328 réponses à ce sujet

[Pinely]

Origins did not offer realistic looking combat. Greatswords looked completely absurd in Origins, as though your character were swinging a tree branch and not a bladed weapon. Sword and Shield was better, but regularly failed to look fluid. Mage staffs consisted of nothing but a repetitive "stabbing at air" motion as stuff shot out the end. Daggers worked rather well, as did dual swords, and I think Archery is hard to get wrong. Not to mention the absurdity of your characters lazily moving between enemies. No one was seemingly capable of running towards an enemy, it was more a slow hobble.


DA2 took an artistic license, but the result is combat that feels more like fighting and less like stage fighting. If they want to tone down some of the aspects of DA2's combat, that's fine. But, let's not pretend that Origins was some paragon of realistic combat. It wasn't and I don't want to return to that awkward and plodding combat simply because a couple malcontents instinctively hate everything DA2.

[Cimeas]

And that is why DA2 allows for both options. Take me, for example. For most fights I sit there and cast my spells, occasionally pausing and setting up some heals or a combo, but for boss fights I micromanage the whole party and pausing every two or three seconds.

Fun, nice looking action combat when you want it, tactics for when you want more control. More options, not regression to bad animations and slow gameplay. Besides,


WHO CARES ABOUT THE SPEED OF GAMEPLAY WHEN YOU CAN PAUSE?
If you're playing the fastest game in the world and you can pause, it can become the slowest game in the world. If you can pause and genuinely tell everyone what to do in your own time, do some inventory management and set up some attacks, then the 'speed' of gameplay is your own decision, not Bioware's.

[The Hierophant]

sharkboy421 wrote...

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.

I mostly agree but don't forget that the pawn's combat usefulness is dependant on the right inclinations they possess, as my friend told me stories of how my pawn(who's level was in the late 60s at the time) nearly solo'd the Drake near Devilfire Grove.

Modifié par The Hierophant, 23 octobre 2012 - 11:32 .

[sharkboy421]

The Hierophant wrote...

sharkboy421 wrote...

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.

I mostly agree but don't forget that the pawn's combat usefullness is dependant on the right inclinations they possess, as my friend told me stories of how my pawn(who's level was in the late 60s at the time) nearly solo'd the Drake near Devilfire Grove.

That's very true.  But by level 60 your pawns should know what the hell their doing.  My pawn for some reason keeps throwing bottles of oil at enemies.  I want to strangle him x.x. 

Anyways, this was something I kept thinking the entire time I was playing.  I so wanted a tactics screen for my pawns.  Since DD doesn't have combos like DA does its not as big a deal, but if both things were included I think it would be such a blast.

[johndud0]

The Hierophant wrote...

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?

I played a demo where I fought a chimera but couldn't get interested in it? So not interested I can't remember how the combat was, I do remember the combat sounded visceral and that was cool.

[johndud0]

Pinely wrote...

Origins did not offer realistic looking combat. Greatswords looked completely absurd in Origins, as though your character were swinging a tree branch and not a bladed weapon. Sword and Shield was better, but regularly failed to look fluid. Mage staffs consisted of nothing but a repetitive "stabbing at air" motion as stuff shot out the end. Daggers worked rather well, as did dual swords, and I think Archery is hard to get wrong. Not to mention the absurdity of your characters lazily moving between enemies. No one was seemingly capable of running towards an enemy, it was more a slow hobble.


DA2 took an artistic license, but the result is combat that feels more like fighting and less like stage fighting. If they want to tone down some of the aspects of DA2's combat, that's fine. But, let's not pretend that Origins was some paragon of realistic combat. It wasn't and I don't want to return to that awkward and plodding combat simply because a couple malcontents instinctively hate everything DA2.

I couldn't have said it better.

[The Hierophant]

sharkboy421 wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

sharkboy421 wrote...

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.

I mostly agree but don't forget that the pawn's combat usefullness is dependant on the right inclinations they possess, as my friend told me stories of how my pawn(who's level was in the late 60s at the time) nearly solo'd the Drake near Devilfire Grove.

That's very true.  But by level 60 your pawns should know what the hell their doing.  My pawn for some reason keeps throwing bottles of oil at enemies.  I want to strangle him x.x.

Lulz does your pawn have a utilitarian inclination?

Anyways, this was something I kept thinking the entire time I was playing.  I so wanted a tactics screen for my pawns.  Since DD doesn't have combos like DA does its not as big a deal, but if both things were included I think it would be such a blast.

