295 réponses à ce sujet

[lil yonce]

Got my a** whooped the first time I fought the Arishok as a rogue. After the sixth failed attempt, I reloaded and let him take Isabela prisoner. She was my Hawke's LI too. Oh well.

Second time with a blood mage, the Arishok barely put a dent in my healthbar but the fight still took forever. Fifteen minutes on hard difficulty. The worst part though is the Act 3 opening cutscene and mission Showdown starts after the fight is over and autosaves in the Hightown courtyard after completed. It was an important moment in the story but if I wanted to replay it I had to reload before the Arishok fight because that was the last available save. SMH.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 19 avril 2013 - 03:55 .

[Naitaka]

There're still well loved games that's based entirely around boss fights such as Monster Hunters so I highly doubt that the mechanic is either out-dated or too ugh..."video-gamey". On the other hands, whether a boss fight would work in DA:I is totally up in the air since we don't even know what DA:I's combat mechanic is like. Thinking that boss fight wouldn't work in this case is a bit premature if you ask me.

[jillabender]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

In the words of Ash: "You have my sympathies"

For fighting the Arishok with a Sword-and-Shield Warrior? Yes, that earns my sympathies as well!

In Exile wrote...

Corypheus and the Wraith required to struggle against the horrible, horrible pathfinding. The fight wasn't about any kind of skill - it was making sure that each party member actually moved fast enough to react to the ridiculous damage that was being influced per unit time. On easy difficulties this was, of course, trivial. 

But on nightmare the game turned into fighting the camera and crappy AI pathfinding, because you needed very fine movements that the game just was not designed to deal with.

I completely agree - needing to wait for a character's animation to finish before they would carry out the command to move also added to the problem.

Modifié par jillabender, 19 avril 2013 - 04:10 .

[Cainhurst Crow]

Is it really too much to ask that we not get boss battles like orsino, saren, reaper husk TIM, meredith, that rocky mantis thing in sundermount, etc.?

Occasionally battles against very strong opponents, I am fine with. Making a final boss battle just because it's expect due to tradition more than for the story, or inserting a boss battle where none was needed, that just frustrates me. Just because you don't have a final boss fight against a massive monstrosity doesn't mean you can't have other types of boss fights throughout the game.

[In Exile]

jillabender wrote...

I completely agree - needing to wait for a character's animation to finish before they would carry out the command to move also added to the problem.

Oh, you just reminded me of that. I had Anders burn to death because of that stupid last part of the staff animation.

[mickey111]

Your next words. Choose them very carefully.gif

[Renmiri1]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Arguably, you can lump the Arishok battle into this as well, since the 
one-on-one duel gave absolutely zero way to defeat him unless you either
A) had a specifc build - Rock Armor and cold spells for a mage, archery
and using decoys for a rogue and the Reaver spec with a warrior... and
also using poisons or other specialized potions, somethign that is never
needed for any of the other gameplay segments, nor hinted at during any
of the gameplay.

Sadly, I found out that you can, in fact, beat him with a standard two-handed weapon warrior....
(During certification, I was doing a playthrough on the PS3 which was having some odd crash issues, and decided to fight the Arishok solo in a duel.  I *really* wish I had known this existed before hand, as that fight was mega tedious.  Slowly wearing him down was fine, until he decided to pop the odd healing potion.  Fortunately he did eventually run out......)

I beat him on my 2 handed warrior, not using Reaver, too kages.

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Is it really too much to ask that we not get boss battles like orsino, saren, reaper husk TIM, meredith, that rocky mantis thing in sundermount, etc.? 

I love the Final Boss battles on a game. Some are painfuly difficult, some are easier but it is a tradition and the game doesn't feel "done" without the last boss kill.

But I understand wanting to skip boss fights. A skip combat option would be great for people who dislike battling every single miniboss / final boss on every playthrough. I'd use it for boring / annoying minibosses - like Arishok - and go to combat for fun bosses.

Modifié par Renmiri1, 19 avril 2013 - 04:24 .

