a single Warden/Hawke type character, the experience of being in that game world  might be lessened numerically, but made infinitely deeper.  When I'm playing Dragon Age, I want to be able to block, counter, roll, and generally feel as if I am becoming a character, and not simply feel as though I am managing a team.  It's the difference between being the batter at the plate, responding to the incoming pitches, and being the manager in the dugout, telling his team what to do.

2) Interesting and Complex Enemies

In both DA games, your enemies essentially boil down into three classes: melee guys, ranged guys, and magic guys.  No matter the differences visually, every enemy in the game essentially acts in one of these three categories.  While you can employ different combos against these enemies, the combos are derived from who you have in your party, and not what kind of enemy you are facing.

Again, contrast this with Mass Effect, which featured enemies who were not only visually distinctive, but behaved and fought completely differently.  When fighting husks, I want to get close and use a shotgun and melee attacks, employing AoE attacks when getting swarmed.  With Brutes, you want to stay the hell away and hit them with long range and heavy attacks.  With Banshees, I need to use specific attacks designed to break barriers, and then employ attacks that destroy armor.

DA 3 would be smart to provide a better myriad of opponents in a similar manner.  Perhaps some enemies are heavily armored, and therefore regular melee and ranged attacks have little effect, and I need to use magic and heavy melee attacks to break that armor before moving in for the kill.  Maybe enemies can summon magic barriers that can only be damaged by stealth attacks and offensive magics.  Make a berserk enemy who can only be hurt by using counter attacks.  And reflect these qualities within the game's visuals, not only within text boxes.  The berserker should actually charge at your group; the heavies should have big armor, and maybe even have an additional health bar displaying that armor's current state.

You may need to put fewer enemies on screen, but as DA 2 showed us, quantity by no means results in quality.

3) Non-Party Based Gameplay

By freeing itself from the traditional party-orientated gameplay of most RPGs, Mass Effect allowed itself the creative liberty to make gameplay that did not always flow along a singular path.  Shepard could fight one mission with a full roster of teammates, and then go at the next completely alone.

Because of its reliance on a party-system of gameplay, DA is forced into crafting moments in which every mission must be able to incorporate that full party.  By focusing on a single character in terms of player control, the possibilites for crafting much richer and varying scenarios becomes far more open.  DA 3 could introduce set pieces, solo missions, and missions that tamper with the size of your party at any given time.  If you are a warrior in a full party fighting a mage, that mage is doomed; however, imagine how differently that scenario plays out if you are a warrior on his own, suddenly fighting against a mage who is practically immune against melee damage while his barrier is intact.  Imagine a simple exploration moment in which you get separated from your party in the Deep Roads, and are suddenly forced to traverse those haunting and dark halls alone, constantly watching for what might be around the next corner.  Part of DA 2's problem was the simple monotony of its tasks, a problem which could be easily remedied if the constant reliance on party-based combat was not abandoned, but at least lessened to the point that the player at least felt capable if forced to act alone.  This principle could actually be used to make boss fights interesting, and not a simple matter of memorizing patterns and managing your team accordingly.

4) Reflect Character Progression Visually

When I say this point, I mean that too much of the progression in Dragon Age is hidden in damage numbers and behind-the-scenes equations.  When I level up an attack power, don't just change the amount of damage it does by altering the damage indicators above an enemy's head.  Show me how that power has changed.  If I level up a Shield Bash to do double damage, show my character swing his shield twice.  Maybe a level two Backstab shows the Rogue stab both daggers into an opponent.  How about a level three Stonefist that soars up and smashes down on an opponent, rather than just fly into their face?  The visuals of Dragon Age's combat never change over the course of a twenty or thirty hour game, which only contributes to the feeling of monotony.  Combat that changes as you level up not only keeps things looking fresh, but it also adds to that feeling of reward that should come with leveling up.

In conclusion, I simply say that the combat in both Dragon Age Origins and Dragon Age 2 felt disconnected.  I am being asked to inhabit this amazing world Bioware created, and yet whenever I approach combat, I feel as though I am suddenly a puppet master, standing apart from my character and employing a point-and-click style of attack.  I want the combat in Dragon Age 3 to reinforce the idea that I am the character I created, and I feel that the best way to achieve that goal would be to embrace a genre-bending identity for this next game inspired by the style of Mass Effect: an action game, but with the complexity and tactical approach of an RPG.

[PPR223]

I didn't like the DA2 combat either for quite a few reasons.

- The combat was way too fast, DA:O, in my opinion, did need a slight increase in speed, but this was far too much.

-The animations are horrible in DA2. Sliding along the floor, doing back flips and spin kicks just looks ridiculous in a game that is supposedly mature.

- The spawning enemies got rid of all tactics. The bandits around Kirkwall at night were so tedious, it was press A until they are all dead.

- Some enemies had far too much life. The Qunari leader fight was so boring, it wasn't even hard, but he had so much life, it took me an age to kill him with a shield warrior. Humans should not have as much life as the commanders of those bandits did, they should have no more than your party. As others have said, I would far prefer if they had equal life, but did a higher amount of damage, not too much higher than your party though. Boss humans should just be able to use more skills than the average enemy can.

What I would like to see in DA3 is a return to tactics, realistic looking combat and less tedious fights.

-I would like to see the return of more tactic stances, like the shield warrior class should have a power which makes him practically invulnerable against arrows from the front and sides, but of course make him much slower at moving and fighting.

- You shouldn't be able to shoot through characters to get to another, which would add tactics for positioning of a shield warrior, or tank as some people seem to call it. Either this, or force the enemy to attack the character in front first.

- Less area of effect, there was far too much in DA2. I don't think every regular attack should be able to hit multiple targets.


- A larger variety of weapons, with strengths and weaknesses would improve the combat a lot. Swords should be faster than every weapon, but it shouldn't have as much armour penetration, hence it would be better against lighter enemies and weaker against heavier ones compared to other weapons, such as the mace. I'd like to see spears myself, but games companies seem to have something against them.

-I didn't like the restrictions on classes in DA2. Why could the rogues only use daggers? I also didn't like how they used the abilities so you could only use certain armour, for example you needed cunning and dexterity for rogues to wear armour, which didn't make any sense. It pretty much meant use these skills, you don't need strength. They shouldgo back to the way DA:O was, where you needed strength, but the heavier the armour the more you need, this restricted character building a lot in DA2.

- Also bring back the second weapon slot, this was so annoying in DA2.

Modifié par PPR223, 11 août 2012 - 08:38 .

[PPR223]

Double post

Modifié par PPR223, 11 août 2012 - 08:35 .

[Rawgrim]

Shooting a few arrows up into the ceilling, and have 200 of them rain down on the enemies was just too dumb. I hope stuff like that gets removed in DA3.

[coles4971]

Less exaggeration, enemies that aren't just HP sponges, enemies that use the same skill set as us, and I wouldn't mind having combat rolls either.

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

You see what the combat was in Dragon Age 2, don't do that and you will have a half decent game.

[Killer3000ad]

No exploding enemies, unless it's a spell like corpse explosion. I don't have to repeat the issues with multiple enemy waves IN EVERY FIGHT, or the way retarded manner in the way they spawned.

Basically, go back to DAO combat, use DA2 skill trees, make it a bit faster and reactive, and dump everything else from DA2.