223 réponses à ce sujet

[FedericoV]

They already decided so our opinion on that matter do not mean that much. But I simply believe that they should choose one direction and follow it coherently to its conclusion even if something get lost along the way. I've just one preference about gameplay: avoid compromises and follow your vision.

If they want to give us a more classical gaming experience, they should return do BG and DA:O's model and try to improve it even further (so: iso view, D&Desque rule system and stronger RTWP system).

It they want to give us a fluid and cinematic game experience that focus on the narrative, they should do something even more radical than DA2 (like removing classes, removing party control and going completely real-time).

Modifié par FedericoV, 18 octobre 2012 - 09:43 .

[Mark of the Dragon]

They need to mix both. The strategic stand point of DAO with the more actiony feel of DA2. Slow down combat so its more realistic and implement the wave combat feature better plus strategically placing enemies as well. Voila!

[Conniving_Eagle]

The more buttons I press, the more awesome should happen.

[ioannisdenton]

ScarMK wrote...

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.

yeah. at least fanbase is divided at almost 50%.
I support DAO or a mix of both.

[Sable Rhapsody]

DA2. Sorry, but going straight from DA:O to DA2, the combat in DA2 is so much less excruciating. Maybe because the combat in both games is ok at best, but in DA2, it at least takes a lot less time to slog through.

[Rawgrim]

Mindless button mashing vs tactical combat with an isometric view....hmm...what to chose what to chose...

[Sylvius the Mad]

Maria Caliban wrote...

DA II was in development for two years

We have dev comments saying 11 months, Maria.

[ioannisdenton]

Reminder:
i had created a POLL in here some time ago about the combat.
you can all vote here  . so far it has 340 votes. you can use this poll and enhance it with more votes.

[Fast Jimmy]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

DA II was in development for two years

We have dev comments saying 11 months, Maria.

Its a constantly moving goalpost. They can claim they were working on DA2 in Spring 2008, since that's when the PC version was technically complete, but was held until November to port it out to the consoles. They could claim high level design ideas for DA2 from that point. They could also claim that they were working on it during the late stages of DA:O's production, possibly late 2007. 

But in reality, I'd say they started working on it, giving it the real brunt of the resources, after the Awakening Expansion. Which could put it being started in March 2010, which means DA2 coming out in March 2011 would be a hair under 11 months (by the time the game went gold, after all). 

Bioware is claiming DA3 is already nearly 2 years in development, since they started working on the Expansion after DA2 came out and they then cannibalized the Expack to include in DA3. In reality, I don't think they were doing much (or any) real work on the Expack until after MOTA came out. And, barring that, cannibalizing an Expack does not mean that you've been working on DA3, at least not on a purely holistic level. 

Its a sliding scale of game development. You can quote dates and times and it really doesn't, ultimately, matter. I'd say a better measure of how much work was put into a project would be the number of man hours invested. Which, of course, is never something we as consumers are ever going to see.

[scootermcgaffin]

Rawgrim wrote...

Mindless button mashing vs tactical combat with an isometric view....hmm...what to chose what to chose...

Hey, a Dragon Age game with solid tactical combat would be cool. Try that for a change, Bioware!

[AppealToReason]

I enjoyed DA2 more. Origins was slow and boring. Like bad fighting in a school play.

[AppealToReason]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

DA II was in development for two years

We have dev comments saying 11 months, Maria.

To pump out a game in that span is insane. Even the guys at Call of Duty are like "Woah how do you do anything in that time frame?"

[Massakkolia]

marshalleck wrote...

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

Both games have good combat (especially Dark Souls with its very precise and crisp design) but they're not meant for a party-centered system. Dragon Age is all about the party. Sure, Dragon's Dogma has pawns but they seem like a useless afterthought. You can't really control them tactically at all. Dark Souls is very much about one lone player vs. everyone else.

Combat in both DA:O and DA2 ended up being merely passable for me. Taking the good from both DA games might not yet be enough to build a really great battle system. Taking some cues from visceral and reactive gameplays of Dragon's Dogma and Dark Souls might be a good idea but not too much, please.