Agreed here's hoping that Capcom adds a similar tactic system in DD2, plus i noticed that alot of the pawn's i hired had contradictory inclinations. 

Modifié par The Hierophant, 23 octobre 2012 - 11:44 .

[challenger18]

Pinely wrote...

Origins did not offer realistic looking combat. Greatswords looked completely absurd in Origins, as though your character were swinging a tree branch and not a bladed weapon. Sword and Shield was better, but regularly failed to look fluid. Mage staffs consisted of nothing but a repetitive "stabbing at air" motion as stuff shot out the end. Daggers worked rather well, as did dual swords, and I think Archery is hard to get wrong. Not to mention the absurdity of your characters lazily moving between enemies. No one was seemingly capable of running towards an enemy, it was more a slow hobble.


DA2 took an artistic license, but the result is combat that feels more like fighting and less like stage fighting. If they want to tone down some of the aspects of DA2's combat, that's fine. But, let's not pretend that Origins was some paragon of realistic combat. It wasn't and I don't want to return to that awkward and plodding combat simply because a couple malcontents instinctively hate everything DA2.

Pretty much ...

The only type of animation I would like to see come back from DAO and expanded upon are the final kill/execution animations. Otherwise, I very much like the changes brought in from DA2.

[The Hierophant]

johndud0 wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

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?

I played a demo where I fought a chimera but couldn't get interested in it? So not interested I can't remember how the combat was, I do remember the combat sounded visceral and that was cool.

The game's not for everyone as it's severely lacking in dialogue, and a cohesive story, but the character creator, combat, weapon/armor design/ creature designs is wear it shines.

Modifié par The Hierophant, 23 octobre 2012 - 11:57 .

[AppealToReason]

Pinely wrote...

Origins did not offer realistic looking combat. Greatswords looked completely absurd in Origins, as though your character were swinging a tree branch and not a bladed weapon. Sword and Shield was better, but regularly failed to look fluid. Mage staffs consisted of nothing but a repetitive "stabbing at air" motion as stuff shot out the end. Daggers worked rather well, as did dual swords, and I think Archery is hard to get wrong. Not to mention the absurdity of your characters lazily moving between enemies. No one was seemingly capable of running towards an enemy, it was more a slow hobble.


DA2 took an artistic license, but the result is combat that feels more like fighting and less like stage fighting. If they want to tone down some of the aspects of DA2's combat, that's fine. But, let's not pretend that Origins was some paragon of realistic combat. It wasn't and I don't want to return to that awkward and plodding combat simply because a couple malcontents instinctively hate everything DA2.

Ah! So much of this is right.

This "DAO was the most perfect evar" reminds me of how shooter fans look back at COD4 and think it was perfect when at the time there were tons of complaints about how A or B sucked and needed to be removed or changed.

It bothers me that people seem to think combat and origins are what made DA2 not such a good game to a lot of people. Its like having an ugly sweater and saying the stitching at the cuffs are 100% the reason it looks dumb and not a terrible combination of colours.

[Unknown_Warrior]

philippe willaume wrote...
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

I played all three classes in both games. Rogues were same-y, Warriors were a lot more fun while Mages were faster but had less oomph (which was kinda required, as they could literally solo the entirety of DAO on Nightmare). DA2 really did have the best combat, but it never got to shine in the main game (which, as we all know, was a bit rushed) leading to mindless drones spawning in wave after wave. It wasn't until Legacy showed me that DA2 really had an edge over DAO. That combat system, maybe a bit slower (but really just a bit) and more CC options and the game would have been golden.

DAO was more fun as a mage, but as Warriors/Rogues were quite boring to play as. Not to mention the frustration you felt as your characters were waltzing to their enemies at their leasure while Genlock/Hurlock Emissaries were busy turning your heads to mush.

Rawgrim wrote...

AppealToReason wrote...

Hell
no. Those animations actually made you feel powerful and like you
mastered your skill set versus being just another guy swinging a sword
or lamely waving a staff

Maybe God of War would be more to your liking? Full of flashy moves. Mostly combo and reflex based combat.

I'm frankly getting really ****ing angry at your patronising tone towards console players and/or DA2 combat enthusiasts. As a person who plays a variety of genres, Hack 'n' Slash (God of War, Dynasty Warriors), Fighting games (Tekken) and RPG's; I can say from a comfortable position that you have no ****ing clue what you're talking about and you should do some more research before you act like a total ass.

[philippe willaume]

johndud0 wrote...

Pinely wrote...

