809 réponses à ce sujet

[9TailsFox]

MisanthropePrime wrote...

To everyone who wants to "skip" the gameplay for the story, I've gotta ask: when you go to the movies, do you close your eyes or plug your ears?

You compering game with move.Then you order tea and get pepsi are you happy? What's the difference between stabbing same dragon for 30 min. and 3 min. if result is the same. 

[Ieldra]

Xilizhra wrote...

How the hell does it impact others' gaming preferences if there is an option to skip combat encounters?

Apparently because it creates a disincentive for other game developers to try to integrate combat with story in any way if a new precedent develops, making combat more and more disassociated with the universe in which it takes place, which would also probably make the combat worse overall. Or so I've heard.

As if developers actually wanted to do such things. ME3 has excellent combat/story integration, and I'd take any bet the people who created ME3's missions are much more content with what they made than DA2's. 

"Make combat enjoyable for everyone" is a good idea in theory, but it won't happen. For some people, the only way to make it enjoyable is to reduce the time spent with it. I'm not one of those, btw. I played ME2 and ME3 on Insanity. Play ME3 on Casual, and the combat is over reasonably fast as well. But DA2 is different, and anway if Bioware wants to make games that appeal to a larger base, they need to take into account that for some who like their stories, most combat is a chore.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 05 juillet 2013 - 11:45 .

[Xilizhra]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

How the hell does it impact others' gaming preferences if there is an option to skip combat encounters?

Apparently because it creates a disincentive for other game developers to try to integrate combat with story in any way if a new precedent develops, making combat more and more disassociated with the universe in which it takes place, which would also probably make the combat worse overall. Or so I've heard.

As if developers actually wanted to do such things. ME3 has excellent combat/story integration, and I'd take any bet the people who created ME3's missions are much more content with what they made than DA2's. 

"Make combat enjoyable for everyone" is a good idea in theory, but it won't happen. For some people, the only way to make it enjoyable is to reduce the time spent with it. I'm not one of those, btw. I played ME2 and ME3 on Insanity. Play ME3 on Casual, and the combat is over reasonably fast as well. But DA2 is different, and anway if Bioware wants to make games that appeal to a larger base, they need to take into account that for some who like their stories, combat is a chore.

What of DAO's combat?

[Ieldra]

deatharmonic wrote...
If this can be done without it being detrimental to the quality of the games ordinary combat experience, and it's optional then I wouldn't really be against it. However, out of curiosity I have to wonder what will become of games if you can just skip dialogue and combat. Why not ask for better implemented combat? Make developers think of ways to improve rather than just add a skip button. Same applies for dialogue too.

One doesn't preclude the other. I recall that Bioware was somewhat surprised by their telemetry data about ME2, in particular by the fact that dialogue was skipped less often than they believed it would be. Well, that was because ME2 had pretty good dialogue, for a game anyway.

In the same way "people (don't) skip combat" could be used as an indicator for developers that people like or don't like the combat in their games. I wouldn't skip combat in ME2 or ME3 because it's actually fun, but someone who plays exclusively for the story still might. I don't see how anyone can lose with such an option.

[Ieldra]

Xilizhra wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

How the hell does it impact others' gaming preferences if there is an option to skip combat encounters?

Apparently because it creates a disincentive for other game developers to try to integrate combat with story in any way if a new precedent develops, making combat more and more disassociated with the universe in which it takes place, which would also probably make the combat worse overall. Or so I've heard.

As if developers actually wanted to do such things. ME3 has excellent combat/story integration, and I'd take any bet the people who created ME3's missions are much more content with what they made than DA2's. 

"Make combat enjoyable for everyone" is a good idea in theory, but it won't happen. For some people, the only way to make it enjoyable is to reduce the time spent with it. I'm not one of those, btw. I played ME2 and ME3 on Insanity. Play ME3 on Casual, and the combat is over reasonably fast as well. But DA2 is different, and anway if Bioware wants to make games that appeal to a larger base, they need to take into account that for some who like their stories, combat is a chore.

