328 réponses à ce sujet

[Rawgrim]

Dagr88 wrote...

Lesser attack speed means longer fights. Longer fights mean less waves.

Don't know what to think about combo attacks. After seeing them for x00 time they start to look silly. DAO style is more serious, yet a bit boring. It's hard for me to imagine a middle ground between those two, so for me it's a 100% developer's choice.

Pretty spot on.

[johndud0]

If anything needs to changed we should be complaining about the tactics system and not the combat....seriously on more than one occasion I've wanted to punch Hawke for using mark of death on a normal enemy and not the mage I instructed him to in tactics...seriously so stupid.

I'll never understand why if Bioware was gonna try and make a good tactics system why they just would'nt make it so you never have to manually control your party members they would do everything by AI and make the tactics system more robust.

This is the problem I'm having someone let me know if you have had the same problem:

Nearest visible mage. > Use condition for next tactic.
Enemy at short range. > Use ability: mark of death.


........WHY use on a normal enemy!!!!!!!

[The Hierophant]

Rojahar wrote...

johndud0 wrote...

If anything needs to changed we should be complaining about the tactics system and not the combat....seriously on more than one occasion I've wanted to punch Hawke for using mark of death on a normal enemy and not the mage I instructed him to in tactics...seriously so stupid.

I'll never understand why if Bioware was gonna try and make a good tactics system why they just would'nt make it so you never have to manually control your party members they would do everything by AI and make the tactics system more robust.

This is the problem I'm having someone let me know if you have had the same problem:

Nearest visible mage. > Use condition for next tactic.
Enemy at short range. > Use ability: mark of death.


........WHY use on a normal enemy!!!!!!!

I don't use tactics, and manually control/micromanage everything.

It sounds tedious, but its actually pretty fun and easy.

Agreed.

Modifié par The Hierophant, 23 octobre 2012 - 10:43 .

[MichaelStuart]

I will would prefer a combat system that is fun.

[AppealToReason]

Rojahar wrote...

johndud0 wrote...

If anything needs to changed we should be complaining about the tactics system and not the combat....seriously on more than one occasion I've wanted to punch Hawke for using mark of death on a normal enemy and not the mage I instructed him to in tactics...seriously so stupid.

I'll never understand why if Bioware was gonna try and make a good tactics system why they just would'nt make it so you never have to manually control your party members they would do everything by AI and make the tactics system more robust.

This is the problem I'm having someone let me know if you have had the same problem:

Nearest visible mage. > Use condition for next tactic.
Enemy at short range. > Use ability: mark of death.


........WHY use on a normal enemy!!!!!!!

I don't use tactics, and manually control/micromanage everything.

It sounds tedious, but its actually pretty fun and easy.

Yeah, fiddling with that tactics menu and settings thing is a huge pain in the rear. I find it way easier to just switch between guys and dish commands that way.

[The Hierophant]

MichaelStuart wrote...

I will would prefer a combat system that is fun.

Dragon's Dogma combat system with Dragon Age's companion tactics?

[sharkboy421]

The Hierophant wrote...

MichaelStuart wrote...

I will would prefer a combat system that is fun.

Dragon's Dogma combat system with Dragon Age's companion tactics?

I would be in heaven if they did that.  But it seems very unlikely.

[Ridwan]

budzai wrote...

There are players who like the DA2's combat??? that anime ****??? really??? oh man I don't want to live on this planet anymore

Cry some more then.

[MichaelStuart]

The Hierophant wrote...

MichaelStuart wrote...

I will would prefer a combat system that is fun.

Dragon's Dogma combat system with Dragon Age's companion tactics?

I was thinking more Assassins Creed combat, with Dragon Age companion tactics.

Really, I will be happy with anything that gives the player more control in combat.

[Pseudo the Mustachioed]

TurianFrigate wrote...

 Please Bioware give us a combat system that looks real like in DAO. Sure you can do it like in DAII without the stupid ninja ****. I mean I loose the sense of realism when in DAII a common thug can move like a freaking karate master. The whole game becomes infuriating with Varric giving the enemy a shower of arrows that do almost no damage from a single crossbow. Make it like DAO not like DAII. Further more I could stand a Kingdoms of Amalur combat, but I would love a Witcher 2 like combat.

combat [...] that looks real like in DAO

*spits out drink*

I think we played different games.

Also, you're confusing/conflating animation and gameplay.

Modifié par Pseudocognition, 23 octobre 2012 - 10:56 .

[The Hierophant]

sharkboy421 wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

MichaelStuart wrote...

I will would prefer a combat system that is fun.

Dragon's Dogma combat system with Dragon Age's companion tactics?

I would be in heaven if they did that.  But it seems very unlikely.

Yeah, i can only dream of it... for now.

