33 réponses à ce sujet

[tehturian]

 First of all whilst I thought the combat in DAO was good, I didn't think it was the best. I enjoyed the tactical aspect of the combat yet I thought the execution was a tad off. for instance Archers were pretty much useless, I had to convert my city elf to a duel wielder because my range attacks just weren't doing any damage. But what I really liked about the DAO combat was it fit with the mood, sword fights were intense and the grey warden never looked like a demi god in battle. 

Fast forward to DA2 and Bioware had implemented a flashy new real time combat system. Where one special attack could send 3-4 grown men spiralling into the air. And while a thinly veiled tactical system was certainly there as Hawk got stronger and stronger; I didn't need to pay attention to tactics as long as I was well stocked with health potions. Hawk could wave around a two handed long sword like a women's handbag and have dozens of spears thrown at him without flinching.

And this combat system whilst quite fun at the start descended into a repetetive button masher by the end. And above all I felt it didn't fit into the setting. While the story was trying to portray Hawke as a character going through much hardship protecting his family, in game he was a collosus tearing apart enemies in the dozens. 

Now let's get down to the point of this thread. If Bioware wish to persist with the real time combat mechanic, I would request to make said combat a  little more realistic than DA2. Take Dark Souls for example, the weapons and armour all have their own unique weights to them. A two handed weapon feels heavy and cumbersome yet rewarding when it makes contact with the enemy, likewise a short sword feels quick and mobile. A character wearing heavy armour will feel like a human tank yet quite slow and clumsy in it's movements. And a rogue type character will feel and nimble yet lacks the ability to give real damage and so on. 

There are less enemies in any given battle than Dragon age but this isn't a bad thing. It makes a normal fight feel more like an eloborate game of chess than a who can bash the attack button quicker contest. The enemies also give as good they get in terms of damage,  unlike in Dragon age where a dozen enemies could be attacking you at once and still make relatively little damage.

And last of all, combat like in Dark Souls would just fit more with the dark, moody setting Bioware are trying to portray rather than the quick, over the top Ninja Gaiden type combat like in DA2.

TL;DR-Combat in DA2 is too cartoonish and needs to be changed to something more realistic and tactical ala Dark Souls.

[MichaelStuart]

Never played Dark Souls, but the combat sounds a lot more interesting than Dragon Age.

[Olmerto]

Yeah, never played Dark Souls but I'm for anything that makes combat look and feel more realistic than the anime cartoon stuff in DA2.

[Giltspur]

I like how there are fewer, smarter enemies in Dark Souls and that you never really feel superhuman so much as you feel like an individual overcoming adversity.

What I don't like about Dark Souls is the attrition-based gameplay.  In other words, you have to repeat content as you learn to perfect encounters without using too much in the way of spells, for example, and then string together those perfect (or good enough) encounters to the next save point. 

If Dragon Age could keep the party-based gameplay, keep fight balance down to the individual encounter (given the ability to save anywhere, which I like) instead of strings of encounters between save points (as in Dark Souls) and give the fights a more tactical feel (using mind instead of reflexes) against fewer, smarter enemies, then, yeah, I think that would be cool and would fit the setting better than the flashier combat that DA2 moved towards.

Modifié par Giltspur, 26 août 2012 - 07:42 .

[Eragondragonrider]

I personally like the combat in Dragon's Dogma and hope maybe they do something like it in DA3 with some improvements.

[Scarlet Rabbi]

Why do people always do this? Dragon Age's combat needs to be like Dragon Age, not Dark Souls (which is a masterpiece ) or Dragon's Dogma (which is an abomination) or any other game. DA2's combat was just DAO's combat on steriods, with overly flashy ability animations. DA just needs to improve on what it has and not seek outside influence on anything. Dragon Age in itself has a winning formula.

[Chaos Lord Malek]

Dark Souls combat is something like 3rd person games have. Its more similar to games like Prince of Persia Warrior Within. You had to time blocks (enemies have special attacks if you just hold block - like plants sucks out your head, etc...), you can use acrobatics to escape attacks (in fact you must on some encounters), stamina is more dynamic (is spent and regenerate faster) and thus the fight is more intensive. And also the fact that surroundings aren't encased by 'invisible walls' gives you a lot more options in combat (for instance i killed one of the early bosses by baiting him, and then when he jumped back to escape my power attack, he dropped out of walls to his death)

However its unlikely you can make anything like this in party based game. And you also needs to think on Mages. The mages combat animation in Dark Souls are horrible, just as bad they were in Dragon Age Origins - those improved a lot in DA2.