What of DAO's combat?

DAO didn't have those excessive waves and much fewer enemies in most encounters. Playing it on Casual reduces the time you spend with its combat significantly. Except for Cadash Thaig in the Stone Prisoner DLC, which uses a wave mechanism very similar to DA2's. In fact, DA2 feels like they took the combat encounter script from Stone Prisoner's Deepstalker encounters and applied it to every combat encounter in DA2.

Note: I didn't have a problem with DAO's combat until I played a warrior (which I do rarely). I see this as a class-related problem, not a problem with DAO's combat as a whole.

[Boycott Bioware]

Bioware is game company, not movie producer. It is sad when this issue even exist

Skip combat is ridiculous as well as skip the story

What i think to solve it is combat is related with the whole things, i mean not like before combat and the whole thing is separated, it even worse in DA2 because DA2 is a story told and the story teller is in the story, when the story teller is dead in combat, who tell the story?

What i mean is combat is not just for a sake of need a combat

[Cheylus]

I don't know. For me some fights can be parts of the story. Dialogs and, basically, words aren't the only way to tell something.

Modifié par Cheylus, 05 juillet 2013 - 12:18 .

[Pedrak]

They should just make the combat better, and with less filler encounters with trash mobs.

If they did, people would generally not want to skip it - and even those who did could simply choose the easiest difficulty level.

[Boycott Bioware]

Combat mechanic department must always work with the writer and designer, what happen in DA2 is they work separately i assume that is why there are many inconsistency such as the player class and specialization vs the world the character live in (Mage Hawk issue, Templar/Reaver issue...ect) and non-sensible combat timing such as Isabella is waiting for Hawke at the town, Hawke is fighting waves of enemies near her, then when click on Isabella she says "There you are!" like nothing happened few minutes ago


Edit : Oh yes the Donnic date in Hang Man and guardsmen traitor case clashing at the same time, Hawke and Co is blowing up the pub, Donnic just sit there waiting for Aveline

Edit 2 : Donnic walk return to the office in Low Town after being saved, Hawke and Co is blowing up Low Town fighting waves of enemies along the way of Donnic path, Donnic pretend nothing happen

Modifié par Qistina, 05 juillet 2013 - 12:36 .

[Mykel54]

I think the main problem are the waves, which are annoying regardless of which difficulty you play on. Otherwise, like in DAO, the difficulty settings would allow people to customise their experience, from beating the game quickly and easily, to being challenged and having to prepare and pause a lot more. The waves makes the difficulty settings mean less, because they are there for everyone, so all from casuals to hardcore players must deal with them. I wouldn´t call that good game design.

[Ziggeh]

Cheylus wrote...

I don't know. For me some fights can be parts of the story. Dialogs and, basically, words aren't the only way to tell something.

Yeah, to an extent. There are definitely pacing issues involved. Knowing you've fought through an army to get to a point is a different position to knowing you should have. But while that might work in say, the deep roads, where it's atmosphere depends on constant danger, not so much on the streets of Kirkwall, where another pack of trash is just another pack of trash. 

[Pedrak]

Mykel54 wrote...

I think the main problem are the waves, which are annoying regardless of which difficulty you play on. [...] The waves makes the difficulty settings mean less, because they are there for everyone, so all from casuals to hardcore players must deal with them. I wouldn´t call that good game design.

Precisely. That's the point I wanted to make.

[Cheylus]

Ziggeh wrote...

Cheylus wrote...

I don't know. For me some fights can be parts of the story. Dialogs and, basically, words aren't the only way to tell something.

Yeah, to an extent. There are definitely pacing issues involved. Knowing you've fought through an army to get to a point is a different position to knowing you should have. But while that might work in say, the deep roads, where it's atmosphere depends on constant danger, not so much on the streets of Kirkwall, where another pack of trash is just another pack of trash. 

I agree. I don't know if there is a precise name for people managing the pace and "writing" of combat, but what was done in DA2 wasn't very good.
I also read they acknowledged that issue, so I'm not worried for the future

[Rawgrim]

If you don`t like combat and want to skip it, rpgs are not the games for you.

