108 réponses à ce sujet

[jillabender]

Despite my frustrations with the way combat encounters were designed in DA2, there were many things that I really enjoyed about the actual mechanics of DA2's combat.

I liked the more exciting and varied combat animations – although I'm glad that, from the sounds of it, they'll be toned down a bit in DA3 to lessen the problem of needing to wait for a combat animation to finish before a character could carry out the next instruction.

I also liked the way that selecting attributes and abilities worked in DA2. I respectfully disagree with those who have argued that DA2's leveling system resulted in too many "useless attributes" – I found the opposite to be the case.

As much as I love DA:O, I think that DA2 did a better job of making all of the attributes potentially relevant for characters of each class, and of offering a wide variety of effective possible builds for each class. For example, the fact that dexterity and cunning affected critical hit rate and critical damage with all weapons, including staves, meant that points in those attributes weren't necessarily wasted on mages. (I admit I did find it a bit counter-intuitive that cunning, instead of dexterity, increased a character's defense score, but that's a minor quibble.)

I liked the ability to unlock and switch between various combat styles (for example, "might" and "control" for warriors) – I thought it was a neat approach to customizing a character's fighting style to complement his or her build.

I also liked the fact that warriors and rogues had a greater variety of abilities to choose from, so that it was possible to create two sword-and-shield warriors, or two dual-wielding rogues, with quite different fighting styles and sets of abilities. For example, I loved the fact that there was a whole tree devoted to stealth-related abiities for rogues, and another whole tree devoted to abilities that dealt massive damage with a single strike.

As much as I love DA:O, I also think that DA2 had far fewer abilities that were little more than stepping-stones to more powerful ones (not that I think that was a major problem in DA:O, but I do think DA2 was an improvement in that regard) – and I really liked having the option to upgrade my character's abilities instead of choosing new ones.

As for what I'd like to see in DA3's combat:

I'd like to see the tactical camera return (if this has already been confirmed one way or the other, I apologize for being redundant).

I'd also like to have the option to equip all characters with both ranged and melee weapons – perhaps mages could have some short-range abilities, or a specialization similar to the Arcane Warrior from DA:O, while warriors could have ranged weapons that work differently from the ranged weapons available to rogues.

Finally, I think it would be cool to be able to use abilities outside of combat – for example, having the option to either fight enemies or use stealth to evade them, or to use either rogue mechanical abilities or mage spells to get around obstacles. In general, a more seamless integration of story and combat would be a plus for me.

Modifié par jillabender, 12 novembre 2012 - 05:07 .

[abaris]

jillabender wrote...

I liked the more exciting and varied combat animations – although I'm glad that, from the sounds of it, they'll be toned down a bit in DA3 to lessen the problem of needing to wait for a combat animation to finish before a character could carry out the next instruction.

That's where tastes kick in. It was the first and foremost reason why I didn't buy DAII. I'm glad it was that obvious, since learning about the whole game, I wouldn't have liked it in any case.

I though the combat in DAO was just fine, since it gave me the feeling of my warriors really carrying their weight and being forced to time their attacks.

Again, tastes. DAO's combat felt realistic for me whereas DAII gave me the feeling of being inside some comic.

[Spankoman]

I preferred DA2's combat to DAO's (although I was fine with both of them), simply because it was a faster system. I tend to treat combat in RPGs as peripheral to the story, so I don't look to far into the tactics behind them. I'm not interested in some kind of medieval combat simulator.

[jillabender]

abaris wrote...

jillabender wrote...

I liked the more exciting and varied combat animations – although I'm glad that, from the sounds of it, they'll be toned down a bit in DA3 to lessen the problem of needing to wait for a combat animation to finish before a character could carry out the next instruction.

That's where tastes kick in. It was the first and foremost reason why I didn't buy DAII. I'm glad it was that obvious, since learning about the whole game, I wouldn't have liked it in any case.

I though the combat in DAO was just fine, since it gave me the feeling of my warriors really carrying their weight and being forced to time their attacks.

Again, tastes. DAO's combat felt realistic for me whereas DAII gave me the feeling of being inside some comic.

I can definitely understand that, and I agree that the combat animations need some work. I liked the combat animations for mages using staves in DA2, but the animations for the two-handed weapons really lacked the sense of weight that they should have had.

From what I've heard, it sounds as though the developers are aware of the problems with the combat animations in DA2, and that they plan to work on making combat feel more responsive while making it neither as slow-paced as in DA:O, nor as fast-paced as in DA2.