[Maria Caliban]

There are a number of benefits to non-party based RPGs and I wouldn't mind BioWare making one.

However, as people have pointed out to me on numerous occasions, BioWare is the only company that makes party based RPGs. It's their niche.

[Xewaka]

Well, there was Radon Labs, but they turned Drakensang into a F2P MMO. Kinda sad, really.

[Merci357]

Xewaka wrote...

Well, there was Radon Labs, but they turned Drakensang into a F2P MMO. Kinda sad, really.

Radon Labs went broke, and in turn they got bought out by a F2P publisher. So the sad part is that Drakensang sold decently, but nowhere near enough to get them a profit.

That said, there are some party based RPG on the horizon, among them Wasteland 2, Shadowrun Returns and Dead State, all of them Kickstarter projects.

[tehturian]

 I'm not saying the two combat systems should be identical. I'm saying that weapons and armour need to have a weight about them ala Dark Souls. Because at the moment the combat system in DA2 looks ridiculous and out of place.

[Wulfram]

What DA2 mostly needed was better encounter and enemy design. Less use of endless waves of "minions", more reasonably tough enemies with access to talents. More use of terrain and other stuff.

And friendly fire on hardcore.

[coles4971]

Dark Souls sucks. Make the combat more like ... DA:O?

Or at least not ridiculously over the top.

[Atakuma]

Visually maybe, however I don't want full on action combat.

[Boss Fog]

As much as I love Demon Souls/Dark Souls, it's combat is so different from the Dragon Age series. Dragon Age is and should be a party based game; Demon/Dark Souls is only a party based game if you approach it from a MP perspective.

The main thing that I think DA could take away from the Souls series are the animations. Each weapon category has its own unique animation and I think DA could benefit from this greatly.

Also @ coles4971.. Dark Souls does not suck. The Demons/Dark Souls franchise is very well respected in the hardcore gaming community and the only people who hate on it are people who pretty much suck at it.

[Scarlet Rabbi]

TelvanniWarlord wrote.....Dark Souls does not suck. The Demons/Dark Souls franchise is very well respected in the hardcore gaming community and the only people who hate on it are people who pretty much suck at it.

Yep, pretty much. I don't even think you have to be a hardcore gamer(whatever that is)to appreciate the obvious love and care that was put into creating the Souls' worlds. I know people will say everyone has their own opinions, and mine is that people who expect and demand hand-holding will certainly hate the Souls games within the first ten minuets; and that experience will create a perspective not to be taken seriously.

I've heard "boring" and "too hard", but to outright say either Souls game sucks, especially coming from a supposed RPG player, is lulz material.

Modifié par Scarlet Rabbi, 27 août 2012 - 09:13 .

[PaulSX]

Dark souls? Ninja Gaiden? OP, Are you serious? but alas, my ultimate hope is one day BioWare will have a sudden enlightenment and make Dragon Age's combat turn-based.

[coles4971]

TelvanniWarlord wrote...

Also @ coles4971.. Dark Souls does not suck. The Demons/Dark Souls franchise is very well respected in the hardcore gaming community and the only people who hate on it are people who pretty much suck at it.

I didn't suck at it, I just found it utterly boring.

[Fisto The Sexbot]

 Dark Souls is a hack & slash console game. Why would Dragon Age be anything like it? I can say that the game very much involves:
1. Bashing X, aka button-mashing.
2. Rolling.

None of which are desirable for what the franchise set out to be.

Modifié par Fisto The Sexbot, 27 août 2012 - 09:33 .

[Boss Fog]

coles4971 wrote...

I didn't suck at it, I just found it utterly boring.

Fair enough; not going to argue with you on your preferences.

Fisto The Sexbot wrote...

 Dark Souls is a hack & slash console game. Why would Dragon Age be anything like it? I can say that the game very much involves:
1. Bashing X, aka button-mashing.
2. Rolling.

None of which are desirable for what the franchise set out to be.

I suppose from a very limited perspective the souls series is based around mashing the attack button; because IMO it certainly isn't.  Yes, there are certain enemies that you can kill if you just rely on weapon spam; however this will get you killed more often than not against more challenging enemies like bosses and such.  There is so much more to the game than mashing the attack button; i.e. sorcieries, miracles, pyromancies, archery, ripostes, backstabs, etc.  I will agree with you though that roll dodging is a huge part of the game however I wouldn't necessarily label roll dodging as an undesireable mechanic.

