243 réponses à ce sujet

[cogsandcurls]

Wave-based encounter issues aside? DA2 hands down. The combat system just felt snappier and more solid to me.

I should mention though that I'm a PC player, so button-mashing wasn't an issue.

[nightscrawl]

In general, I liked DA2 because it was faster paced. However, there are elements that I would take from each game.

Warrior: I can go either way. Both the DAO and DA2 SnS and 2h warrior are pretty boring. I prefer DAO for the inclusion of the dual-wield spec that DA2 lacks.

Rogue: DA2 rogue all the way. Zevran was OK after a fashion, but I couldn't stand having a bow or dw rogue as my PC. Bow rogue in DAO was boring, and after playing with Varric and Sabastian in DA2 I really have no interest to spec my PC that way. DA2 dw rogue is incredibly fun, even if the flying around is a bit much sometimes. The active stealthing in combat added a lot to the class, as did their various CC abilities.

Mage: I prefer the DAO selection of skills, but with the DA2 staff combat. That said, force mage is a very fun spec; I'm hoping they bring it back for DA3.

[TheRealJayDee]

Damn, I was logged out and my sophisticated, long-winded answer was lost. '

Short version: DA2 was way too over-the-top for what I feel is reasonable for the Dragon Age setting. I like flashy combat, but definitely not that flashy in DA. Delivering grenades by roundhous kicking them looks awesome and I like it, just in a game that is not Dragon Age.

I'd wish for a varied, reasonably fast and not-boring, but more mundane looking combat, with generally fewer, yet really well thought out encounters.

[wright1978]

simfamSP wrote...

DA2... by a reasonable margin.

Yeah this

[ghost_ronin]

Gotto say, going ninja gaiden with a two-hander in DA2 was unrealistic.......-ally entertaining

Damn straight i double-posted this.

Modifié par ghost_ronin, 07 février 2013 - 12:23 .

[Sir Edric]

Dunno. I prefered the warrior in DAO, but the mage a lot more in DA2.

[Yumichika]

I prefer the combat in DAO.
Except for the archery combat system in DA2.

[Milan92]

I prefered the combat from DA 2. I hated the combat from DAO.

[animedreamer]

 Not necessarily, one felt way to slow combat was and very clumsy. DA2 on the other hand was noticably faster but seemed more about rapid button mashing and not wise skill use. DA:O also felt more like rock paper scissors when it came to whether or not you hit or missed, a bad feeling if you ask me.

[Moirai]

ghost_ronin wrote...

Gotto say, going ninja gaiden with a two-hander in DA2 was unrealistic.......-ally entertaining

Damn straight i double-posted this.

Have to agree. Looks-wise, it was pretty bad.

Isolated on its own, the combat was fundamentally interesting and worked reasonably well. However, I thought it was totally inappropriate for the style and tone of the game. It was a bit like watching a battle scene from Lord of the Rings and suddenly everyone starts fighting in over the top slo-mo Matrix style kung fu moves with trendy camera sweeps and angles.

DA:O was a serious and arguably epic story, and the style of combat sat comfortably within that scenario. It looked believable and 'realistic' in relation to the rest of the game setting. DA2's combat style was so out of place that it effectively spoiled the tone and feel of the game for me. Well, ignoring the fact that the overall story was nowhere near as captivating as DA:O's anyway, which didn't exactly help.

Anyway, that's more a visual thing, as opposed to mechanics. But it's still relevant.

Modifié par Moirai, 07 février 2013 - 12:59 .

[Siegdrifa]

Catfish Shotgun wrote...

Strategy > Telling the party to just run up an do their thing against copy-paste enemies wave after wave.
DA:O easy.
Btw guys, animation =/= combat. Obviously DA3's going to have improved animations, so there's really no point using that as a tip in DA2's favour, JS.

I think you don't understand how animation and character movements are deeply tied to combat.
If the animation take too long (doesn't matter how greatly it was done), it can kill the pace and flow of the fight wich lead to a bad combat experience.

For the same reason, if the animation looks bad... even if the combat mechanic are great, it can ****** off player to see their character executing strange ugly movement one after another " why the hell my character have to look like a dumb monkey when he is fighting for god sake !!! ".

For exemple, let's say a deliscious food look disgusting and smell like real sh*t... some people will most likely have a bad experience with it. Usualy people prefer when the food taste good, smell good and look good too.

For combat it's the same, mechanic and designe alone is not enough to give a good combat experience.

[dainbramage]

Origins, since at least a slight amount of thought was necessary. DA2 animations also looked ridiculous, but that's a secondary concern. PC in case it's relevant (I think fights on console for Origins were also significantly more AI-controlled?)

EDIT: And origins isn't at all slow if you're actually controlling all 4 party members. If you're watching your SnS warrior autoattack while the other 3 guys are on tactics, then yeah, it probably is.

