223 réponses à ce sujet

[Quicksilver26]

Filament wrote...

Leaping tiger.

hidden dragon

[Vicious]

DA II was in development for two years, DA:O for 5-7 years. Even with half the sales, they'd still make more profit.

I understand what you said, but Let's not skew things here by offering half-assed information and more fodder for the anti anything new crowd.

Since 1998's Baldur's Gate, Bioware has been on a 1 game every 2 years release schedule. DA:O's development was hampered by a myriad of problems, including

A) No one would publish DA:O unti EA came along after Bioware was dropped by Interplay.
DA:O went through NUMEROUS changes and overhauls, graphical, GUI, gameplay, over the course of it's development while Bioware tried and failed to find a publisher.


That said, yes DA2 just wasn't a good game. It's DLC, however, was superior and evoked echoes of DA:O.

That said, I prefer DA:O style combat where attacks were slower but had more weight. I want a dark fantasy, not Jrpg style hit a human being with a sword 50 times before he dies.

2 Handed needed to be faster, though.

Modifié par Vicious, 18 octobre 2012 - 04:25 .

[Burnouts3s3]

I just want something like Origins where bother the cRPG fans and newcomers could both enjoy.

Then again, I doubt that's possible if they decide to put in multi-player...

Still, one can hope.

[Massa FX]

I liked combat style of both games. What can I say?

[h0neanias]

deuce985 wrote...

Was it financially successful though? 5 year development cycle and about 4-5 million copies sold. DA2 is on about a year and six month dev cycle - sold about half of DAO. Which would you view as being more financially successful for the company? Probably DA2 because I doubt it came close to DAO's budget. I don't think you can say for sure that DAO was a big success for Bioware financially.

That probably also played into why EA/Bioware decided to make DA2 so fast. Bank on the success and recover whatever money they lost over the years.

To be honest with you, DA3 can be an absolutely amazing game and it still won't see huge commercial numbers. I believe once some gamers view a franchise as being "damaged", they won't give them a second chance. I think some gamers will have their minds made up about the game without even watching any footage, unfortunately. This might be the last DA game.

But why would gamers view this franchise as damaged? Don't get me wrong, I think DA2 is a great game despite its flaws, but if enough people cannot overlook those flaws, what suffers is not only the game itself, but the future as well. In short -- if DA2 and ME3 hurt the revenue from future titles, it should be factorised into their supposed profitability.

[Cultist]

DA2 could not considered an RPG. More of arcade slasher and interactive movie with minor RPG elements at best.
And this is one of the reasons because Project Eternity with promises of tactical complex combat gathered 4 million dollars.
Complexity is more appealing than games like DA2 where the most complex action is "Press A, Press A, Press A, Press A, "

Modifié par Cultist, 18 octobre 2012 - 03:49 .

[xJorgexBK]

id prefer the DA:O gameplay, because DA2 was like a weird thing without understanding and with no special deaths, when my characters attack, i cant see what they were doing!

[Rpgfantasyplayer]

I liked DA2 combat better only for the fact that I really enjoy playing as a rogue and in DA:O my rogue was so busy shuffling around to hit an enemy that I hardly got to fight. I also found that in DA:O it was sometimes hard to get my PC to target the enemy I wanted to hit. I would like a mix between both styles. Faster than DA:O sluggishness but slower than DA2 tornado combat.

[Massa FX]

nvm

Modifié par Massa FX, 18 octobre 2012 - 04:06 .

[Mr_Steph]

DA2 combat was by far more enjoyable for me. I liked DAO when it came out, but DA2's combat is fun and I have trouble playing DAO now because it is just so boring. Heck I feel DA2's combat is more tactical than DAO's where I quite honestly don't have to give a )="#/ about what I do even on nightmare. Try that in DA2 and you lose the fight badly.

That said, I really hope they have ditched the waves. Legacy and MotA did it a lot better.

[Urazz]

I'd prefer DA2's combat with a hint of DA:O's mixed in. More specifically what they did in the DLCs which did show they learned their mistakes.

[Annie_Dear]

I prefer the combat in Origins. Granted, it could be too slow at times, but I'll take that over the ridiculously fast combat in DA2. Not to mention how the animations in DA2 reminded me of DMC more than anything.

I also miss the camera from Origins.