@MichaelStuart - I hope there's drastitic improvements in combat animations, enemy placement, enemy and companion AI for Da3's combat system.

Modifié par The Hierophant, 23 octobre 2012 - 11:06 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

MichaelStuart wrote...

I was thinking more Assassins Creed combat, with Dragon Age companion tactics.

Really, I will be happy with anything that gives the player more control in combat.

As long as that control isn't limited by the player's own physical skills, sure.

Also, "more control" applies to all of the characters, not just the player-created one.

[Imp of the Perverse]

I thought DA2 made some great combat changes. Two handed swords in DAO were excruciatingly slow (I'm pretty sure I watched my rogue take down two mooks before oghren managed to land a single blow), and didn't really offer any tactical difference from dual wielding or sword and shield, just different powers. In DA2 they felt a lot more dangerous, were more fun to watch, and had an entirely different use - crowd control, versus dual wielding's single target focus, and sword and shield's defensive benefits.

I also thought the mage attack animations were an overwhelming improvement over DAO's.

[Sylvius the Mad]

MichaelStuart wrote...

I will would prefer a combat system that is fun.

Some of us think micro-managing down to the smallest detail is fun.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Imp of the Perverse wrote...

I also thought the mage attack animations were an overwhelming improvement over DAO's.

I hated the mage attack animations in DA2.  Why is he waving his staff around like a lunatic, and wasting time doing it?

It looks so tiring.

I wanted to play a mage, not a drum major.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 23 octobre 2012 - 10:59 .

[Cimeas]

Because the mage doesn't ONLY use magic. The staff is designed to not only be a way to channel spells, but also a viable melee weapon in case the enemy gets too close. In said case, wielding it like a ninja stick is certainly much cooler and seemingly more practical than using it to punch someone or some other kind of melee attack.

[johndud0]

Rojahar wrote...

johndud0 wrote...

If anything needs to changed we should be complaining about the tactics system and not the combat....seriously on more than one occasion I've wanted to punch Hawke for using mark of death on a normal enemy and not the mage I instructed him to in tactics...seriously so stupid.

I'll never understand why if Bioware was gonna try and make a good tactics system why they just would'nt make it so you never have to manually control your party members they would do everything by AI and make the tactics system more robust.

This is the problem I'm having someone let me know if you have had the same problem:

Nearest visible mage. > Use condition for next tactic.
Enemy at short range. > Use ability: mark of death.


........WHY use on a normal enemy!!!!!!!

I don't use tactics, and manually control/micromanage everything.

It sounds tedious, but its actually pretty fun and easy.

Especially compared to dealing with tactics and bad AI.

It's basically just making the game turn-based.

I play the way you play also, you almost have to play that way on nightmare, but I'm just tired of playing that way the combat doesnt flow the way I want it to.

I said this somewhere else but what they should do is improve on tactics, give more options like not to use AOE attacks if a party member is in the area or IN LINE OF SIGHT...and make it so they have priority options...like if an elite mage is still alive don't attack the little guys...I mean WTF.

They could circumvent all the bad AI and tactics if they just brought back the style of issuing orders they had for KOTOR on pc (I can't remember if it was the same for xbox), this was the perfect tactics, the AI did exactly what you wanted them to do and there was little room for error.

Or include both and KOTOR style tactics override DA style tactics since you manually imputed them for that battle. Can you imagine how great it would be no more pausing all the time to issue orders...pause at the start of battle, imput orders, watch for 20 seconds, pause, rinse and repeat.

Who else wants KOTOR style tactics back??!! Should we make a poll??

[johndud0]

I'm sorry but what is this crap about Dragon's Dogma combat? What's so special about it?

[Cimeas]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

MichaelStuart wrote...

I was thinking more Assassins Creed combat, with Dragon Age companion tactics.

Really, I will be happy with anything that gives the player more control in combat.

As long as that control isn't limited by the player's own physical skills, sure.

Also, "more control" applies to all of the characters, not just the player-created one.

Some gameplay will always be limited by physical skills.  What if your vision is impaired?  What if you have Parkinsons and struggle to move the mouse over a target?   What seperates 'physical' skill from 'mental' skill (ie. choosing the right abilities, planning tactics)?  Surely the brain is just another organ that is 'better' or 'worse' in different people?

RPGs are Role Playing Games are 'Games' ,and 'games', whether they be football or ping pong or chess have always been limited in some way by player skill, whether that be mental or physical.  The beauty of games is that they can require both, and in many cases games that do so well are among the best examples of the medium.  

TL;DR: Unless you are seriously challenged, if you have enough hand-eye coordination to drive a car or put your keys in the door of your house, you have enough to play practically every 'skill-based' videogame, especially an offline one.  We're not talking about playing Counter Strike competitively or Starcraft at 500 movements per minute here.  