[Foolsfolly]

I don't get the whole 'too video-gamey' complaint. We all realize we're playing video games right? What's more video gamey than having characters set on fire and being fine literally a second after the flames are put out? Or seeing a group of goons hitting a robe wearing mage repeatedly with swords?

Now there are good boss fights and bad boss fights. But that's true about every aspect of any video game (or any product) ever.

[Nightdragon8]

.... dont want video gamey boss fight?? READ A BOOK.

not having a boss fight in an RPG is like not having guns in a WW2 game.. its just doesn't makes any sense.....

I mean why have fights at all in the game if you don't want it to be "Video gamey" Why dont they just cut all ther costs to make a video game and make it a pick your answer Movie.. there are plentey of games like that right now,

I bet most of you can't name too many. Cause I can't. I know there was a submarine one (still wanna play it and beat it...) but its not popular.

Edit: Don't get me wrong I understand the idea of what you all wanna push its just not going to work for massive A.D.D. generation of people playing the game.

In fact it sounds like a wonderful idea for like a mobile device title. In fact it would be prefect for it. But otherwise no.

Modifié par Nightdragon8, 19 avril 2013 - 04:42 .

[AshenShug4r]

DA2 just executed poorly. Good boss fights are... good.

[Direwolf0294]

I think there needs to be more ways to deal with bosses than to just fight them in the traditional sense. You should be able to talk them down, sneak past them, take them out without having to fight them at all (via a trap or something, and not just a trap that weakens them then forces you to fight them anyway, the trap should be able to make you avoid a fight altogether).

I also feel that at this point, boss fights are being included in games because devs feel like it's required to include them because video games. Having a confrontation with the antagonist is fine, but there doesn't need to be an evil dragon hiding at the end of the dungeon, there doesn't need to be a demon laughing and claiming "this isn't even my final form!" before turning into some sort of giant abomination every time you go confront the leader of some blood mages. Stuff like that gets boring really fast.

They should focus on crafting interesting story encounters, not tacking bosses onto every thing because it's what's expected of them.

[Allan Schumacher]

Eh, regarding the video gamey, I can understand where it's coming from.

I remember pretending to be soldiers and the like when in elementary school (basically "playing imaginary guns" or something), and I remember a friend of mine that was a part of the group would always concoct situations for us to solve that were clearly "video gamey" as in, we had to focus fire the specific aspect of the boss, and it'd take several hits to drop the guy. Whereas I never cared much for that, and preferred situations where, if we were able to shoot a guy (and presumably he was a human), he was typically neutralized.

I remember a situation where, playing Metal Gear Solid on the PSX, I was in the smelting area, and I was hiding against a wall and a soldier was patrolling on a metal plank (so I couldn't sneak up behind him). As he got to me, he turned, around, so I immediately popped out from the cover with my pistol out, lined him up in the back, and shot him. He then blinked 3 times (he's invincible during that time!) then turned around and started shooting at me, and the full alarm was sounded. It was certainly "video gamey" and not in a positive way.


We all have certain levels of disbelief we accept while playing games, and guys having HP and us slowly wearing them down (rather than instant mortal wounds) is something we tend to be okay with. I don't even think twice about it, which I think is important. If an encounter makes me consciously realize "Oh right, this is a video game" then I don't consider that a good thing.


I actually enjoy endgames that aren't just a boss battle (if for no other reason than it's somewhat unique), but I had no problem with it in DAO. I didn't like either of the boss fights in ME1/2 either, however. DA2 I can tolerate Meredith, but wasn't a fan of Orsino (especially since I had been siding with the mages).

I realize that I'm always playing a video game, but it's never really a conscious recognition. I go about my business in the game because I am finding it enjoyable or whatever. Usually when I realize I am playing a video game, it's because something unpleasant has happened (whether in the controls, the story, or whatever). So in that sense, I find that is what it means to be "video gamey" even in a video game.

