243 réponses à ce sujet

[Ophir147]

 A couple of months ago I would have said DA:O, but I am playing through on nightmare right now for the first time and the game is juust sooo easy. It's not tactical at all, and the only interplay between my characters is healing, force fields, and setting my rogue up for coup de grace. Everyone's running animations look ridiculously stilted, and I use the exact same strategy for every single fight. The only time the game came anywhere near to be remotely challenging so far was during the quest where you have to wipe out those blood mages in Denerim, and even then I believe the gameplay would have benefitted from DA:2's faster pacing.

DA:2 had big problems, but the combat was better.

[Gibb_Shepard]

This really needs to be split up between PC and console. DAO's combat on console is horrendous, while DA2 is bearable.

But going by PC, DAO's combat was far, far more enjoyable and satisfying that DA2's.

[imbs]

Ophir147 wrote...

 A couple of months ago I would have said DA:O, but I am playing through on nightmare right now for the first time and the game is juust sooo easy. It's not tactical at all, and the only interplay between my characters is healing, force fields, and setting my rogue up for coup de grace. Everyone's running animations look ridiculously stilted, and I use the exact same strategy for every single fight. The only time the game came anywhere near to be remotely challenging so far was during the quest where you have to wipe out those blood mages in Denerim, and even then I believe the gameplay would have benefitted from DA:2's faster pacing.

DA:2 had big problems, but the combat was better.

Are you really going to sit there and harp on about how hard the blood mages in denerim were and not even mention Cauthrien, or that mage/spider pack in the deep roads etc...? DAO had its problems for sure, but DA2 is a joke.

[Siegdrifa]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

This really needs to be split up between PC and console. DAO's combat on console is horrendous, while DA2 is bearable.

But going by PC, DAO's combat was far, far more enjoyable and satisfying that DA2's.

Humm, if i remember right, the console version of DA2 had no auto attack at launch, the player had to mash their buttons all the time while pc player were using only skills button right ?

Modifié par Siegdrifa, 07 février 2013 - 03:06 .

[Robhuzz]

DAO by a landslide. I liked DA2 as well at first but it's just way over the top. Hope they slow it down and make it a bit tactical for the next instalment. DAO was way more detailed and realistic, albeit a bit slow. If they speed up DAO's combat just a bit I'll be a happy panda.

Just...no over the top hack and slash like DA2 again...

[Tumak]

I had a lot of fun playing mage and archer rouge in DA2 - classes I couldn't play in DA:O due to their combat. I liked how dynamic and fluid combat was in DA2, and you could feel the impact of your hits. But I didn't like how enemies could explode from one hit, or how my warrior in plate armor was jumping like Micheal Jordan doing slum dunk. I think that dagger wielding rouge had too much jumping and acrobatics in combat too, and many times it seemed like things are going on fast forward button. If combat would be dynamic, fuild and responsive, but with more realistic moves than it would be really good.

[DraCZeQQ]

DA:O all the way! There is nothing DA2 has to offer, ridiculous combat, retarded boss mechanics and absolutly horrible difficulty scalling? No thank you DA2, now go cry in the corner! In DA:O I could pimp out my rogue and just rush the battlefield like an Angel of Death poping big numbers and doing cool moves that didnt look ridiculous and even on Nightmare finished battles swiftly (not like the snoozefest in DA2)

But to be honest I personally prefer combat like in Dragon's Dogma, Atelier Meruru/Totori/Rorona, FF13-2 or Ni No Kuni

[Plaintiff]

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

So your "meaningful attributes" are, as I always suspected, actually just issues of personal taste, and have no grounding in anything solid.

I may be blunt about my opinion, but I at least I don't claim that my opinion is anything more than what it is (ie, an opinion, and not objective fact). Nor do I claim that the games I like are the only "real" ones.

[Plaintiff]

DraCZeQQ wrote...

DA:O all the way! There is nothing DA2 has to offer, ridiculous combat, retarded boss mechanics and absolutly horrible difficulty scalling? No thank you DA2, now go cry in the corner! In DA:O I could pimp out my rogue and just rush the battlefield like an Angel of Death poping big numbers and doing cool moves that didnt look ridiculous and even on Nightmare finished battles swiftly (not like the snoozefest in DA2)

But to be honest I personally prefer combat like in Dragon's Dogma, Atelier Meruru/Totori/Rorona, FF13-2 or Ni No Kuni

FF 13-2 doesn't look "ridiculous", but DA2 does?

[DraCZeQQ]

Plaintiff wrote...

FF 13-2 doesn't look "ridiculous", but DA2 does?

Well the ridiculousness was compared to DA:O. But to answer your question I must say that no, FF13-2 doesnt look ridiculous, I like it that way, it follows the game mechanics, game lore and settings it's perfectly fine for THAT game, but it would look ridiculous in DA game, because there are no skills, lore based abilities and items that would allow such behavior oposed to FF13/13-2 universe

[Masha Potato]

imbs wrote...

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

hahahahahahahaahah

hahaa

okay then

[LilyasAvalon]

DA2 was certainly faster paced and more energetic, but I still prefer DA:O, which feels more realistic to me. DA2's fighting styles remind me too much of DMC or Naruto, mindless action A button for awesome button mashing. Aside from two boss fights, the game isn't that hard.

[10K]

DA2 by far, yeah it was a one button masher. But since I'm a xbox user it was a step in a better direction, as I hated watching my character fight while I do nothing the majority of the time.