[Giltspur]

There are many elements to combat: mechanics, encounter design, reliance on attrition, presentation/feel.  In terms of encounter design and presentation/feel I think there's something to be said for Dark Souls being a good influence on other types of games (like Dragon Age).  In terms of mechanics though, the games are fundamentally different and there's nothing for Dragon Age to learn from Dark Souls.  (And DA's mechanics are fine.  It's encounter design from DA2 can certainly improve.)

Mechanics
Dark Souls: Control one character. "Vancian" spellcasting (limited spells until recharging at a campfire); Melee attacks, dodges and shield blocks are activated by button presses (making Dark Souls a "hack and slash" or a "button-masher" but I don't use those terms as insults here).  Force attacks from enemies, to enemies.  Also, weapons have weight and how well you can use weapons is tied to stats.
Dragon Age II: Control a party.  Use spells governed by a regenerating resource (mana/stamina).  Non-spell/ability attacks ("white attacks") can be initiated by button press or run via auto-attack.  Force mechanics from enemies and to enemies.
WINNER: DRAGON AGE II

Encounter Design
Dark Souls: Individual enemies are much stronger than in DAII.  You fighter fewer enemies at a time, and there's no real reliance on waves.  Bosses sometimes have a gimmick which removes the impossibility that they might seem to have.
Dragon Age II: Much of DA2's encounter design is MMO-style AOE farming.  In other words, you tank a lot of trash and blow it up with damage classes.  This is probably the result of the decision to have so many enemies by melee-only enemies.  As a result challenge comes from waves of these melee enemies.  Soemtimes there are movement tests--these are also like MMO fights.  Corypheus involves running from slow-moving fire.  Prosper involves running from bombs.  ARW involves hiding behind columns, etc.
WINNER: DARK SOULS
...but if we  add Dragon Age: Origins into the mix
WINNER: DRAGON AGE: ORIGINS

Attrition/Perfection
Dark Souls: Dark Souls has limited saves.  So you have SAVE 0, Challenge 1, Challenge 2, Challenge 3, Challenge 4, Challenge 5, SAVE 1.  In other words, you can't just clear one challenge and move on to the next.  You have to be so good at Challenge 1 that you have enough resources to complete Challenge 2.  As you fail later challenges you must improve at earlier ones if you ever hope to make it to Save 1.  That makes you better at the game.  Some crave that kind of challenge.  It was commonly found in 8-bit games with limited lives/continues and in arcade coin-ops.
Dragon Age II: SAVE 0, Challenge 1, SAVE 1, Challenge 2, SAVE 2, Challenge 3, SAVE 3, Challenge 4, SAVE 4, Challenge 5, SAVE 5.  Encounters are designed with the assumption you'll use all resources and regen to full after the fight or get more consumables on trash before next major challenge.  Ultimately, this requires less perfection on individual encounters to progress to the end of the game.
WINNER: DRAGON AGE II

Presentation/Feel
Dark Souls: The enemies are very strong.  You feel like you've survived something harrowing when you clear an encounter.  You're not a comic book hero; you're surviving a horror movie.
Dragon Age II: You hit eight dudes with a swipe of the sword and they all fly backwards.  Some of them explode into chunks.  Imagine if Ned Stark did this to eight Lannisters.  That would not be cool.
WINNER: DARK SOULS

Modifié par Giltspur, 27 août 2012 - 03:14 .

[Giltspur]

Double post.

Modifié par Giltspur, 27 août 2012 - 03:05 .

[philippe willaume]

I would say that the OP got the jest of it, though.

yes Dark Soul might not be the perfect example to illustrate the point and nor is "clumbsy armour" and "heavy swords" any more realistic that paratrooper-pirate-ninja.

at the end of the day DS makes you feel as if you have worked you brain using tactics and gave you a sense of achievement.
and that how DA:0 made me feel.

DA:2 was more a walk in the pack. (and to be fair DA:0 with two mages is about the same)
to illustrate my points, i did some test with two 550 ti in SLI on a crosshair V/FX8150 at max resolution. (it was all smooth on a 24")
by the time i remembered what was where the enemy had been anhilated in DA:2., but in DA:0 i was the first to dies and the parie got its arse handed over.
Phil

[Scarlet Rabbi]

Fisto The Sexbot wrote...

I can say that [Dark Souls] very much involves:
1. Bashing X, aka button-mashing.
2. Rolling.

There is much evasion involved in the combat of DS, I'll give you that. But button mashing in DS will get you killed very quickly, and if you've played it you know this. In comparing the two, I'd say DA2 can be justifiably labeled as more of a button masher than Dark Souls, easily.