155 réponses à ce sujet

[DarkKnightHolmes]

xsdob wrote...

Dragon age 1's combat sucked, it's the reason why I dread playing through it despite the good story.

I would rather get a train run on me and than get run over by a train than have to deal with that type of combat system in DA3.

I would rather even have dynasty warriors combat system than dragon age 1's combat, no joke or troll.

Also, there's nothing tactical in DAO's combat at all, you just click on an enemy and the game does the rest, about the only class that has any true strategy is the mage, and most times their spells are bugged to **** where you can't use half of them at all for no reason, they just are unlickable despite the cooldown ending.

Sir, I think you have something called an opinion (a very over exaggerated one, really) and I seriously disagree with it.

[Bernhardtbr]

What´s the system of Dynasty Warriors?

[DarkKnightHolmes]

Bernhardtbr wrote...

What´s the system of Dynasty Warriors?

Hack n' slash.

[xsdob]

DarkKnightHolmes wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Dragon age 1's combat sucked, it's the reason why I dread playing through it despite the good story.

I would rather get a train run on me and than get run over by a train than have to deal with that type of combat system in DA3.

I would rather even have dynasty warriors combat system than dragon age 1's combat, no joke or troll.

Also, there's nothing tactical in DAO's combat at all, you just click on an enemy and the game does the rest, about the only class that has any true strategy is the mage, and most times their spells are bugged to **** where you can't use half of them at all for no reason, they just are unlickable despite the cooldown ending.

Sir, I think you have something called an opinion (a very over exaggerated one, really) and I seriously disagree with it.

Why I do believe I do, as do most of the other posters here saying that DAO's combat is the best combat for dragon age, which I disagree with immensily from my persoanl expereince of playing an elf mage and a human noble warrior.

Are you saying that DAO's combat was not simply clicking on an enemy and watching as your character or party converged on said enemy and preformed combat animations without the need for further input from the player?

[DarkKnightHolmes]

xsdob wrote...

Are you saying that DAO's combat was not simply clicking on an enemy and watching as your character or party converged on said enemy and preformed combat animations without the need for further input from the player?

No... no where near that. Maybe if you're stuck on  casual or something. Just clicking on an enemy again and again with the attack button would lead to death in a matter of seconds. There was always that mage or archer guy depleting your health or some trap crushing your legs or some spider trapping you in webs. You always had to be prepared for stuff like that. And why do companions need my input when I give them tactics for that?

[xsdob]

DarkKnightHolmes wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Are you saying that DAO's combat was not simply clicking on an enemy and watching as your character or party converged on said enemy and preformed combat animations without the need for further input from the player?

No... no where near that. Maybe if you're stuck on  casual or something. Just clicking on an enemy again and again with the attack button would lead to death in a matter of seconds. There was always that mage or archer guy depleting your health or some trap crushing your legs or some spider trapping you in webs. You always had to be prepared for stuff like that. And why do companions need my input when I give them tactics for that?

Perhaps, I never found any use in programing in my companions tactics, found the menu for it hard for me to understand exactly what it was it was telling me my companions would do when in battle.

I was merely speaking from my experience, and that experience was a very laborus one filled with situations where my attempts at strategy were made redundant in favor of simply rushing on enemies and relying soley on cold spells and area of effect spells like lightning storm or inferno I believe it was along with blizard in order to make enemies weaker and slower to make rushing them easier, and since that same rule was applyable in DA2, I don't really see value in the older system.

[Sylvius the Mad]

xsdob wrote...

Are you saying that DAO's combat was not simply clicking on an enemy and watching as your character or party converged on said enemy and preformed combat animations without the need for further input from the player?

there was positioning involved, as well, but fundamentally yes.  The player selected a target and an action, and then the character carried out that action without any further player involvement.

That's exactly what I want from combat in a roleplaying game.  I tell the character what to do, and he does it.  I should absolutely not ever have to do it for him.

[Guns]

xsdob wrote...

Dragon age 1's combat sucked, it's the reason why I dread playing through it despite the good story.

I would rather get a train run on me and than get run over by a train than have to deal with that type of combat system in DA3.

I would rather even have dynasty warriors combat system than dragon age 1's combat, no joke or troll.