JMO

[Reznik23]

The main problem I have with the "slowly wearing hp down" type bossfights is that they can get really dull & tedious really quickly & just drag on way too long. I like to see bossfights that have more strategic involvement than that, where different & clever application of techniques & tactics decide the fight rather than just hammering away seemingly for ever.

[Renmiri1]

Meh, I like the "video gamey" aspect of it. It's like Final Fantasy always has Cid, Chocobos and moogles, DA has Bodham and Sandal, Mario has Mario, Zelda has slingshots, etc... Is part of the tradition and feels like meeting an old friend. Having to sweat bullets and level up / gear up / gain skills on the talent tree before you can kill a boss and finish the game is part of that familiar feeling.

But that's just me. And even myself, on a second, 3rd.. play through, I get bored of the mini bosses and wish i had a way to skip a fight. New game plus, (with no dynamic enemy leveling), works because I can basically one-shot everything up to the final battles ^^

[Nightdragon8]

so you want 1 hit fights with both enamies and boss fights.... quite frankly it doesn't really work too well.. even the most "realistic" game Mount&Blade still use hitpoints. because quite frankly getting 1 shotted over and over agian sucks.

Another game that doesn't really use hp as much would be the Arma series. Playing that on "hard" aka realistic its seriously hard. and its not like the computer cheats either

[Allan Schumacher]

Nightdragon8 wrote...

so you want 1 hit fights with both enamies and boss fights.... quite frankly it doesn't really work too well.. even the most "realistic" game Mount&Blade still use hitpoints. because quite frankly getting 1 shotted over and over agian sucks.

Another game that doesn't really use hp as much would be the Arma series. Playing that on "hard" aka realistic its seriously hard. and its not like the computer cheats either

No, I think you're misrepresenting my perspective.  I also wouldn't equate Mount and Blade as being "the most Realistic game."  Having said that, I do think it's combat system is really well done and I love the way they incorporate physics into it.

My issue is NOT in terms of having final conflicts with an antagonist.  The two games I alluded to earlier were Fallout and Planescape: Torment.  IMO the most satisfying endings in both of those games were the ones where my character didn't have to fight the final boss.  In fact, in Planescape: Torment fighting the final boss comes at a cost for the character.

I liked both of those because I found them so interesting and a really well done, and creative divergence from what I see in a lot of other games.  It left me pleasantly surprised.

I've already stated I have no issue with the Archdemon fight, nor do I even want "one hit kills" in the game.  I want something that is fun and enjoyable, and for example, I found the fight against Saren (after convincing him to stand down) to be something that was not particularly fun, and in fact diminished the enjoyment I had just received moments earlier by successfully convincing him that his perspective was wrong.  That part was epic win and a great conclusion to the narrative.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 19 avril 2013 - 05:26 .

[Dave of Canada]

Nightdragon8 wrote...

so you want 1 hit fights with both enamies and boss fights....

Don't see exactly where anyone said that.

even the most "realistic" game Mount&Blade still use hitpoints. because quite frankly getting 1 shotted over and over agian sucks.

As someone who plays Mount & Blade almost religiously, it's far from realistic and never attempts itself to be as such.

Even then, most multiplayer matches in Mount & Blade does lead to people near one-shotting because people use bows / firearms and seek defensive positions as they fire upon the crowd of enemy players. Getting head-shotted when ambushed is one of the most insulting things because you die before you can do anything, as "realism" would imply.

The only time where health even matters is once you've over-leveled most of the content or you're playing on easier difficulties where enemy damage is reduced significantly. Trying to win a tourney on normal / hard difficulty is ridiculously difficult and has little to do with health bloat.

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

Corypheus and the Wraith required to struggle against the horrible, horrible pathfinding. The fight wasn't about any kind of skill - it was making sure that each party member actually moved fast enough to react to the ridiculous damage that was being influced per unit time. On easy difficulties this was, of course, trivial. 

But on nightmare the game turned into fighting the camera and crappy AI pathfinding, because you needed very fine movements that the game just was not designed to deal with.