Modifié par dainbramage, 07 février 2013 - 01:07 .

[Kidd]

Moirai wrote...

DA:O was a serious and arguably epic story, and the style of combat sat comfortably within that scenario. It looked believable and 'realistic' in relation to the rest of the game setting. DA2's combat style was so out of place that it effectively spoiled the tone and feel of the game for me.

It's pretty interesting now that I think about it. The down-to-Earth, political and personal story has the over-the-top crazy martial arts animations, while the epic and heroic save-the-world-from-pure-evil story has the gritty street-level animations. Isn't this somewhat backwards? =)

[Arakat]

DA2, simply because it was more fun for me. I actually enjoyed the combat (well, except the endless waves of enemies, and the sometimes silly animations) and even tried cranking up the difficulty, something I've never done in a video game before. DA:O combat has its moments, too, but it's not nearly as entertaining.

[dainbramage]

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

Moirai wrote...

DA:O was a serious and arguably epic story, and the style of combat sat comfortably within that scenario. It looked believable and 'realistic' in relation to the rest of the game setting. DA2's combat style was so out of place that it effectively spoiled the tone and feel of the game for me.

It's pretty interesting now that I think about it. The down-to-Earth, political and personal story has the over-the-top crazy martial arts animations, while the epic and heroic save-the-world-from-pure-evil story has the gritty street-level animations. Isn't this somewhat backwards? =)

Calling DA2's story down-to-earth is a bit of a stretch though

[CrazyRah]

I'm in the middle really. Both games have their strengths and flaws. DA2 had the really annoying wave system while DAO sometimes felt a bit too slow. I really liked how the mage felt in DA2 compared to DAO with the animations and all but just aswell the warrior in DA2 looked just terrible, swinging a 2h-sword around like if it was made out of paper.

[Nerdage]

On balance, probably DAO.

My main issue with DA2 was how much AoE there was and how many enemies were just fodder to it; I'm guessing it's different on nightmare (because of friendly fire) but from hard difficulty down most fights could just be AOE-spammed through. In DAO, a dual-daggers rogue could tear down a single enemy pretty quickly, but in DA2 a warrior or mage could kill a dozen enemies in the same time with next to no thought, which just seems pointless.

Also, in DAO it seemed like party members and NPCs had broadly similar health, which, for one, felt less gamey, but also meant friendly fire worked like it should (i.e. proportionally), so it could be active on more than just the hardest difficulty.

That said, actually being able to move around the battlefield in DA2 was great. Removing the plod from in-combat running and adding talents which specifically moved you from place to place; scythe, backstab (even if the teleporting rogue still annoys me), etc., were great changes.

[mickey111]

Siegdrifa wrote...

Catfish Shotgun wrote...

Strategy > Telling the party to just run up an do their thing against copy-paste enemies wave after wave.
DA:O easy.
Btw guys, animation =/= combat. Obviously DA3's going to have improved animations, so there's really no point using that as a tip in DA2's favour, JS.

I think you don't understand how animation and character movements are deeply tied to combat.
If the animation take too long (doesn't matter how greatly it was done), it can kill the pace and flow of the fight wich lead to a bad combat experience.

For the same reason, if the animation looks bad... even if the combat mechanic are great, it can ****** off player to see their character executing strange ugly movement one after another " why the hell my character have to look like a dumb monkey when he is fighting for god sake !!! ".

For exemple, let's say a deliscious food look disgusting and smell like real sh*t... some people will most likely have a bad experience with it. Usualy people prefer when the food taste good, smell good and look good too.

For combat it's the same, mechanic and designe alone is not enough to give a good combat experience.

What? No, bad example. What you're describing is preference. If something exists then there is probably someone who thinks " hey, that looks pretty good". In a game like Street Fighter you'll often see people go instantly from a crouch kick to a hadouken. You don't see the animations of the character transistion from the sweep kick by moving from a crouch position to a standing position, to then bring their arms to their chest and then thrust both arms foreward with the palm of their hands pushing outwards to the hadoken because that will make the combat less responsive, and unresponsive gameplay is unforgivable in any form of competition. Why, you ask? Because Street Fighter is not Assassins Creed. I'm sure that while the Street Fighter fans would appreciate the rule of cool, it is tertiary to gameplay (balance would be the secondary priority and responsiveness is priority #1) and they won't have any fancy and highly detailed animations holding them back You

Modifié par mickey111, 07 février 2013 - 01:36 .

[Kidd]

Hence the problem with the last attack on the mage auto-attack chain in DA2 as well as decapitations in DAO. You can't cancel those animations prematurely, so the animation takes (a great deal of) precedence over gameplay. It's quite noticeable.

[Tootles FTW]

DA2.

I only "like" DAO combat if I'm playing a ranged character (mage/archer) as the shuffling around the battlefield is so awkward looking.