[bleetman]

Eh. It depends. I much prefered sword-and-board warrioring in Origins. My rogues on the other hand were more enjoyable in DA2, largely because archery wasn't a complete and utter chore and rogue skills actually supported it for a change. Since I play rogues a whole lot more than anything else, I guess I'll go with DA2, since enjoying both for different reasons apparently isn't a valid answer.

Modifié par bleetman, 07 février 2013 - 03:44 .

[milena87]

To be fair, the missing auto-attack on console was fixed in April 2011 (and it was supposed to be in the game, so I wouldn't consider the hack & slash nature of the console version on launch a design choice). Essentially, it's no more button mashing than DAO.

[10K]

Tumak wrote...

I had a lot of fun playing mage and archer rouge in DA2 - classes I couldn't play in DA:O due to their combat. I liked how dynamic and fluid combat was in DA2, and you could feel the impact of your hits. But I didn't like how enemies could explode from one hit, or how my warrior in plate armor was jumping like Micheal Jordan doing slum dunk. I think that dagger wielding rouge had too much jumping and acrobatics in combat too, and many times it seemed like things are going on fast forward button. If combat would be dynamic, fuild and responsive, but with more realistic moves than it would be really good.

I like the way you think:happy:

[Tinu]

DAO doesn't feel like combat at all. It's slow, boring and lifeless.
DA2 might be a little bit over-the-top, but it's at least more interactive and interesting.

[Mantaal]

imbs wrote...

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.

Would you go to Nail that on the door on the Bioware HQ in Canada pls?

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

There was another poll like this about a month ago and Origins was the clear winner.

Modifié par DinoSteve, 07 février 2013 - 04:10 .

[Terraforming2154]

I'm surprised DAII has more votes.

I agree that DAO combat was quite slow , but I enjoyed it a lot more playing as a warrior. The weight behind the attacks made it feel significantly better.

I will say DAII's combat for rogues was a lot more fun though, and the animations for mages were much nicer.

Modifié par Terraforming2154, 07 février 2013 - 04:17 .

[imbs]

Plaintiff wrote...

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

So your "meaningful attributes" are, as I always suspected, actually just issues of personal taste, and have no grounding in anything solid.

I may be blunt about my opinion, but I at least I don't claim that my opinion is anything more than what it is (ie, an opinion, and not objective fact). Nor do I claim that the games I like are the only "real" ones.

self importance much? I wasnt responding to you at all. I'd love to see you argue even a single of those extremely detrimental things to gameplay though.

Attributes (or maybe attribute sets would be a better term) can be a lot of things. Things like customisation, realism, the strategy involved. DA2 is good at none of these except, apparently, convincing Bioware forum dwellers that the combat is "fast" and thereforegood. I say Bioware forum dweller because this is literally the only place I have ever met anyone who considers combat in DA2 to be good, and I have talked to a fair few people, both irl and on forums, about this game so yea

PS. There are several other things I could easily have added to that list. DAO didnt have half so many problems and obvious flaws

Modifié par imbs, 07 février 2013 - 05:36 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

DAO, in every respect but one.

I did really like DA2's melee friendly fire, and would like to see that again in future games, but DAO surpasses DA2 by:

Allowing friendly fire at lower difficulty levels;
Having a movable tactical camera;
Giving mages a wider range of things to do;
Making positioning matter;
Not using waved encounters; and,
Being slower.

edit: Cross-class combos are a wash, because their addition merely balances the loss of DAO's spell combos.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 07 février 2013 - 05:41 .

[imbs]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

DAO, in every respect but one.

I did really like DA2's melee friendly fire, and would like to see that again in future games, but DAO surpasses DA2

This is actually a good point, I definitely liked that you had to be careful with that stuff in DA2 but there are problems that arise from it. Melee are already kinda crappy on some fights (in both games), and because of the ratio of player hp to mob hp it got to the point in DA2 where bringing a second melee was never a good idea.

By ratio of hp i mean the way mobs have much more hp than players, and your spells are balanced in this regard. For example my firestorm was doing something like 600 dmge+ towards the end of the game on my mage. This was 2 shotting Aveline, my tank who had stacked hp and elemental aegis (improved, 60% reduction of elemental damage taken iirc), and whenever I would try to use Fenris Aveline would get 1shot whenever I didn't bother controlling them. (It didn't actually matter at this point in the game, Firestorm was oneshotting entire packs of mobs and Aveline was only useful for staggers; so i was pretty careless).

To make real use of that feature they need to normalise health of both mobs and players in my opinion. It doesn't really make sense anyway, having players with 3rd the hp of normal mobs but able to hit 30-40+ times harder.

Problem with that though is that this system contributes to the illusion of fast gameplay, which means they might have to actually have genuinely good gameplay this time round.

PS: the health system they use in DA2 totally belongs in my super duper list from earlier

Modifié par imbs, 07 février 2013 - 05:51 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

DAO, in every respect but one.

I did really like DA2's melee friendly fire, and would like to see that again in future games, but DAO surpasses DA2 by:

Allowing friendly fire at lower difficulty levels;
Having a movable tactical camera;
Giving mages a wider range of things to do;
Making positioning matter;
Not using waved encounters; and,
Being slower.

edit: Cross-class combos are a wash, because their addition merely balances the loss of DAO's spell combos.

They also resulted in some serious HP bloat of many enemies, which was more than a little silly.

[unbentbuzzkill]

loved the combat in DA2, that's pretty much all i liked about DA2 ( besides the characters minus Hawke and Carver.)