Origins did not offer realistic looking combat. Greatswords looked completely absurd in Origins, as though your character were swinging a tree branch and not a bladed weapon. Sword and Shield was better, but regularly failed to look fluid. Mage staffs consisted of nothing but a repetitive "stabbing at air" motion as stuff shot out the end. Daggers worked rather well, as did dual swords, and I think Archery is hard to get wrong. Not to mention the absurdity of your characters lazily moving between enemies. No one was seemingly capable of running towards an enemy, it was more a slow hobble.


DA2 took an artistic license, but the result is combat that feels more like fighting and less like stage fighting. If they want to tone down some of the aspects of DA2's combat, that's fine. But, let's not pretend that Origins was some paragon of realistic combat. It wasn't and I don't want to return to that awkward and plodding combat simply because a couple malcontents instinctively hate everything DA2.

I couldn't have said it better.

well clearly you are missing the point then. 
Few  pages ago you asked why some people found DA:0 more tactical?
Well in DA:0 you can find out the number and level of the enemy ahead of you (through cloaked scouting or skill)
You could use terrain, enviroment, choke points, combos and traps to effectively control the enemy movement.
Each character had could have two specialisations
Companion did what you wanted on the spot and did not have to finish their animation before they might take in account what you asked.
Companion stayed where you told them and did not feel the need to follow you unless invited. so that your staggered defence plan with traps field actually worked.

That does not makes the comments about two handed weapon, poky poky mage staff and non stop shuffling rogue wrong or unimportant.just as it does not make the cheerleader baton twirling, bicycling kick explosive and stupid leap in the air with a BFS less grotesque and out of context.really it is just as bad to characters strolling  as it is to have char that zooms around.

As you mentioned it don't think it is combat per se.
Your experience with DA:0 or DA:2 really depends of what you played in both games. So in both game you can have run that makes ME:2  the pinnacle of tactical  RPG. 
Really both game do not scale well compared to the character power rise., DA:O being kinder to sub-optimal build. and if you play suboptimal build in DA:0 your run is likely to be closer to Xcom or silent storm 2.
I find sub-optimal build unplayable in DA:2 mainly because all the "tactical options" have been removed.
Now if you have not experienced  each type of play in both game, it is hard to understand the points made by each side of the arguments. 

I really hope that dragon dogma2 makes it on PC, it is a cool game and there is some really cool combat feature but this is not what I expect from a DA game.
that is  DD is more akin to divinity II the dragon knight saga. or the ME series, DA is about the companions as much as  the main characters, how they develop and how they work together.

as some one said the speed of combat does not really matter when you can pause, and flight simulator you can give order to your rote up to the gruppen so even live tactical interaction is possible, so combat speed is not really a limiting  factor per se.
DA should not be about the central protagonist with a bunch of dudes on autopilots that happens to help, it should be about versatility in the tactical choice for each character and the synergy of the group strategy.
Phil

Modifié par philippe willaume, 24 octobre 2012 - 12:41 .

[The Teyrn of Whatever]

Sejborg wrote...

I still don't understand why Bioware decided to make the combat look stupid in DA2. Has Bioware explained why?

I don't think combat looking stupid was their intention. If it had been slowed down to allow for proper tactical gameplay while still being action-based and had they eliminated some of the more bombastic animations, "button awesome" might have worked...

I'm not trying to disparage Ray Muzyka, I respect him immensely as a founder of BioWare and all the good work he did over the years before his recent retirment, and I appreciate that being a PR mouthpiece for a game company must be an incredibly difficult job. I don't really blame him for his enthusiasm concerning the combat system in Dragon Age II ("You hit a button and something awesome has to happen! Button! Awesome! Awesome button!). It failed and we facepalmed and some of us cried. Another game by another company, Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning actually managed to pull off the hit a button and something awesome happens mechanic. The combat system in that game was fluid, responsive, and a lot of fun to watch. Heck, it's a game I like to watch friends play as much as I enjoy playing it myself.

BioWare really proved to us with the second and third Mass Effect that they know how to make a cool, fun to play cover shooter system. With Dragon Age: Inquistion it will be up to them to prove to us that they can do the same for action RPG combat with tactical elements; something that will please the old fans (a difficult task to be sure) and get new players involved. I wish BW the very best of luck, and I mean that without sarcasm or cynicism.

Modifié par The Teryn of Whatever, 24 octobre 2012 - 12:50 .

[PaulSX]

DAII's combat looks okay, just it felt cheaply made (especially those special effects of magic).