[Rawgrim]

Mantaal wrote...

GenericEnemy wrote...

DA:O. It was definitely a little slow and unresponsive at times, but I found the gravity defying backflipping enemies exploding from a goddamn dagger anime BS in DA2 was so stupid it nearly turned me off from the game.

Nothing much to add here.

Spot on.

[andar91]

DA2. Any problems I had in DA2 were more about implementation and encounter/enemy design than the actual combat system. The feel of the game was so much more alive than DAO's was. I liked DAO a lot, but I can barely stand to play it now because it feels so cumbersome.

I agree with some people that the animations were a little silly, but it wouldn't take much to tweak that (I would think). And I was under the impression that the exploding enemies were actually not supposed to do that as much as they did. I didn't mind some of the acrobatics though. I don't need complete realism, just enough so that it's believable.

My biggest issues with DA2's combat were the mobs of enemies that didn't really mean anything. You'd kill around 5-15 little, inconsequential enemies with half-inch lifebars per fight, and what the heck was their purpose? I hated that. I also felt like the enemies were fairly repetitive and I got sick of fighting the same foes with the same abilities over and over again.

Modifié par andar91, 07 février 2013 - 02:09 .

[Wulfram]

DA:O combat was in many ways utterly broken. Mages were overpowered, there are talents which don't really do anything, using healing potions could make it basically impossible to die.

But I still prefer it to DA2, because DA2's encounter design, lack of enemy variety and lack of enemy talents made almost every fight feel the same. Whereas at least I could self-impose limits on healing potion use. And I like having friendly fire, and don't want to have to deal with the stupid random immunities on nightmare.

[Siegdrifa]

mickey111 wrote...

Siegdrifa wrote...

Catfish Shotgun wrote...

Strategy > Telling the party to just run up an do their thing against copy-paste enemies wave after wave.
DA:O easy.
Btw guys, animation =/= combat. Obviously DA3's going to have improved animations, so there's really no point using that as a tip in DA2's favour, JS.

I think you don't understand how animation and character movements are deeply tied to combat.
If the animation take too long (doesn't matter how greatly it was done), it can kill the pace and flow of the fight wich lead to a bad combat experience.

For the same reason, if the animation looks bad... even if the combat mechanic are great, it can ****** off player to see their character executing strange ugly movement one after another " why the hell my character have to look like a dumb monkey when he is fighting for god sake !!! ".

For exemple, let's say a deliscious food look disgusting and smell like real sh*t... some people will most likely have a bad experience with it. Usualy people prefer when the food taste good, smell good and look good too.

For combat it's the same, mechanic and designe alone is not enough to give a good combat experience.

What? No, you have it all wrong. What you're describing is preference. In a game like Street Fighter you'll often see people go instantly from a crouch kick to a hadouken. You don't see the animations of the character transistion from the sweep kick by moving from a crouch position to a standing position, to then bring their arms to their chest and then thrust both arms foreward with the palm of their hands pushing outwards to the hadoken because that will make the combat less responsive, and unresponsive gameplay is unforgivable in any form of competition. Why, you ask? Because Street Fighter is not Assassins Creed. I'm sure that while the Street Fighter fans would appreciate the rule of cool, it is tertiary to gameplay (balance would be the secondary priority and responsiveness is priority #1) and they won't have any fancy and highly detailed animations holding them back You

ah....
Well, i'll try and bother again.

In a fight, we have mainly 2 aspect that make it a whole.

- the mechanic and design, wich will be the squeleton on how the combat should occure and developpe (pace / strategie, timing, combo etc).

- the aesthetic. Combat involve character movement and they are important because this is "corporal expression". The corporal expression will have to traduce the degree a power, speed, reach and amplitude of one move to be coherent with the indended damage it has to deal.

When the asthetic go too far, it can bypass the design intend. This is a game and should never bend too far.
Movement have to be usefull and usable during a fight; if you have a move that take too long to execut, it will impact the natural flow of the fight and also compromise the usability of the move it self.
Let's not forget that a long animation = your character is in a greater danger, why ?
because sometimes moving during an animation = canceling and you will have to start again; while you are executing this animation, you are more lickely to suffer more ennemy fire / cc wich will increase the chance that your move will fail (either by a interuption or because ennemy got out of range during that time).

A good combat designe carry only animation that were crafted to match the pace intended by the combat designer (it doesn't mean all move have to be of the same lenght).

Responciveness is a complex matter that affect game play on different specific layer.
By responciveness, players expect the character to traduce their gameplay input as quicly as possible, on but the code side, it's not always that easy and it can't be reduced to "i order your to do this so you do it right now", there is more technical thing to consider to make it looks and feels like the game is actualy responcive and still coherent from the original designe.