It was even worse than that, in fact, as the Corypheus encounter taught you to micromanage movement so as to deal with the pathfinding issues, but once you learned that the encounter became trivial because the dog could kill all of Corypheus's minions.  Yes, the dog would sometimes die, but it could eventually be resummoned.  Eventually, the minions were all gone.

The Arishok battle was much the same.  He could be defeated using the dog as the primary damage dealer, and simply keeping Hawke out of harm's way by kiting.  Yes, it takes forever (because the dog summon has a cooldown, and the dog dies over and over again), but it works.

Combined with patience, the infinitely resummonable dog removed all challenge from many encounters.

[Sylvius the Mad]

jillabender wrote...

I completely agree - needing to wait for a character's animation to finish before they would carry out the command to move also added to the problem.

That animation problem is the entire basis for my insistence that DA2's combat is less responsive than DAO's combat, despite the opposite being a stated design goal.

[Foolsfolly]

@Allan

I remember a situation where, playing Metal Gear Solid on the PSX, I was in the smelting area, and I was hiding against a wall and a soldier was patrolling on a metal plank (so I couldn't sneak up behind him). As he got to me, he turned, around, so I immediately popped out from the cover with my pistol out, lined him up in the back, and shot him. He then blinked 3 times (he's invincible during that time!) then turned around and started shooting at me, and the full alarm was sounded. It was certainly "video gamey" and not in a positive way.

That's just terrible. Like if I was enjoying the game I'd have to just mutter "That's stupid" and move on from there. But if I was already kinda meh to the game it would be a deal breaker for me completing the game at all.

[Allan Schumacher]

@Foolsfolly

In general I really liked the original MGS, but it definitely had some "legacy" from older school game design. It was more a realization that I shouldn't treat it as a "realistic" game (which is easy to do, given the content). The idea of not just being run and gun was definitely fun. It more just made me alter my perception of the game, and to play it within its scope. It's still one of my favourite games on the PSX, although upon replays I realize it's a bit too... "educational" haha.

Alpha Protocol sort of suffered a bit by the perception of realism to some, I think, because of its setting. Very early on I realized that the game wasn't really intended to be realistic (stealth makes you actually invisible), so I quickly considered it just an abstraction to demonstrate that Mike was able to do pretty phenomenal things.

It didn't alter my enjoyment in the slightest (one of my all time favs), but I know it did for some.

[Face of Evil]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Combined with patience, the infinitely resummonable dog removed all challenge from many encounters.

I can't imagine the countless hours of tedium involved in such a strategy. Point me out a person willing to employ DA2's dog to defeat his enemies and I'll show you a person who's a) got way too much time on his hands and sort of missed the point of playing video games in the first place, which is to have fun and share in a sense of vicarious accomplishment.

Modifié par Face of Evil, 19 avril 2013 - 06:16 .

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

jillabender wrote...

I completely agree - needing to wait for a character's animation to finish before they would carry out the command to move also added to the problem.

That animation problem is the entire basis for my insistence that DA2's combat is less responsive than DAO's combat, despite the opposite being a stated design goal.

I wonder why they did that. Were they maybe trying to clear up the DA:O problem where characters would perform the animations but the actions  the animations were for wouldn't happen? My guess back then was that there was some sort of mismatch between the action queues and the animation queues.

Modifié par AlanC9, 19 avril 2013 - 06:15 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Face of Evil wrote...

I can't imagine the countless hours of tedium involved in such a strategy. Point me out a person willing to employ DA2's dog to defeat his enemies and I'll show you a person who's a) got way too much time on his hands and sort of missed the point of playing video games in the first place, which is to have fun.

I don't play video games.  I roleplay characters.

And what I described is exactly how I fought Corypheus.  Against the Arishok I also used cold spells, as there was no danger to Hawke when the Arishok's attention was focused on the dog.

[Face of Evil]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I don't play video games.  I roleplay characters.

Well, nice meeting ya.

*Backs away slowly without making eye contact*

Modifié par Face of Evil, 19 avril 2013 - 06:21 .