151 réponses à ce sujet

[HOUSE MDD]

marshalleck wrote...

It seems we can all agree that OP doesn't actually play any Japanese games and is simply being racist. Sadly it's not uncommon to see people on BSN bemoaning anything Japanese.

I find that really hard to belive. if you read any of my posts in relevance to this thread. on he subject of racism i find it extremley offensive for u to say that and that your definition of the term to be slighly odd, the fact im half japaneese ( on my fathers side ) and would never insult a race especially 1 that is half my own. not that i have to justify myself to you. it seems the title was mis-inturpreted, as what it meant was the action style combat of jag's dmc etc does not suit DA2. but i couldnt fi all that into the title. that fact you think that is of your own assumption and i have no time for assumptions.

[HOUSE MDD]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

HOUSE MDD wrote...

BouncyFrag wrote...

It sounds like you think all Japanese action games are bad. If so, any conclusions that you come to cannot be taken seriously.

No i said in my various posts i have no problem with jag's jrpg's etc i own ad adore many of them. i just didnt think that comat style suited or worked with DA2.

E.g in dmc it explains how dante has all these super powers and can pull off these insane moves which works with the type of game and the story the char has etc. yet in DA2 you are portraded as a simple human with no super powers etc ( unless u count mages ) in a very human world. as alot of the enemys are human based or mutations of humanoid ( e.g DS ). the only things that would justify the insane ott power would be demons i suppose. what my point is there is a time and a place and a game style ( action ) for this type of combat. this type of rpg is not one of them imo.

Well there's Berserkers ,Templars and Reavers for the warrior classes And Zevran pretty much tells you that Assassins go through Training from Hell to get as good as they do.

So no ain't seeing it.

well the main point  i said if you wernt being so pedantic was this style of combat is more suited to action games ( or hack n slash ) dmc bayo etc not a rpg like DA and the big point to see here was IMO.

[Kerilus]

Actiony does not have to be Dynasty warrior style. I suggest learning a thing or two from Guild wars 2. Fluid combat with actual need for aiming, blocking and dodging, animation quality could be viewed as a bit over the top by some old RPG fans, but certainly not as out of place as that of DA 2.

[Rawgrim]

HOUSE MDD wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

It seems we can all agree that OP doesn't actually play any Japanese games and is simply being racist. Sadly it's not uncommon to see people on BSN bemoaning anything Japanese.

I find that really hard to belive. if you read any of my posts in relevance to this thread. on he subject of racism i find it extremley offensive for u to say that and that your definition of the term to be slighly odd, the fact im half japaneese ( on my fathers side ) and would never insult a race especially 1 that is half my own. not that i have to justify myself to you. it seems the title was mis-inturpreted, as what it meant was the action style combat of jag's dmc etc does not suit DA2. but i couldnt fi all that into the title. that fact you think that is of your own assumption and i have no time for assumptions.

There was nothing at all racist in any of your posts. You were criticizing a product, not a race or country. Playing the racist card is, sadly, a "get out of jail free card" for some people. Usually it gets played when someone is losing a discussion. Don`t worry about it, mate. You did said nothing wrong.

[Realmzmaster]

I do not see where you get that DA2 is Hack and Slash? If that the case is refers to all Bioware games since BG1. The only games that that term may not refer to would be turn based games like Temple of Elemental Evil and Pool of Radiance.

The same mechanics are basically used in BG1 to DA2. One must separate animations from game mechanics. The animations may be over the top in some cases but the mechanics are essential the same. The speed may be different but as has been stated on this forum many thought DAO to be too slow. DA2 is thought to be too fast. The point is BG1, BG2 and NWN were faster than DAO.
All the games implement pause and play in realtime..

As far as some of skills in DA2 being over the top that goes back to DAO and the expansion Awakening. Every class in Awakening got hit with the super stick.