[xkg]

Rawgrim wrote...

If you don`t like combat and want to skip it, rpgs are not the games for you.

hahaha ... ok that was good.

If you think RPG == combat, then you have no clue.
How about RPG games with no combat at all like Harvest Moon etc, or one of the largest MMO RPGs - Second Life ?

And to all the others naysayers - this question has been already asked - so one more time:
How does something optional (read - something you don't have to use) affect your game ?

[Rawgrim]

xkg wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

If you don`t like combat and want to skip it, rpgs are not the games for you.

hahaha ... ok that was good.

If you think RPG == combat, then you have no clue.
How about RPG games with no combat at all like Harvest Moon etc, or one of the largest MMO RPGs - Second Life ?

And to all the others naysayers - this question has been already asked - so one more time:
How does something optional (read - something you don't have to use) affect your game ?

RPGs arn`t all about combat, no. But when the game has weapons, deadly spells, and things like that, its a good bet that combat might be included in said game.

Harvest Moon = a childrens game. Thats why it has no combat.


To answer your question: Things like that usually leads to even more simplification\\streamlining\\dumbing down of other things in the game. Thats why people are wary of them.

[Stalker]

Just skipping fights or even altering the game settings to spawn less enemies is a bad idea. It draws away from the whole experience when you can exactly set your preferences like that.
I do however agree that DA2's combat was such a chore that I set the difficulty on casual and it was still extremely annoying.

Best solution would probably be to make the difficulties change the overall effort required. Like you said: even on casual you were bothered by long, countless, plot-related useless encounters...
OR the other solution is to make combat fun to begin with. In ME3 I wouldn't have had a problem if I spent more time in combat for example. I ran through countless enemies there as well, but I was not even slightly bothered by it, because it was very fluid combat that made sense in the universe and progressed the story with every wave. Not so in DA2 where you spend half of the game fighting bandits and cavespiders.

Modifié par Mr Massakka, 05 juillet 2013 - 02:03 .

[Ieldra]

Mykel54 wrote...
I think the main problem are the waves, which are annoying regardless of which difficulty you play on. Otherwise, like in DAO, the difficulty settings would allow people to customise their experience, from beating the game quickly and easily, to being challenged and having to prepare and pause a lot more. The waves makes the difficulty settings mean less, because they are there for everyone, so all from casuals to hardcore players must deal with them. I wouldn´t call that good game design.

That, and the sheer number of trash enemies compared with the fact that too much combat was just filler and served no purpose whatsoever. Some of the Cerberus fights in ME3 were annoying the same way, but mostly in the N7 missions, and even there there were one or two big fights per mission and six of these missions over the whole game. Quite acceptable even if you don't exactly like them.

I agree that better design of combat encounters should be the first priority. Also, I don't necessarily want to skip combat altogether - though I think this is an idea which has merit at least for fights unrelated to the plot if such things must exist at all - but getting it over with fast regardless of how good it is, that I find a very necessary option. 

Modifié par Ieldra2, 05 juillet 2013 - 02:01 .

[Wulfram]

Rawgrim wrote...

If you don`t like combat and want to skip it, rpgs are not the games for you.

Why needlessly exclude potential paying customers from your product?

I think in the end Bioware RPGs are primarily about the story, anyway.  I mean, KotOR is remembered as a great game and it certainly isn't because of the combat.

[nightscrawl]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Usually, whenever I get bored with the combat in other games - as can happen even with the best of them after enough playthroughs - I set the difficulty to Casual and combat is over reasonably fast. Only, not in DA2. Most enemies don't die any slower on Normal than on Casual, their number is drawing things out beyond my patience, and there is always the next wave, and the next, and the next. No matter that I can sit back and let my team handle the fight almost without doing anything myself, setting the difficulty to Casual in DA2 does not reduce the time wasted in combat significantly (and in DA2 it was a waste of time 90% of the time, as opposed to, say, ME3).