[Sharn01]

MillKill wrote...

This is a world of magic, potions, demons, dragons, lyrium, and monsters. Any attempt to constrain combat animations due to realism at this point is arbitrary and inconsistent.

Flashy moves are at least interesting to look at and increased mobility keeps combat from dragging on longer than necessary.

The magic in the universe has rules, one of those rules is that people who use magic are called mages and they are persecuted and locked in a tower for their ability to do so.  You seem to want every single person to be able to use magic, thats fine, but it kind of ruins the whole some people are mages and some are not thing Dragon Age has going on.

[labargegrrrl]

how do you define realistic looking combat?

in da2 my mages would actually DECK

[Direwolf0294]

If they're going to go back to DA:O's combat in terms of pacing I really hope they implement something like TOR has where the weapons actually hit each other and characters actually deflect blows with their shields and stuff. If the combat's going to be slow paced than at the very least they can make it pretty to look at.

[Rawgrim]

I think Belivable combat, would be a better term. DA.O didn`t have realistic combat either. Roaring at someone doesn`t stun people around you etc. But i would say, nontheless, that DA:O had more belivable combat that DA2. People don`t explode when poked by a dagger.

[Direwolf0294]

Rawgrim wrote...

I think Belivable combat, would be a better term. DA.O didn`t have realistic combat either. Roaring at someone doesn`t stun people around you etc. But i would say, nontheless, that DA:O had more belivable combat that DA2. People don`t explode when poked by a dagger.

I don't know, if you roar at a completely inappropriate time, like the middle of a funeral, I'm sure everyone in the room will be stunned.

[Realmzmaster]

If Bioware goes back to DAO combat or continues with DA2 or something in-between, I would like to see weapons actually break and armor rend. If we are going to talk about believable combat.

[Sidney]

Rawgrim wrote...

I think Belivable combat, would be a better term. DA.O didn`t have realistic combat either. Roaring at someone doesn`t stun people around you etc. But i would say, nontheless, that DA:O had more belivable combat that DA2. People don`t explode when poked by a dagger.

I don't think the blood bag effect is a core of combat in DA2.  Same with the grotesque weapons which looked stupid - albeit they were just an amplification of the silly weapon designs in DAO.

The problem in DAO is that it is 100% not tactical. dear god the people claiming this must have some sort of problem.  You cannot use tactics when you can't move effectively in combat. In DAO you simply cannot move and fight properly because of the truffle shuffle you make. You can't block choke points because no one reacts and you have no mass.  You can't cover casters...nada.  There are precious few combos to be had (DA2 actually helped this a great deal). There is nothing less tactical than Mana Clash which turns all mage fights into a crushing joke. 

Frankly other than presentation layers DA2 and DAO were basically the same in terms of select power, select target, watch mobs die. People grossly overestimater the variances of substance because they don't like acrobatics or blood bags. DA2's combat moved faster but it was hardly incomprehensible if you were paying any attention and actually used the pause button.

DA2's main structural problem was the abuse of waves. I'm not sure DAO's idiot opponents who don't react at all to their allies being butchered in a room 5 meters away makes a ton of sense but at least it didn't slap you in the face with the stupid like the waves did. I'll also toss in DA2 had some of ther worst boss fights I can recall - the Arishok was terrible. Rock Golem, stupid.

[Sidney]

Realmzmaster wrote...

If Bioware goes back to DAO combat or continues with DA2 or something in-between, I would like to see weapons actually break and armor rend. If we are going to talk about believable combat.

That gets into a level of Falloutish mciromanagement - something that works in that setting. That's not something I really want to be involved with in dA*. I'll accept some level of abstraction on that.

[StElmo]

KiwiQuiche wrote...

No. I nearly died of boredom when I tried to replay DAO because the combat was so bloody monotonous. I liked DA2 style a lot more.

This. DA2 has awesome looking combat, was so fun!

[StElmo]

Sidney wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

If Bioware goes back to DAO combat or continues with DA2 or something in-between, I would like to see weapons actually break and armor rend. If we are going to talk about believable combat.

That gets into a level of Falloutish mciromanagement - something that works in that setting. That's not something I really want to be involved with in dA*. I'll accept some level of abstraction on that.

DA is a lot more linear then fallout, therefore it doesn't have any explorative gameplay rewards that offset the boredom of micromanagement.

I would much prefer the DA2 style of combat, but with more animations for blocking and other types of things as well as more combat moves so that tactical combat makes a bigger return.