But as a small side note, I hope they create smaller two-handed weapons. I can't imagin anyone jumping in the air in order to deliver a blow with Hayder's Razor.

[KDD-0063]

What DAO's combat system needs fix on:
1) Meaningful hard/nightmare difficulty curve; IIRC in DAO, hard is only 10% more difficult than normal and NM is only 10% more difficult than hard.
2) Meaningful boss encounters, boss mechanics, AI and general enemy mechanics. The only fearsome thing in DAO were enemy mages, which brings to the next point...
3) Extremely cheap/overpowered abilities or tactics available to players, such as mana clash one-shotting enemy mages in a huge area, or blood wound, an AoE high damage hard CC.

Fortunately, DA2's combat system addressed most problems above, most cheap abilities no longer exist (some abilities are still cheap but not completely brainlessly powerful), enemy mechanics are added, and hard/nm is vastly more difficult than normal.

Unfortunately, DA2 also turned Dragon Age's combat into a hack & slash game. That part really isn't great, it is also unnecessary. If you install the combat tweaks and nightmare+ mod, many of the criticism towards DAO's combat in this thread will go away.

[TheCharmedOne]

MUCH prefer the combat of DA 2. I felt more engaged and just overall enjoyed it more, and it is more fun for me to replay. I dont get bored with it.

[philippe willaume]

hello
about profitability,
let it not be forgotten, that DA:2 got a fair bit of it's initial sales success due to mugs like me pre-ordering because we like DA:0 so much, which is directly linked on the time spent on DA:0.


about combat
it can be argued that DA:0 and DA:2 have the same combat mechanics.
as well if we want to be fair, EA tried to improve several point about which the fan base complained.
Conceptually DA:2 could have been a much game that it ended up to be. for me DA:0 ended up being a superior game in very aspect.

lots of things that made DA:0 combat great are in fact not related to combat and we lost them in DA:2
you could have an good idea of where your opponent where by using skills or stealth. from there you could use a strategy tactics that would compensate for sub optimal character design.
and the way the companion reacted made on the spot adjustment a viable option.
because you could control you companions position, larger playing maps (and a dogdy AI path findings) and having two weapons talents tree.
you could thin out the opposition with 3 archers which you can't in DA:2.

all that meant that if you were inclined or had to (because your char&comp design is based on how you see the role more that build efficiency) you had much more options than you have in DA:2.

That is compounded by the boss and level design, were really geared towards build efficiency which makes the tediousness directly proportional to the departure of build efficiency.
the problem is that if you use the ultimate build found on the forum, you mince goons like butter and the boss fight are a boring rinse and repeat.
If you played two mages in DA:0 it is a very similar feeling.
and then if you add silly animation like bicycle kick grenades, rocket propelled slides or jump, cheerleader twirling and BFS. You will understand that i have the lingering felling of unease comes from.

That being said, the stealth for all in MotA was really good. Mages using their stick in hand to hand combat instead of pocking at a very slow rate is a good idea.
Rogue in DA:0 could have beneficiated of roll animation to get into position to get the angle and attack. (that's what they do after all, sneaky buggers)

phil

[DarkKnightHolmes]

ORIGIN! ORIGIN! ORIGIN!

Don't care if it's slow.

[PaulSX]

I am one of those who support the mix of the two games. I liked the strategic elements of the first game (for example survival, trap making skills) but I also think DA2's combat talent trees are superior

[MichaelStuart]

Well I didn't like either Dragon Age games combat, but out of the two I prefer Dragon Age 2s combat as it was quicker.

[Browneye_Vamp84]

I liked the combat of both games, but DA: 2 combat was pretty fun and I miss the finishing move from Origins.

[ioannisdenton]

Too much button awesome..
i ll stick with DAO

[ScarMK]

Origins. Da2 has potential, but I'm not sure if bioware would be willing to put in the work.

[ioannisdenton]

OP i forgot, i had done a POLL in here some time ago about the combat.
you can all vote here  . so far it has 336 votes. you can use this poll and enhance it with more votes

[marshalleck]

Neither is ideal, they should be aiming for something closer to Dark Souls or Dragon's Dogma

[ScarMK]

ioannisdenton wrote...

OP i forgot, i had done a POLL in here some time ago about the combat.
you can all vote here  . so far it has 336 votes. you can use this poll and enhance it with more votes

Da2 beating Origins is very unsettling.