[johndud0]

Cimeas wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

MichaelStuart wrote...

I was thinking more Assassins Creed combat, with Dragon Age companion tactics.

Really, I will be happy with anything that gives the player more control in combat.

As long as that control isn't limited by the player's own physical skills, sure.

Also, "more control" applies to all of the characters, not just the player-created one.

Some gameplay will always be limited by physical skills.  What if your vision is impaired?  What if you have Parkinsons and struggle to move the mouse over a target?   What seperates 'physical' skill from 'mental' skill (ie. choosing the right abilities, planning tactics)?  Surely the brain is just another organ that is 'better' or 'worse' in different people?

RPGs are Role Playing Games are 'Games' ,and 'games', whether they be football or ping pong or chess have always been limited in some way by player skill, whether that be mental or physical.  The beauty of games is that they can require both, and in many cases games that do so well are among the best examples of the medium.  

TL;DR: Unless you are seriously challenged, if you have enough hand-eye coordination to drive a car or put your keys in the door of your house, you have enough to play practically every 'skill-based' videogame, especially an offline one.  We're not talking about playing Counter Strike competitively or Starcraft at 500 movements per minute here.  

That's exactly why I don't play starcraft, I don't want to be a hotkey machine, I want to actually enjoy a game with tactics and take my time, that's why I choose games like Company Of Heroes.

[The Hierophant]

johndud0 wrote...

I'm sorry but what is this crap about Dragon's Dogma combat? What's so special about it?

You played the game, and didn't see anything special about the combat or you genuinely never heard of it nor play it?

[sharkboy421]

johndud0 wrote...

I'm sorry but what is this crap about Dragon's Dogma combat? What's so special about it?

It has some of the more robust and fun "action" combat for a recent rpg.  Also the boss fights are really well done; it borrows from Shadow of the Colossus and these add a lot to the game play. 

The reason some also ask for DA style companion tactics is because your party is made of AI controlled "pawns".  And while its cool that they learn as the game progresses, their skill in battle leaves something to be desired.

And IF, that is a big if, Bioware decided for one reason or another to go with a pure action type of game play for DA3, that is what I would like to see.  However I highly doubt that will happen.

[philippe willaume]

Unknown_Warrior wrote...

philippe willaume wrote...

Unknown_Warrior wrote...
<snip>

DA2 was harder, but not in the good way. Wave combat made for rather cheap deaths,
<snip>

i agree with you post in genaral.  Though i prefered DA:0. and found DA:0 more chalenging (but i used sub-optimal builds)
about the waves, I found that the waves were ling of usefull and a re-fuelling source of stamina for warriors so it made fights much easier.

Phil

I found myself cursing quite frequently at DA2 when hitherto unknown assailants jumped from nearby rooftops to decimate Isabella/Anders who were killing a lone opponent/casting from afar respectively while I was a bit futher away trying to get all attackers to pile me, since I was actually equipped to withstand more than 3 enemy hits.

So yeah, I had to frequently check out my minimap and allies' hp to determine whether a new group of jerks joined the fore and get them to target me.

But aside from that DA2's actual combat was more fun. More thinking on your feet, better responsiveness, feels like you have some weight to your attacks. DAO was more: set sustainables, do initial spells, wail on your enemies, get a drink, go out with your friends, return half an hour later to see your enemies dead (exaggeration here, woopwoop).

Generally, DA2 was more fun in its actual combat, while DAO was more fun in its preparation of combat. DA2 had a sense of accomplishment when you saw your team properly cooperating, timing your spells/talents and attacks and seeing an enemy flail around helplessly. It was visceral, it was on your feet thinking. While DAO was more fun in a chessmaster kind of sense. Line up your sustainables and spells to see piles of enemies crumble beneath your mighty foot.

hello

i think it really depends what you played in each
game.  But that is how people who prefer DA:0  feel.

it is not a counter argument to you point. i think it point
more that the difference is nor really related to combat mechanism as such.



For me in DA:2 it did not mater if Isabella or the mage got it during the waves. There is a potion to revive them if need be but the vanguardberserker is such a mincing machine that you can thin the ranks so much that it
is not a problem and the one injury kit are cheap.

So I really ended up doing the same thing all the time. boss fight were the same but longer. (and it is really painful and monotonous, the only difference between difficulties is how much dosh, I have at the end of the game)

I had the same sense of accomplishment in DA:0 that you have in DA:2. At the end of DA:0 you will be proficient enough to command your group on the fly without pausing.
The thing is that playing two mages are just as bad in DA:0 as what i am complaining about DA:2. 

 

Phil

Modifié par philippe willaume, 23 octobre 2012 - 11:21 .