Also, there's nothing tactical in DAO's combat at all, you just click on an enemy and the game does the rest, about the only class that has any true strategy is the mage, and most times their spells are bugged to **** where you can't use half of them at all for no reason, they just are unlickable despite the cooldown ending.

If you don't like how a series' gameplay is then you find a different series and let those who do enjoy it. Not the other way around. I don't like micromanaging so I'm not a fan of Starcraft. You don't see me trying to get it scaled down to warcraft or a shooter. 

Modifié par Guns, 31 octobre 2012 - 10:47 .

[Wozearly]

xsdob wrote...

Are you saying that DAO's combat was not simply clicking on an enemy and watching as your character or party converged on said enemy and preformed combat animations without the need for further input from the player?

For some class builds, where your auto-attack was the workhorse of your attacks in combat, you could do exactly that with decent success rates on everything perhaps barring Nightmare difficulty. Unless you were an archer, where you could legitimately construct your entire class around the auto-attack and then focus on managing your other party members instead.

Excluding archres, In most cases, unless you were on the lower difficulty settings, the only way you could get away with just autoattacking was if your companions' tactics were set-up very effectively or, more likely, you were choosing to switch quite a bit across party members.

Also, never experienced the issue you described with mages having difficulty casting spells because of cooldowns. Sounds like a bug.


Did DA2 do it better? Well, it sped everything up and boosted the impact of abilities and cross-class co-ordination, so that auto-attacking and sitting back was practically a no-go. The knock-on effect of what that meant for balancing of enemies led to the insane hitpoint grumble, the arguably excessive focus on positioning, the liberal use of AoE thanks to friendly fire being absent on most difficulty levels...and generally a much higher requirement to pause and reassess the situation.

In some small ways it was better, but for me the combat in DA2 was one of the game's spectacularly low points. I just didn't enjoy it in the way that I enjoyed DA:O's. Not going to say that DA:O was the perfect combat model, but still...

[anillee]

Wozearly wrote...

but for me the combat in DA2 was one of the game's spectacularly low points. I just didn't enjoy it in the way that I enjoyed DA:O's.

This is pretty much what the general concensus was and still is.  Most people preferred Origins to II and the combat was one of the big complaints.  People were complaining about that back when they did the preview thing a month or so before it released, remember?

[DreamwareStudio]

anillee wrote...

Wozearly wrote...

but for me the combat in DA2 was one of the game's spectacularly low points. I just didn't enjoy it in the way that I enjoyed DA:O's.

This is pretty much what the general concensus was and still is.  Most people preferred Origins to II and the combat was one of the big complaints.  People were complaining about that back when they did the preview thing a month or so before it released, remember?

I certainly recall that. Combat was one of the myriad of issues I had with DA 2. It was in almost every aspect a subpar game to me. If I want a good action RPG set in a medieval-like world I will turn to the Witcher or the Assassin Creed series. If I want to explore, I'll put in the Elder Scrolls. I had hoped (as many) that when I wanted a more traditional computer role-playing game I could turn to Dragon Age. That, however, is no longer the case.

Ah, well, it doesn't hurt my feelings any with Wasteland 2, Project Eternity (looks like it will be AMAZING), and Baldur's Gate Enhanced Edition soon to be coming out. It's no sweat off my back really, but it is EA's loss as many customers of DA:O are now turning to other sources. I'm just glad we have those sources. We certainly did not always and this is something EA better take into account.

THERE ARE OTHER PLACES TO GO NOW.

Yes, the future of RPVG looks very bright even without the presence of "Bioware" in the genre. Honestly, while I am reluctant to toll the death bell for the label that is Bioware, the move they're making for the DA series could very well become that given the sour taste DA 2 and ME 3 left on people's palates.

DA 3 has a heavy load to haul. Countless folk I used to see in these forums I no longer do. Thus, I can only assume they have given up on Bioware because I have a lot of friends who have done just that. Too, I can't say how many times I've seen a statement eluding to or outright stating DA 3 is Bioware's last chance. Whereas before I would have rated such comments as empty threats, I currently take them seriously because the recent Bioware track record is fairly horrid and there was such a drop-off in sales between DA:O and DA 2.