Modifié par jillabender, 03 novembre 2012 - 06:44 .

[Realmzmaster]

I having trouble understanding the lack of a sense of weight. I admit that two handed swords should not look like you are using a toothpick, but neither should it look like you are swinging an anvil. DAO was too slow in that regard. The two handed technique has to be used for both offense and defense. The slow movement in the swing in DAO made me doubt the ability to recover for defensive purposes.

I think it is the speed of the swing in DA2 that makes it look like it has less weight if that is what you mean by sense of weight.

[TheRealJayDee]

abaris wrote...

jillabender wrote...

I liked the more exciting and varied combat animations – although I'm glad that, from the sounds of it, they'll be toned down a bit in DA3 to lessen the problem of needing to wait for a combat animation to finish before a character could carry out the next instruction.

That's where tastes kick in. It was the first and foremost reason why I didn't buy DAII. I'm glad it was that obvious, since learning about the whole game, I wouldn't have liked it in any case.

I though the combat in DAO was just fine, since it gave me the feeling of my warriors really carrying their weight and being forced to time their attacks.

Again, tastes. DAO's combat felt realistic for me whereas DAII gave me the feeling of being inside some comic.

Based on my experiences from playing the demo I could say that I wouldn't enjoy the combat in DA2 very much. After playing the game I reeeeally didn't like it. After DA:O I hoped the direction in which they would take the combat in terms of look and feel would go in a 'Game of Thrones' direction (only of course with more magic and creatures and stuff, duh). Instead it felt they injected a heavy dose of 'Naruto' in the combat, which I find very unappealing. Awakening already made me a little nervous, and with DA2 they almost lost me completely on the combat aspect of the game, which sadly was a very large aspect.

Thing is, in a different game, in a different setting I might have even liked it, really liked it. But it just didn't feel like Dragon Age to me, and never will.

[CrazyRah]

jillabender wrote...

abaris wrote...

jillabender wrote...

I liked the more exciting and varied combat animations – although I'm glad that, from the sounds of it, they'll be toned down a bit in DA3 to lessen the problem of needing to wait for a combat animation to finish before a character could carry out the next instruction.

That's where tastes kick in. It was the first and foremost reason why I didn't buy DAII. I'm glad it was that obvious, since learning about the whole game, I wouldn't have liked it in any case.

I though the combat in DAO was just fine, since it gave me the feeling of my warriors really carrying their weight and being forced to time their attacks.

Again, tastes. DAO's combat felt realistic for me whereas DAII gave me the feeling of being inside some comic.

I can definitely understand that, and I agree that the combat animations need some work. I liked the combat animations for mages using staves in DA2, but the animations for the two-handed weapons really lacked the sense of weight that they should have had.

From what I've heard, it sounds as though the developers are aware of the problems with the combat animations in DA2, and that they plan to work on making combat feel more responsive while making it neither as slow-paced as in DA:O, nor as fast-paced as in DA2.

This i so much agree with. Personally i'm still torn between DAO and DA2 in which combat is superior. The animations for the mage was just superb and i would love if they don't get too much different. As you say youself about the warrior, it looks like the warrior is swinging around with a paper sword. There's just no weight behind it and it looks ridiculous. If they manage to make the combat fit somewhere between DAO and DA2 it would be awesome since both of them had their strengths and weaknesses

[jillabender]

Realmzmaster wrote...

I having trouble understanding the lack of a sense of weight. I admit that two handed swords should not look like you are using a toothpick, but neither should it look like you are swinging an anvil. DAO was too slow in that regard. The two handed technique has to be used for both offense and defense. The slow movement in the swing in DAO made me doubt the ability to recover for defensive purposes.

I think it is the speed of the swing in DA2 that makes it look like it has less weight if that is what you mean by sense of weight.

I completely agree that two-handed weapons felt far too slow in DA:O – for exactly the reasons you describe. However, the combat animations for two-handed weapons in DA2 also felt off to me – it didn't make much sense for Hawke to swing a two-handed weapon so easily in one hand the way he or she sometimes did.

With that said, I think the developers are aware of this, and that they're working on making the speed of the weapons in DA3 a balance between DA:O and DA2.

Modifié par jillabender, 03 novembre 2012 - 07:19 .