Normal human Hawke maybe but those normal humans can become reavers, templars, berserkers, assassins, duelists etc to the point the character is not longer an ordinary human. Templars cannot be ordinary if they are going to guard mages. The training that is undertaken makes them extraordinary.

Nothing you said was racist but the title should said action oriented (or Hack and slash) combat and left any reference to an ethnicity out.

[Realmzmaster]

Kerilus wrote...

Actiony does not have to be Dynasty warrior style. I suggest learning a thing or two from Guild wars 2. Fluid combat with actual need for aiming, blocking and dodging, animation quality could be viewed as a bit over the top by some old RPG fans, but certainly not as out of place as that of DA 2.

I do not view is as out of place in a single player action oriented game like Skyrim or the Witcher 2. It simply becomes more difficult to implement in a party based game. 
The point is that the game becomes more based on player reaction time skill than character skill.  What is the point in building a character if player reaction time skill can compensate for the lack of the build?

[Rawgrim]

Skyrim and The Witcher 2 never struck me as action oriented, though. DA2 certainly did. Pure hack and slash, for the most part. The waves of enemies, and enemies spawning all around you saw to that.

[Realmzmaster]

Rawgrim wrote...

Skyrim and The Witcher 2 never struck me as action oriented, though. DA2 certainly did. Pure hack and slash, for the most part. The waves of enemies, and enemies spawning all around you saw to that.

Actually (IMHO) both Skyrim and Witcher 2 are more action oriented than DA2. Both  rely more on player skill than character skill than DA2. Certain buttons have to be pressed to enagage in blocking, rolling, aiming etc in Skyrim and Witcher 2. In my opinion that makes them more action oriented (Hack and slash) than DA2.

In DA2 I set the tactics for the companions. I tell Hawke to attack and when to use a special ability. Once I tell Hawke to attack the attack continues with out me having to tell Hawke to block a blow , aim the bow etc. I tell Hawke who to attack and how.

[scootermcgaffin]

It always amuses me how having to move your party around is considered "deep, tactical gameplay" in DA:O and "cheap kiting hack 'n' slash" in DA2.

[MrMcDoll]

The only reason I want DA3 to have slower paced and less exaggerated combat moves in it is because I could barely tell what was happening at most times. The teleporting and backflipping rogues, the jumping and sliding-forward-at-faster-than-light-speeds warriors and the ninja-style mages just made my head hurt.
Essentially, other than the spawning enemies the combat was essentially the same between the two Dragon age games, it's just that in DA2, the animations were all a lot faster and crazier.
I really don;t feel that it suited the theme established by the previous game.

For an example of awesome looking two-handed fighter animations have a gander at skyrim. The weapons look like they have heft (and before some know-it-all comes along and says "they only weighed blah blah whatever" - most people expect giant swords to BE heavy, it makes them more deadly looking. doesn't matter if IRL they were lighter, because IRL there are no mages, or GIANT swords and axes etc as thick as in these games, or HUMUNGO armour with even bigger pauldrons)

[Realmzmaster]

MrMcDoll wrote...

The only reason I want DA3 to have slower paced and less exaggerated combat moves in it is because I could barely tell what was happening at most times. The teleporting and backflipping rogues, the jumping and sliding-forward-at-faster-than-light-speeds warriors and the ninja-style mages just made my head hurt.
Essentially, other than the spawning enemies the combat was essentially the same between the two Dragon age games, it's just that in DA2, the animations were all a lot faster and crazier.
I really don;t feel that it suited the theme established by the previous game.

For an example of awesome looking two-handed fighter animations have a gander at skyrim. The weapons look like they have heft (and before some know-it-all comes along and says "they only weighed blah blah whatever" - most people expect giant swords to BE heavy, it makes them more deadly looking. doesn't matter if IRL they were lighter, because IRL there are no mages, or GIANT swords and axes etc as thick as in these games, or HUMUNGO armour with even bigger pauldrons)

So DA3 is to go back to mages who do not know that a staff can be used as a melee weapon? Rogues who do not know what a smoke bomb is? So rolling foward is acceptable but a backflip is not? The overpowered moves started in DAA which hit every class with the super stick. It did not start in DA2.  