Also, even the most loyal of customers will take only so much when they feel they've been taken advantage of by EA/Bioware and the questionable marketing practices that have come into play with them. The fact there is the perception no cares about their complaints and concerns does not help in the slightest.

As business history teaches, it is far easier to lose a customer than it is to gain one.

Modifié par google_calasade, 01 novembre 2012 - 12:29 .

[xsdob]

So everyone prefers the click and auto attack combat system? Why?

[playaplayer]

I personally prefer DA2 combat over DAO combat. And I played origins first. Both only on nightmare difficulty. Personally I can't even go back to playing DAO, because of the combat.

[Herr Uhl]

xsdob wrote...

So everyone prefers the click and auto attack combat system? Why?

Because it is different mainly. It is a playstyle that I enjoy that doesn't get much exposure.

[Sylvius the Mad]

xsdob wrote...

So everyone prefers the click and auto attack combat system? Why?

Because I can control the entire party simultaneously.

Because it allows my characters' abilities to function unfettered by my own limitations.

Because it prevents my abilities from making my characters more effective than they should be.

Because it's not so frantic - I hate frantic action.

I like to take the time to decide what I want to do, and then I like to watch that plan unfold.

[Sylvius the Mad]

playaplayer wrote...

I personally prefer DA2 combat over DAO combat. And I played origins first. Both only on nightmare difficulty. Personally I can't even go back to playing DAO, because of the combat.

I watch gameplay videos of DAO recreationally.  I think it's fun to watch the game, even when I'm not playing it.

[Wozearly]

xsdob wrote...

So everyone prefers the click and auto attack combat system? Why?

Not sure that's a fair representation of DA:O's combat. Just like "hack and slash" is an unfair description of DA2's, even if both have a grain of truth.

My recollection is that irrespective of anyone's personal preferences, including mine, DA2's combat was a divided (and divisive) issue. There were a lot of people on the forums who thought it was a significant improvement on DA:O, and a lot of people who thought it was significantly worse than DA:O.

I'm not sure there was ever a clear majority of opinion either way. But I never attempted to count up views, so could be wrong.

Modifié par Wozearly, 31 octobre 2012 - 11:44 .

[mav805]

I love Dragon's Dogma for the game that it is. The combat is the best that I've experienced in an Action RPG and I think that there are a number of things that can be taken from the game that would benefit a game like Dragon Age...

HOWEVER...when I play Origins, in addition to the story and the characters, I play for the Origins style of combat specifically. That style includes deeper tactics, the use and availability of a larger number of skills and spells, higher difficulty, etc, etc... I see no reason to fundamentally change the combat style just for the sake of it.

What are those aspects that I think can be incorporated from Dogma? I think the speed of the combat and animations are perfect for a game featuring non "fantastic" combat. The animations are well done, imaginative, and varied from everything from weapons to skills to spells, and I believe that it was the attention to detail that really made that game.

Modifié par mav805, 31 octobre 2012 - 11:47 .

[xsdob]

Herr Uhl wrote...

Because it is different mainly. It is a playstyle that I enjoy that doesn't get much exposure.

Just because it isn't exposed much doesn't make it a glistening gem, just as something in the limelight all the time isn't a sparkling diamond either.

Though if it's your preference, than alright I suppose, I just find it hard to stomach at all.

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Because I can control the entire party simultaneously.

Because it allows my characters' abilities to function unfettered by my own limitations.

Because it prevents my abilities from making my characters more effective than they should be.

Because it's not so frantic - I hate frantic action.

I like to take the time to decide what I want to do, and then I like to watch that plan unfold.

1. Never had the luxury because the tactics section was difficult for me to use and understand what I was telling my companions to do, way too much micromanaging in my opinion.

2. I had the opposite problems, though that might have been becasue my game may have had a bug where abilities were not selectable despite the cooldown ending on them. Also, often in DAO I found myself not really being able to use my full abilities to attack quickly, or get out of the way of an attack fast enough, or block at all, which would have helped me in combat immensly. Would love to see a block feature occur in DA3.

3. So a self imposed shackle and handicap, I can understand that in wanting the game to be more challenging.

4. Don't know how that works since all the enemies crowd around and swarm you endlessly. Maybe it's just that I don't play on the PC but instead on console, but my game never let me pause the combat, merely look at my inventory screen.

[Bernhardtbr]

xsdob wrote...

