151 réponses à ce sujet

[philippe willaume]

[quote]philippe willaume wrote...

[quote]simfamSP wrote...

[quote]If you choose to limit your understanding of term to that definition, you will miss the point that people are trying to make. What i am getting at is when people call DA:2 hack and slash, they know that it is a not a H&S design but it feels like it when you play.
That felling is not due to the design of the combat per se, though it is obvioulsy part of it, it is a result of how the game plays compared to your references.[/quote]

Feeling and being are two different things. The latter is objective and the former is subjective; if DA2 'feels' like a hack n' slash, it is entierly to the individual's taste.

[quote[The difference is that in DA:2, you can't use the thing that made DA:O tactical and despite that the tactical aspect of DA:2 that is more elaborated than your average hack and slash game it is far behind what you can do in DA:0.
[/quote]

Not to me, I played DA2 on hard, I found it challenging on occasions, no more than I found DA:O challenging. Things become easier the more you do them.

[quote]
In DA:0 you had a tactical situation through skills or scouting, you could position your mages to control choke point (or created them artificially with traps or using the grease barrel and a fire based spell), put
you archers to get a good enfilade position and so that he can support the mage if need be ,what
you do with your warrior and/or rogue would depends of what the situation is.


In DA:2 move forward see enemy, engage vanguard berserker,
kill a mooks to get stamina. rise and repeat. (i.e. the same as fire storm +tremor and the rogue and warrior finishing off the rest in DA:0 when playing with two mages)
phil[/quote]

No. In DA2 if I did that I would have been slaughtered in seconds. It took Varric, me [mage] Fenris and Aveline to get anywhere. In occasions where I didn't bring somebody due to RP reasons, it was even more difficult.

For example: The Deep Roads were a **** because my Hawke didn't want to deprive Aveline of her duty to the guard, so she didn't take her and Fenris acted as Tank. It took a lot of 'changes' to get that part sorted.

Even so, if you find the game simple, it means you're either very good at it, or just playing it on a very low difficulty. I found The Witcher 2 a peace of cake in my second go on Dark Mode. The game is hard, because I've heard many people complain about it. But to me it isn't because I'm good at it.
[/quote]

That is the point i am trying to make mate. yes it is a relative abstract felling.if you have not played DA:0 with a suboptimal team, this thread is not likely to make sense.
Saying no you can't fell that way because technically it is not a hack and slash, despite being 100% true is missing the point that is being made. 

For DA:2
no i am not especially good and I played in nightmare,except for  bosses, because it was too long and too much of the same thing that it makes witling or watching paint dry interesting. 
Now i played a vanguard berserker (basically you are getting a very fast attack rate), as a warrior you get stamina back each time you kill some one. so you never run out of juice and if you potion up a little you will be fine. (and 1 use injury kit because Isabella or Fenris are going to get decked every two fights or so).

to be honest I think I understand where you are coming from. My first run at DA:2 was with suboptimal char and the deep road was a very very unpleasant experience. the ARW was particularly painful.

In the vanguard berserker, it was much quicker and almost interesting because it was over before becoming tedious. 

But you should try it (use the ultimate build) that is what I did in DA:2 when someone told me that their DA:0 run was like my DA:2 run (and they were right).

I agree with you about the Witcher, it is more a
matter of getting used to the way it works. though it is harder run  for me than DA:2 

phil[/quote]

[philippe willaume]

simfamSP wrote...

I suspect that the endless mincing for stupid amount of damage on 10^9 hit point did have FF whatever reminiscence as well

Final Fantasy games are anything but hack n slashes. Calling FF an action game because of the overkill animations is like accusing someone of a crime due to their race.

Just to clarify because you seems to have got the wrong end
of the stick here.

 That comment has noting to do with animation really. more with plenty of hit point bosses/ monster  that takes donkeys to whittle down.

And for the record I prefer FF over Diablo and I think the FF series have some good rpg elements and  I find FF combat  much better than DA:2

but I can understand why people relate DA:2 run to Japanese's RPG. in fact it is a view that I can relate to.

Again if we  take a absolute stricto sensus view and do not wish to  take in account that type of experience. there is no point debating.
It is like saying that the Kar98 has a stronger recoil than a 7.65. That is true but i have shot 7.65 that kicked harder than a kar98 despite the kar98 being a heavier bullet with a bigger case 7.9*57 than a nato 7.65*51.

or i would still think that batting away the tip of an incomming couched lance is pure fantasy, if i had not read it in medieval fancig manual and  tried it when jousting 

phil

Modifié par philippe willaume, 14 octobre 2012 - 09:22 .