[Fortlowe]

Combat in DA:O was satisfying but sluggish. Combat in DA2 was quick (almost too quick....almost) but monotonous. Ideally I would like to see the return of flourishes (ahhh the beheadings!) without the combat becoming bogged down. All the while maintaining a stimulating sense of responsiveness.

[Allan Schumacher]

Realmzmaster wrote...

I having trouble understanding the lack of a sense of weight. I admit that two handed swords should not look like you are using a toothpick, but neither should it look like you are swinging an anvil. DAO was too slow in that regard. The two handed technique has to be used for both offense and defense. The slow movement in the swing in DAO made me doubt the ability to recover for defensive purposes.

I think it is the speed of the swing in DA2 that makes it look like it has less weight if that is what you mean by sense of weight.

I agree that the two handed warrior in dao was much too slow. On the merits of realism I find dao too be farther from than da2.

[Allan Schumacher]

Note that one of the reasons that animation interrupt is less important, imo, in da2 is because the player must voluntarily choose to attack unlike dao where it is less obvious.

[abaris]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I agree that the two handed warrior in dao was much too slow. On the merits of realism I find dao too be farther from than da2.

I didn't have that feeling at all.

The only thing DAII probably handled better in my opinion, as has been pointed out, were the mage animations.

That might be the only problem I had with DAO and - for lack of a better word - the waddle to the toilet walk characters took on when combat started and weapons were drawn. That really looked ridiculous.

Modifié par abaris, 03 novembre 2012 - 07:49 .

[DadeLeviathan]

I thought, for the most part, that the combat system in DA2 was an improvement over Origins. The problem, however, is that they improved upon a good system -- and then introduced crap. It's similar to improving on a great meal, and then putting something in that doesn't fit. Like baking a cake, and then making a parsley-flavored frosting.

Examples of this would be the wave system - which was horrid. Could a wave system work? Yes. In the system they had? NO. It was, in my opinion, the worst design decision in the entire game. And it either needs to be removed for DA3, or the entire combat system needs to be reworked to accomodate a wave system. Otherwise you just end up in frustrated players.( "yay! I won the fight! WHAT DO YOU MEAN THERE ARE NOW FOURTEEN MORE PEOPLE WHO JUST DROPPED FROM THE DAMN SKY?!")

Another example are the boss battles. The boss battles in DA2 are split up into two categories: Boring, and WTF. high Dragon: boring. Ancient Rock Wraith: Boring. Orsino: WTF. Meredith: WTF. None of these boss battles added anything. They were eithre arduous, tedious and boring, or they looked like the developers had been playing WAY too much final fantasy during the development. And not the good final fantasies like 4 and 6. No, the bad ones like 12 and 13.

[Joe25]

I was okay with the way thay did the mage fighting style in DA2. I found it a little hard to think that your character was in in hidding with the lager blow staff, the "Fist of the Dragon" fight style, and not being able to use your hands. On the other hand DA:O fighting style was slow, dut had more realism. I can see why some player might not want to air hump while using a staff, and why some would want to use sword or hands again. But, hopfully there might be a compromise or blend for DA3

Modifié par joe2353, 03 novembre 2012 - 08:11 .

[Realmzmaster]

DadeLeviathan wrote...

I thought, for the most part, that the combat system in DA2 was an improvement over Origins. The problem, however, is that they improved upon a good system -- and then introduced crap. It's similar to improving on a great meal, and then putting something in that doesn't fit. Like baking a cake, and then making a parsley-flavored frosting.

Examples of this would be the wave system - which was horrid. Could a wave system work? Yes. In the system they had? NO. It was, in my opinion, the worst design decision in the entire game. And it either needs to be removed for DA3, or the entire combat system needs to be reworked to accomodate a wave system. Otherwise you just end up in frustrated players.( "yay! I won the fight! WHAT DO YOU MEAN THERE ARE NOW FOURTEEN MORE PEOPLE WHO JUST DROPPED FROM THE DAMN SKY?!")

Another example are the boss battles. The boss battles in DA2 are split up into two categories: Boring, and WTF. high Dragon: boring. Ancient Rock Wraith: Boring. Orsino: WTF. Meredith: WTF. None of these boss battles added anything. They were eithre arduous, tedious and boring, or they looked like the developers had been playing WAY too much final fantasy during the development. And not the good final fantasies like 4 and 6. No, the bad ones like 12 and 13.