Finaly, it's the game and combat designer that choose if they want a more street fighter like kind of fight or not(overiding previous animation with the next for a greater dynamic effect, or never allow a new move to occure unless previous animation is over or in wich situation it can be shortened / ignored to perform a counter blablabla etc).
Designing combat is not reduced to push X do X, it's lot more complex to craft a real fighting gameplay.

Modifié par Siegdrifa, 07 février 2013 - 02:32 .

[imbs]

I felt like writing an essay about why DA2's combat was bad, so here it is, in bullet point form.

Faults with DA2 gameplay that i couldn't stand;

Wave system: don't really need to explain this, when mobs are randomly inserting themselves into random positions during fights the amount of attention you need to pay towards positioning is about 0. The only fight where positioning matters enough to control more than 1 party member is the boss fight in deep roads. Rest is a joke.

Fortitude/knockback system - This system is terrible. It makes little to no intuitive sense, and sadly is the only source of any difficulty in the entire game. What makes this system even worse are the random items, talents that make you utterly immune to it. Whilst the system was bad (the worthless mob archers were more likely to wipe you than any non-assassin melee mob....) being able to disregard this "feature" entirely by equipping magical ring of no more difficulties or talent of never feel the physics of a sword slash again was just bad design.

Melee mobs - utterly useless mobs who could never hit you if you felt like playing properly, outside of broken animations that is (sup Golems).

Archer mobs - With the ridiculous fortitude/knockback system these were artificially a pain in the ass. Did anyone ever kill melee before Archers? Outside of assassins i mean.

Archery itself with line of sight - See an archer loading a bow to shoot at you? Think ducking behind that pillar will save yourself some damage? Nope didn't work, you inexplicably got hit with it anyway.

Cross class combos; I know some people like these, and I'm not saying I dislike the idea, but there are some big problems with it in DA2. For one thing it shouldn't be limited to Cross-classes. Mages should be able to set up other mages (altho it shouldn't be DAO either where only mages really are involved with Spell Combos). Secondly it doesn't make any intuitive sense - Why can chain lightning benefit from the stagger debuff and not Tempest? Why does assassinate gain bonus damage from Brittle, but not backstab? Makes no sense. They also have too much effect; 400% is an absurd number that means either the spell will be too good when triggered, or the spell will suck when not triggered (or both, as in the case of some abilities in DA2). Bioware pretty much confirmed this when they felt the need for that band-aid damage cap patch.

Customisation; You have basically no choice in DA2 compared to DAO. 2 Mage builds can look so much different in DAO for example, whereas in DA2 I will never play mage again. I pretty much got to use all abilities during my one playthrough that i'd ever want to use. I'd be suprised if there were more than about 2 general mage builds that people play. Same goes for Rogue/warrior. ZZZZ. No ranged weapons on melee is yet another thing I would point out here, although thats big enough of an issue to have it's own heading.

Things about combat/gameplay i didn't like but could stand push come to shove;
Assassins - I actually liked assassins but it made no sense that some aoes just didn't break them out, whilst others completely dominated stealth mobs.

Imbalances - Force/blood mage is absurd. Companions vary ridiculously in strength (what were whoever made varrick smoking when they designed his archery tree?) Assassinate is (or was) too strong compared to every other direct damage ability in the game etc Lots of things can be said here.

Gear - Too many requirements on gear, probably because Bioware were so scared of the balance problems of the first game. Fits in with customisation too. Some things were too good as well, such as the immune to knockback/stun items or that ridiculous 35% attack speed weapon rune etc.

Difficulty - Too easy, especially in late-game. I know DAO was easy as well but at least you could wipe in that, and there were some hard fights (Cauthrien anyone?). In DA2 I wiped a bit in first act , and the last boss fight in deep roads took me a few tries, but aside from that it was easy sailing pretty much - and the deaths in the first act were basically due to unfamiliarity with the ridiculous wave system, and how the game is one of those games that is harder in the beggining than in the end (DAO had this problem as well).

Spell immunities - It was a pain carrying around 6 staffs due to the absurd and non-sensical spell immunities some mobs had. Why are slavers immune to frost, and why do Templars take so much damage from frost (seriously why do Templars take bonus damage from any schools? 0 sense)? Spell resistances should be intuitive. Fire elementals should be immune to fire etc. Not this DA2 trash.

Animations - Ridiuclously flamboyant, absurd and childish. Made utterly no sense and had no purpose other than to be flashy to impress your average 12 year old. DAO's animations were bad as well, but at least they were of the right type to satisfy the themes of the game.

I could think of more problems had i played the game more recently. It really did have flaw after flaw after flaw. People here like pretending that DA2 tanked purely because of story. NOPE nope it didn't. The combat was one of the main turn-offs for most of us.

In conclusion, People who love DA2's combat should try playing some real games.

Modifié par imbs, 07 février 2013 - 02:45 .