And no just because a sword looks big does not make it heavy. It depends on the metal or material it is made out of. Like the meteor metal used to make Starfang in DAO and what about dragonbone,  veridium, silverite. What about ironbark which is strong but very light . Nowhere is it stated that all these metals and materials are heavy. So no big does not equate to heavy. 

[Rawgrim]

Realmzmaster wrote...

MrMcDoll wrote...

The only reason I want DA3 to have slower paced and less exaggerated combat moves in it is because I could barely tell what was happening at most times. The teleporting and backflipping rogues, the jumping and sliding-forward-at-faster-than-light-speeds warriors and the ninja-style mages just made my head hurt.
Essentially, other than the spawning enemies the combat was essentially the same between the two Dragon age games, it's just that in DA2, the animations were all a lot faster and crazier.
I really don;t feel that it suited the theme established by the previous game.

For an example of awesome looking two-handed fighter animations have a gander at skyrim. The weapons look like they have heft (and before some know-it-all comes along and says "they only weighed blah blah whatever" - most people expect giant swords to BE heavy, it makes them more deadly looking. doesn't matter if IRL they were lighter, because IRL there are no mages, or GIANT swords and axes etc as thick as in these games, or HUMUNGO armour with even bigger pauldrons)

So DA3 is to go back to mages who do not know that a staff can be used as a melee weapon? Rogues who do not know what a smoke bomb is? So rolling foward is acceptable but a backflip is not? The overpowered moves started in DAA which hit every class with the super stick. It did not start in DA2.  

And no just because a sword looks big does not make it heavy. It depends on the metal or material it is made out of. Like the meteor metal used to make Starfang in DAO and what about dragonbone,  veridium, silverite. What about ironbark which is strong but very light . Nowhere is it stated that all these metals and materials are heavy. So no big does not equate to heavy. 

It did start in Awakening, you are quite right there. I got no problems with the smokebombs, or the backflips. But an unlimited amount of smokebombs being forced onto my rogue is a bad move. I want to decide for myself what kind of rogue I am playing. Rogues don`t equal Ninjas. DA:O let me design the type of rogue I wanted. DA2, with the removal of non combat skills (also a hack and slash trait), made my rogue great at picking locks just because he got great at backstabbing. I wanted to play a more charismatic and lockpicking kind of rogue, not a damn manga ninja.

[Kail Ashton]

Because overbearing inventory and boring combat animations are so much better, as always people forget what THEY want is not what EVERYONE wants, the obvious assumption on the developers parts is "well these other games get positive response about their stylized combat while we had alot of complaints about our slkugish combat, maybe we should look into that" and "should me make people waste a buncha inventory space JUST to use a speciel move they already painstakingly unlocked? that sems like something that would ****** off the majority of players"

Honestly i've never seen such self indulgent, me, me, me, inconsiderate to everyone else nonsense complaints then i've seen on this forum

[Icinix]

Kail Ashton wrote...

Because overbearing inventory and boring combat animations are so much better, as always people forget what THEY want is not what EVERYONE wants, the obvious assumption on the developers parts is "well these other games get positive response about their stylized combat while we had alot of complaints about our slkugish combat, maybe we should look into that" and "should me make people waste a buncha inventory space JUST to use a speciel move they already painstakingly unlocked? that sems like something that would ****** off the majority of players"

Honestly i've never seen such self indulgent, me, me, me, inconsiderate to everyone else nonsense complaints then i've seen on this forum

You must not get onto other game forums much then.

[Rawgrim]

Kail Ashton wrote...