So everyone prefers the click and auto attack combat system? Why?

It´s not that it´s better, it´s just because it´s different. As much as I loved playing The Witcher 2, for my next RPG I want to do something different. Besides, it isn´t click and watch, you constantly have to give input, specially if it´s in harder difficulties. Finally, managing friendly fire would be a pain in the ass. Good luck programming an AI that will never freeze you with Cone of Cold.

Modifié par Bernhardtbr, 31 octobre 2012 - 11:50 .

[FutharkTomahawk]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Because I can control the entire party simultaneously.

Because it allows my characters' abilities to function unfettered by my own limitations.

Because it prevents my abilities from making my characters more effective than they should be.

Because it's not so frantic - I hate frantic action.

I like to take the time to decide what I want to do, and then I like to watch that plan unfold.

Once again, you nailed it, Sylvius!  And Happy Halloween to you and yours.

[xsdob]

Alright, let's just let bygones be bygones since this is clearly a personal preference issue. I like to feel like I'm in the middle of the action fighting and right inside the moment with the need to think on the fly, others like to feel like the eye in the sky watching over everything and coordinating combat that way.

DAO is more orientated to the latter, DA2 the former.

I'm just curious what DA3 will bring, and not looking forward to the complaints on the forums when those unhappy with the combat come on and vent collectively. Tired of that from the ME3 disaster.

[Herr Uhl]

xsdob wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

Because it is different mainly. It is a playstyle that I enjoy that doesn't get much exposure.

Just because it isn't exposed much doesn't make it a glistening gem, just as something in the limelight all the time isn't a sparkling diamond either.

Though if it's your preference, than alright I suppose, I just find it hard to stomach at all.

Not saying that it makes it a glistening gem, but I get my fill of more actiony games elsewhere. DA is one of the few places outside of the indie market where you get this playstyle, so I'd prefer to keep it.

[Pzykozis]

Whilst I vastly prefer more hands on combat, I'm not sure removing all other options in the RPG / whatever sphere when DA style combat is fairly rare these days anyway is a great idea. Seems counter-intuitive to be stucking up for a style I enjoy less but I guess just having the option of being able to play a different combat system every now and again is good.

If they decided to try an action combat game out again sometime though Id be all over that like Jade Empire. Mmmm Jade Empire.. S'like warm socks on a cold winter day.

[deuce985]

I'd like to see them adopt the some mechanics from Dragon's Dogma. Specifically the flow. You can seamlessly transition between a bow and dagger to perform attacks. When you hold the trigger, specific attacks come up for each weapon. Of course, you can cycle out abilities you don't want and replace them on the face buttons. I wouldn't mind seeing DA3 do something like this without sacrificing the depth of the skill trees.

DA2 just completely lacks any kind of flow. Dragon's Dogma also has a great AI system. Would be nice to see tactics vastly improved in DA3. I'm not saying remove pause combat and companion control either. Just that they can improve the combat flow, fluidity, and AI.

By doing this, maybe they could create cooler boss fights like DD too. But yea, if Bioware wants to make a game with a good combat system, then use some foundation from DD. In fact, Dragon Age isn't that far off from it. Some ways, I actually think DD is everything DA intended to be...

Imagine them copying that system over to DA but allow skill trees like DAO, pause combat, more advanced tactics, more advanced movement(jumping), seamless transitions between weapons and combat "flow", and companion control. DD could've adopted companion control and a more robust skill tree system from DA. I think these two games would be a good merging quite honestly.

DD's companions just automatically "learn" encounters because you can't control them. I like being hands-on with my party. This allowed them to make some great boss fights but I could see DA still keeping their tactics system if they just put a lot more depth behind it. Partially why the boss encounters end up being a problem in DA2(especially Legacy) is braindead AI. Even with tactics set. I don't want to micro-manage every two seconds on a fight like Legacy where positioning is critical. This is what completely destroys whatever fluidity DA2 is trying to accomplish. That spills over to normal encounters too. I end up micro-managing my entire party every few seconds on nightmare. Doesn't really make sense to me when a game is built around flashy fast combat.

And I only say that because I highly doubt we'll ever see DA go back to DAO style combat.

Modifié par deuce985, 01 novembre 2012 - 12:43 .