I can only assume you found the boss battles in DAO to be boring ( Flemeth, High Dragon and ArchDemon). The high Dragon battle in DA2 are based on the battles with high dragons in DAO. The Rock Wraith battle is based on the battle with the Queen of Blackmarsh from Awakening

[jillabender]

DadeLeviathan wrote...

I thought, for the most part, that the combat system in DA2 was an improvement over Origins. The problem, however, is that they improved upon a good system -- and then introduced crap. It's similar to improving on a great meal, and then putting something in that doesn't fit. Like baking a cake, and then making a parsley-flavored frosting.

Examples of this would be the wave system - which was horrid. Could a wave system work? Yes. In the system they had? NO. It was, in my opinion, the worst design decision in the entire game. And it either needs to be removed for DA3, or the entire combat system needs to be reworked to accomodate a wave system. Otherwise you just end up in frustrated players.( "yay! I won the fight! WHAT DO YOU MEAN THERE ARE NOW FOURTEEN MORE PEOPLE WHO JUST DROPPED FROM THE DAMN SKY?!"

I believe BioWare has said that the waves of parachuting enemies will be gone in DA3 (the devs can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong).

I'm still curious to hear people's thoughts about the way attributes and abiities were handled in DA2. Personally, I thought that "useless" attributes and abilities were less of a problem in DA2 compared to DA:O. I also felt that DA2 offered more variety by making it possible to build, for example, two sword-and-shield warriors, or two dual-wielding rogues, with quite different sets of abiities, and I'm curious to hear other people's thoughts about that.

Also, how would people feel about being able to use both ranged and melee attacks with all party members? That's something I would definitely like to see – I know that BioWare have said they want each class to feel more distinct, but I think there could be ways to do that while still giving each class the option to use both ranged and melee attacks.

Modifié par jillabender, 03 novembre 2012 - 09:30 .

[abaris]

jillabender wrote...

Also, how would people feel about being able to use both ranged and melee attacks with all party members? That's something I would definitely like to see – I know that BioWare have said they want each class to feel more distinct, but I think there could be ways to do that while still giving each class the option to use both ranged and melee attacks.

As experts, no. I like the distinction between a ranged build only able to defend themselves in a melee situation and a tank. No need for everyone being ranged.

[Gamemako]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I agree that the two handed warrior in dao was much too slow. On the merits of realism I find dao too be farther from than da2.

On that we can agree. No weapon that slow would ever be used. The actual massive swords used were much faster (though they were also not used to hack like fantasy weapons -- torquing the blade and thrusting it through a man's gut is much more effective).

On the subject of DA2's combat, I have precious little positive to say about the changes.

-Deliberate role-forcing, both as a part of the "differentiation" of classes and otherwise, was a bad, bad idea. Forces everyone to use the same party make-up.
-Forcing skill combinations to be inter-class was just annoying and forces everyone to use the same party makeup.
-The awful AoE scaling also ruined the ability to run multi-warrior builds. Seriously, what were you thinking giving the weakest of mooks 20x as much health as your teammates? Not only is that just a strange and needless disconnect, you also enjoy the busted effects relative to friendly fire.
-As a sum of these, you ended up with no party variation. NONE. Completely broken.
-And you know what's REALLY annoying about it? Healing spells were also downplayed to avoid it. All of the changes that forced you to use one party makeup don't do a damn thing to give you
-Stats in DA:O were bad. They CON/WIL were all but completely useless and most characters specced a certain God Stat. Stats in DA2 were even worse, straight-up formalizing the God-stat method. Instead of trying to make stat builds a decent question, it pretty much took all player input and flushed it.
-Waves are total nonsense. Parachuting enemies flat-out removed tactical planning.
-Combat was occasionally too fast for its own good, requiring incessant pausing and micromanagement to avoid complete disaster via friendly fire.
-Bosses taking an hour to kill because you spent the last hour-and-a-half having brought the wrong characters? Bad design all around.
-Enemy scaling was a disaster. Leveling up didn't level up your equipment, so getting a level actually meant getting weaker until you found a new item. That made difficulty uneven and frustrating (and when you get to the end of the game, you'll be out of unique equipment and actually have to use generic crap).
-Awesome button? More like awful button. <_<

[Han Shot First]

DA:O two-handed animations were too slow, but I thought DA2 was too fast and over-the-top.

[jillabender]

abaris wrote...

jillabender wrote...

Also, how would people feel about being able to use both ranged and melee attacks with all party members? That's something I would definitely like to see – I know that BioWare have said they want each class to feel more distinct, but I think there could be ways to do that while still giving each class the option to use both ranged and melee attacks.