Because overbearing inventory and boring combat animations are so much better, as always people forget what THEY want is not what EVERYONE wants, the obvious assumption on the developers parts is "well these other games get positive response about their stylized combat while we had alot of complaints about our slkugish combat, maybe we should look into that" and "should me make people waste a buncha inventory space JUST to use a speciel move they already painstakingly unlocked? that sems like something that would ****** off the majority of players"

Honestly i've never seen such self indulgent, me, me, me, inconsiderate to everyone else nonsense complaints then i've seen on this forum

Complaints like these happens when the developers completely changes the style of a game in mid-series. You would have seen the same complaints if they turned BG2 into an action game, after the success of BG1 as well.

[Fyurian2]

schalafi wrote...

I tried to play a mage in Origins, but it seemed way too slow. In DA2 mages were much better and their spells were more powerful, so I hope they keep that aspect in DA3.

I must say that combat as a mage in DA2 was an improvement over DA, in regards to having combat animations that aren't standing in one place and pointing your staff or casting spells. The improved animations for mage combat made my Mage Hawke feel more like an Arcane Warrior than an Arcane Warrior in Origins/Awakening, simply because the animations gave a more martial feel to it.

I was disappointed by the extreme streamlining of spells and the lack of spell combos (grease & fireball ftw!), but I did like the addition of the telekinetics spell tree (though that tree made me think of Adepts from Mass Effect).

As for traditional combat and the animations... I honestly found two-handed swords OTT in scale and speed and a couple of two-handed abilities were just, "wth?", in particular the sprinting slashing thing.
Was disappointed that dual-wield and archery were pigeon-holed to Rogue only.

As I'm writing this I can't quite remember whom it was that wrote about the combat being too fast, but I'd wholeheartedly agree.
It needs to be slowed down some, but not as slow as the first game. That, and two-handed weapons not looking ridiculously large.

Modifié par Fyurian2, 13 octobre 2012 - 03:42 .

[SpEcIaLRyAn]

DA2s combat wasn't really hack n slash. It just felt that way because you had to keep pressing "A" to attack or your character would just stand there getting destroyed.

[Fallstar]

Woah. Low blows to dynasty warriors all round. It doesn't pretend to be anything other than a hack and slash game. I thought the first four (the only ones I've played) were great.

[Androme]

Good.. Good! Keep up the selfhating of everything Western and the glorifying of anything non-Western, also, keep defending the use of JRPG-like combat mechanics in a Western-RPG!

On a more serious note; No more JRPG combat indeed, PLEASE BioWare.

Modifié par Androme, 13 octobre 2012 - 03:41 .

[Iosev]

I can't help but feel like some people are exaggerating the similarities between Dragon Age 2 and action games, and downplaying the similarities between DA 2 and Dragon Age: Origins. I think one change in DA 2 that can be seen as a shift towards being more action-oriented is the increased responsiveness of attacks and abilities. Specifically, when you select a target to attack, your character will immediately lunge toward its target (if in a close-enough range), as opposed to the slow shuffle seen in DA:O.

However, to call DA 2 a "button-mashing" action/hack n' slash game is ridiculous, especially if you have played games like Devil May Cry 3, Ninja Gaiden, or Dark Souls. For example, not only is the combat in Dark Souls and Dragon Age 2 dissimilar, but if you attempt to button-mash through Dark Souls, you're going to spend a lot of time running back to your corpse. Within the action/hack and slash genres, games are far more complex and diverse than "button-mashing", which is why several people have issue with the OP.

I've stated this in other threads, but I think DA 2 was simply too easy on the default setting. When I first played DA 2, I played it on nightmare, so I had to rely on cross-class combinations, elemental resistances, and spacing (to avoid friendly-fire), resulting in a very enjoyable, tactical experience. It wasn't until I watched my brother play on normal that I saw how DA 2 could be perceived as being more action-oriented (he was mowing through enemies with his warrior). However, I see this as more of a difficulty issue, and not really a shift towards being an action game. I also think that the game releasing without an auto-attack feature helped create the "button-mashing" perception, but that was patched rather quickly.

Modifié par arcelonious, 13 octobre 2012 - 04:13 .