I kind of like controlling the whole party by pausable gameplay and I don't want to lose that. So for me, less button mashing, more strategy but in an engaging and exciting package that won't make me yawn. Mass Effect is Bioware's more action-oriented series, so I'd like Dragon Age to emphasize strategy. Too much to ask?

[AppealToReason]

Ria wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

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

Both games have good combat (especially Dark Souls with its very precise and crisp design) but they're not meant for a party-centered system. Dragon Age is all about the party. Sure, Dragon's Dogma has pawns but they seem like a useless afterthought. You can't really control them tactically at all. Dark Souls is very much about one lone player vs. everyone else.

I want to hug the **** out of you for saying that. Thank you!

[scootermcgaffin]

There's really no reason you couldn't just attach a tactics system to Dragon Dogma's combat and make it work. In fact, that's what I'm hoping for with the sequel.

Modifié par scootermcgaffin, 18 octobre 2012 - 10:48 .

[Massakkolia]

AppealToReason wrote...

Ria wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

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

Both games have good combat (especially Dark Souls with its very precise and crisp design) but they're not meant for a party-centered system. Dragon Age is all about the party. Sure, Dragon's Dogma has pawns but they seem like a useless afterthought. You can't really control them tactically at all. Dark Souls is very much about one lone player vs. everyone else.

I want to hug the **** out of you for saying that. Thank you!

Aww, thanks for thanks, and here I was having such a bad day. 

Edit: To Scooter, I agree that there are some good stuff in Dragon's Dogma but I don't want combat where I control only one character and the rest follow preset tactics (of course, in DD there really weren't much of pawn tactics to speak of).

What Bioware could take from DD is the scale of battles. I loved fighting those gigantic enemies, climbing on them or taking my distance and really utilize my archer. Some of this is something I'd love to see in Dragon Age as well.

Modifié par Ria, 18 octobre 2012 - 11:05 .

[philippe willaume]

Ria wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

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

Both games have good combat (especially Dark Souls with its very precise and crisp design) but they're not meant for a party-centered system. Dragon Age is all about the party. Sure, Dragon's Dogma has pawns but they seem like a useless afterthought. You can't really control them tactically at all. Dark Souls is very much about one lone player vs. everyone else.

Combat in both DA:O and DA2 ended up being merely passable for me. Taking the good from both DA games might not yet be enough to build a really great battle system. Taking some cues from visceral and reactive gameplays of Dragon's Dogma and Dark Souls might be a good idea but not too much, please.

I kind of like controlling the whole party by pausable gameplay and I don't want to lose that. So for me, less button mashing, more strategy but in an engaging and exciting package that won't make me yawn. Mass Effect is Bioware's more action-oriented series, so I'd like Dragon Age to emphasize strategy. Too much to ask?

+1 to all that
in fact, you can tactical in full hands on real time game like flight simualtor or tank simulator. so there is no reason why you cant get tactical on an action game in the same way at the very least.

what i would really like in DA:3 is more tactical option for a given char amd if possible a greater connection between the role you want to play and those option.
What really annoy me the most in DA:2 was that i ended up doing the same thing over and over. it was so repetitive for me that i felt that you  had more tactical contol in ME1 than in DA2.

Phil

[sharkboy421]

scootermcgaffin wrote...

There's really no reason you couldn't just attach a tactics system to Dragon Dogma's combat and make it work. In fact, that's what I'm hoping for with the sequel.

I'd really, really, really love this as well.  DD has the most enjoyable combat I've played in a recent rpg.  Except I kept thinking how it would be even better if it had a tactics screen for your pawns like DA does for companions.

I personally enjoyed DA2's combat because it seemed to flow better.  For me DAO couldn't decide whether it wanted to be a turned based system or real time action game.  Characters were slow to respond and move it just felt kinda blah to me.  I agree the animations were over the top in DA2 but things just seemed to flow better.  Granted that might be because DA2 was designed to run mostly in real time while DAO was more geared towards pausing and micromanaging.  However DA2 used the same combat system as DAO with more of an emphasis on creating party tactics before and playing the situation as opposed to the slower, micromanagement of DAO.