As experts, no. I like the distinction between a ranged build only able to defend themselves in a melee situation and a tank. No need for everyone being ranged.

I really liked the fact that archers in DA2 had more abilities to choose from than in DA:O.

Even if they don't make both ranged and melee attacks available to every character, I'd like it if each class had access to both ranged and melee abilities. I think it would be cool to be able to create a warrior archer again – they could probably find ways to make a warrior archer build work differently from a rogue archer build. I also think it would be cool to see some mage specializations that use melee attacks – maybe something a bit like the Arcane Warrior or Shapeshifter specializations in DA:O.

Modifié par jillabender, 03 novembre 2012 - 09:16 .

[Twisted Path]

The combat animations in Dragon Age 2 were realistic? I understand that claymores were handled differently in real life then how they're portrayed in fiction but I'm pretty sure no one ever did somersaults on a medieval battlefield. Or ninja-vanished to teleport behind a guy and stab him in the back. Or slammed the ground to stun nearby combatants. I'm also pretty sure combatants on a medieval battlefield didn't dance around spastically like the mooks from Power Rangers. Also people don't explode in a cloud of bloody mist when you stab them with a knife.

Those are my big complaints with the combat animations in DA2 at least. The battles always looked like a silly anime instead of a fight in a high fantasy setting with fencing and armor and magic. I will admit though, after replaying DA2 a bit recently I agree that underneath the silly animations and badly thought out encounter design the actual combat system (the skills and spells and synergy and balance between them and such,) in DA2 wasn't bad. There's also the parachuting waves and endless, tedious mook-mashing in DA2 but it seems like the developers know that's a problem and are trying to improve on it. Besides that my biggest complaints are mostly aesthetic.

Basically I thought the way characters fought in Origins looked really cool and the way characters fought in DA2 looked terrible.

[Nerevar-as]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

I having trouble understanding the lack of a sense of weight. I admit that two handed swords should not look like you are using a toothpick, but neither should it look like you are swinging an anvil. DAO was too slow in that regard. The two handed technique has to be used for both offense and defense. The slow movement in the swing in DAO made me doubt the ability to recover for defensive purposes.

I think it is the speed of the swing in DA2 that makes it look like it has less weight if that is what you mean by sense of weight.

I agree that the two handed warrior in dao was much too slow. On the merits of realism I find dao too be farther from than da2.

The swing itself was fine, and it looked that it would hurt when it hit. It was the recovery time or the pre-swing that was way too slow and looked like the enemy could kill you several times before it was over. DA2 on the other side was too fast and also didn´t hurt much because of the bright idea of giving hundreds of HP to the enemy.

Please have both PC and enemies follow the same rules. Whose idea was it to have 2 rulesets for party and enemy anyway?

[Allan Schumacher]

abaris wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I agree that the two handed warrior in dao was much too slow. On the merits of realism I find dao too be farther from than da2.

I didn't have that feeling at all.

As a not very strong person that has actually held and manipulated some actual two-handed swords, the swing speed in DAO is pretty much a snail's pace.

The actual weight of a two-handed sword is usually between 3-8lbs.  Which really isn't that heavy, and when properly balanced and held correctly, is still a quick weapon.

Some interesting reading here.

[abaris]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

The actual weight of a two-handed sword is usually between 3-8lbs.  Which really isn't that heavy, and when properly balanced and held correctly, is still a quick weapon.

Some interesting reading here.

They actually handle it completely different from what is shown in the game:



Now I understand that's difficult to implement in any game environment, since it required a lot of animation sets.

[jillabender]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

abaris wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I agree that the two handed warrior in dao was much too slow. On the merits of realism I find dao too be farther from than da2.

I didn't have that feeling at all.

As a not very strong person that has actually held and manipulated some actual two-handed swords, the swing speed in DAO is pretty much a snail's pace.

The actual weight of a two-handed sword is usually between 3-8lbs.  Which really isn't that heavy, and when properly balanced and held correctly, is still a quick weapon.

Some interesting reading here.

Thanks for the info, Allan – that's very interesting! Perhaps the speed of the two-handed swords in DA2 was more accurate than I thought. I still maintain, though, that it looked a bit odd to see Hawke swinging huge mauls with one hand – but that's a minor quibble.

Modifié par jillabender, 03 novembre 2012 - 09:51 .