[SpEcIaLRyAn]

Androme wrote...

Good.. Good! Keep up the selfhating of everything Western and the glorifying of anything non-Western, also, keep defending the use of JRPG-like combat mechanics in a Western-RPG!

On a more serious note; No more JRPG combat indeed, PLEASE BioWare.

I agree I prefer Western RPGs. JRPGs are too linear for me.

[Realmzmaster]

SpEcIaLRyAn wrote...

Androme wrote...

Good.. Good! Keep up the selfhating of everything Western and the glorifying of anything non-Western, also, keep defending the use of JRPG-like combat mechanics in a Western-RPG!

On a more serious note; No more JRPG combat indeed, PLEASE BioWare.

I agree I prefer Western RPGs. JRPGs are too linear for me.

What makes you think that western crpgs are any less linear? Games from BG1 to now are linear. The only ones that may give the impression of not being linear are Elder Scroll games and other open world games. The main plot in those games are extremely linear. OPen world games are based on exploration. Story based games (which Bioware makes) then to be more linear because they have to be to tell the story. As far as westen crpgs go what about Diablo or Dungeon Seige which are very linear.

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 13 octobre 2012 - 04:40 .

[Realmzmaster]

arcelonious wrote...

I can't help but feel like some people are exaggerating the similarities between Dragon Age 2 and action games, and downplaying the similarities between DA 2 and Dragon Age: Origins. I think one change in DA 2 that can be seen as a shift towards being more action-oriented is the increased responsiveness of attacks and abilities. Specifically, when you select a target to attack, your character will immediately lunge toward its target (if in a close-enough range), as opposed to the slow shuffle seen in DA:O.

However, to call DA 2 a "button-mashing" action/hack n' slash game is ridiculous, especially if you have played games like Devil May Cry 3, Ninja Gaiden, or Dark Souls. For example, not only is the combat in Dark Souls and Dragon Age 2 dissimilar, but if you attempt to button-mash through Dark Souls, you're going to spend a lot of time running back to your corpse. Within the action/hack and slash genres, games are far more complex and diverse than "button-mashing", which is why several people have issue with the OP.

I've stated this in other threads, but I think DA 2 was simply too easy on the default setting. When I first played DA 2, I played it on nightmare, so I had to rely on cross-class combinations, elemental resistances, and spacing (to avoid friendly-fire), resulting in a very enjoyable, tactical experience. It wasn't until I watched my brother play on normal that I saw how DA 2 could be perceived as being more action-oriented (he was mowing through enemies with his warrior). However, I see this as more of a difficulty issue, and not really a shift towards being an action game. I also think that the game releasing without an auto-attack feature helped create the "button-mashing" perception, but that was patched rather quickly.

Actually the computer always had autoattack. It somehow got left out of the console versions. One problem DA2 suffered came in the changing of the difficulty level. DAO had friendly fire on normal (40% level). DA2 does not. The amount of Friendly fire differed between normal, hard and nightmare in DAO. DA2 should have included friendly fire on normal and gradually increased it like DAO.

I have played the JRPGs that have come out on the PC. I am playing the Last Remnant now. The game and combat are very good. The problem I have is with the control system since it must be played with keyboard and mouse rather than just mouse ( Keyboard optional) like DA games. It limits my playing time due to physical limitation.

[Iosev]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Actually the computer always had autoattack. It somehow got left out of the console versions. One problem DA2 suffered came in the changing of the difficulty level. DAO had friendly fire on normal (40% level). DA2 does not. The amount of Friendly fire differed between normal, hard and nightmare in DAO. DA2 should have included friendly fire on normal and gradually increased it like DAO.

Yes, you're correct, I was talking specifically about the console versions regarding the lack of an auto-attack feature at release (I forgot to specify), and I agree, I think that Dragon Age: Inquisition could benefit from adjusting difficulty settings and friendly fire in a matter that encouraged the player to learn tactical gameplay.