I felt both DAO and DA2 had different elements of "tactical" game play that focused on different parts of the same combat system.

[deuce985]

Ria wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

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

Both games have good combat (especially Dark Souls with its very precise and crisp design) but they're not meant for a party-centered system. Dragon Age is all about the party. Sure, Dragon's Dogma has pawns but they seem like a useless afterthought. You can't really control them tactically at all. Dark Souls is very much about one lone player vs. everyone else.

Combat in both DA:O and DA2 ended up being merely passable for me. Taking the good from both DA games might not yet be enough to build a really great battle system. Taking some cues from visceral and reactive gameplays of Dragon's Dogma and Dark Souls might be a good idea but not too much, please.

I kind of like controlling the whole party by pausable gameplay and I don't want to lose that. So for me, less button mashing, more strategy but in an engaging and exciting package that won't make me yawn. Mass Effect is Bioware's more action-oriented series, so I'd like Dragon Age to emphasize strategy. Too much to ask?

Probably not.

See at the 3:35 mark. Of course, that was over a year ago so their design philosophy might've changed.

[marshalleck]

Ria wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

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

Both games have good combat (especially Dark Souls with its very precise and crisp design) but they're not meant for a party-centered system. Dragon Age is all about the party. Sure, Dragon's Dogma has pawns but they seem like a useless afterthought. You can't really control them tactically at all. Dark Souls is very much about one lone player vs. everyone else.

Combat in both DA:O and DA2 ended up being merely passable for me. Taking the good from both DA games might not yet be enough to build a really great battle system. Taking some cues from visceral and reactive gameplays of Dragon's Dogma and Dark Souls might be a good idea but not too much, please.

I kind of like controlling the whole party by pausable gameplay and I don't want to lose that. So for me, less button mashing, more strategy but in an engaging and exciting package that won't make me yawn. Mass Effect is Bioware's more action-oriented series, so I'd like Dragon Age to emphasize strategy. Too much to ask?

Both games simply lacked the NPC tactical scripting Bioware have implemented in DA so far. Take the base combat gameplay of either of the two titles, then add the companion tactics. I thought its inclusion was obvious so I didn't say it, but there you have it.

Modifié par marshalleck, 18 octobre 2012 - 11:37 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

sharkboy421 wrote...

For me DAO couldn't decide whether it wanted to be a turned based system or real time action game.

Since BioWare doesn't typically make either of those things, I don't see why you would expect one or the other.

BioWare's combat is point-and-click, real-time-with-pause.  That's what's in BG, BG2, NWN, KotOR, DAO, DA2, and even, I would argue, all three Mass Effect games.  Of their RPGs, only Jade Empire used either turn-based or real-time action combat.

So why would you judge DAO based on its ability to be either?

[TMZuk]

Well. What I liked about DA:O was the story-telling, the characters and the origins. The combat and the skill systems, and the fact that there was just three, rather restrictive classes, was all deducting from the overall game.

But if those things were bad in DA:O, they were ~awful~ in DA2. Where the design was poor but just working in DA:O it was utterly broken in DA2.

So, I very much hope Bioware will go the opposite direction: More classes, better (and more believable) skills, less restrictions and more overall freedom in character creation and development. If not... well, there's always Project Eternity and Wasteland 2 coming out.

Modifié par TMZuk, 19 octobre 2012 - 12:13 .

[Lazengan]

I want DA2's animations and combat with DAO's tactical bar and strategy

combat in DAO was slow as hell

but combat in DA2 was too dumbed down, even for console idiots

[Cyne]

da2 style combat was a lot more fun, though it bordered on the cartoonish

[iDetonation]

Personally, I'm not a huge fan of tactical-combat based RPG's but I enjoyed everything else about DA:O. That's why I really liked DAII. It's more of a preference, because I am more a aster-paced combat type of guy. So I'd definitely prefer something similar to DAII if anything.

Modifié par iDetonation, 19 octobre 2012 - 12:37 .