So here's what I'd like to see: an option to reduce the number of waves in a combat encounter to one, or any other way to get combat over with real fast. I don't care if it costs me xp.

Is it the illusion of the time wasted or actual time you take? If there were a single, more powerful wave that took you the same amount of time to defeat as three waves at one-third strength, would you be satisfied? In that case, the illusion of wasted time, and of a never ending fight sequence, is hampering your enjoyment and making the combat tedious.

Ieldra2 wrote...

Except for Cadash Thaig in the Stone Prisoner DLC, which uses a wave mechanism very similar to DA2's. In fact, DA2 feels like they took the combat encounter script from Stone Prisoner's Deepstalker encounters and applied it to every combat encounter in DA2.

Ugh I just did that area. So irritating.

Modifié par nightscrawl, 05 juillet 2013 - 02:14 .

[crimzontearz]

Sure....can we have one in Dark Souls as well??

[Seth_Holloway]

I think Bioware accomplished this pretty well in ME3:

Narative mode = Pro-Story + Quicker Combat
Action mode = Intense combat + Less Story
Classic RPG mode = Full combat + Full Story.

I dont see how this would inconvience or dissapoint anyone. It allows the player the freedom to choose what aspects of the game to focus on.

My personal preference would lean towards RPG for my first few playthroughs, then Narative for minor story elements I may have missed.

I'd likley never play 'Action' mode.

To my way of thinking removing story decsions almost removes the point of playing a plot driven RPG, But that is only my opinion, if people enjoy the combat more than the narrative thats awesome, and they should be able to play their game the way they want to.

I'd pretty much support any feature that allows players to customise their game to improve their own experience, so long as that improvement didnt restrict the freedoms or enjoyment of others.

[xkg]

Rawgrim wrote...

To answer your question: Things like that usually leads to even more simplificationstreamliningdumbing down of other things in the game. Thats why people are wary of them.

But you can already literally skip the most important (for many people) part of the game - the story - by space/esc through the dialogs and ignoring the codex entries. You can finish the game with no clue what was it about.

Does the story suffer or are there other parts of the game dumbed down becuase of that ? If you can please give some examples.

[Rawgrim]

xkg wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

To answer your question: Things like that usually leads to even more simplificationstreamliningdumbing down of other things in the game. Thats why people are wary of them.

But you can already literally skip the most important (for many people) part of the game - the story - by space/esc through the dialogs and ignoring the codex entries. You can finish the game with no clue what was it about.

Does the story suffer or are there other parts of the game dumbed down becuase of that ? If you can please give some examples.

Tactics requires thinking. Everything else is allready being spoonfed to you anyway.


I buy bioware games for the story, dialogue, and the combat though. And I love reading the codexes.

[Ieldra]

nightscrawl wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Usually, whenever I get bored with the combat in other games - as can happen even with the best of them after enough playthroughs - I set the difficulty to Casual and combat is over reasonably fast. Only, not in DA2. Most enemies don't die any slower on Normal than on Casual, their number is drawing things out beyond my patience, and there is always the next wave, and the next, and the next. No matter that I can sit back and let my team handle the fight almost without doing anything myself, setting the difficulty to Casual in DA2 does not reduce the time wasted in combat significantly (and in DA2 it was a waste of time 90% of the time, as opposed to, say, ME3).

So here's what I'd like to see: an option to reduce the number of waves in a combat encounter to one, or any other way to get combat over with real fast. I don't care if it costs me xp.

Is it the illusion of the time wasted or actual time you take? If there were a single, more powerful wave that took you the same amount of time to defeat as three waves at one-third strength, would you be satisfied? In that case, the illusion of wasted time, and of a never ending fight sequence, is hampering your enjoyment and making the combat tedious.

If there was a single wave with stronger enemies, the time required to finish it would be more significantly affected by the difficulty setting. The most numerous enemies in DA2 are one-hit kills regardless of whether you play on Normal or on Casual, so the time required to finish the fight is only affected by the number of enemies and the wave sequence.

As for whether the impression is an illusion, I haven't taken the time but I don't think so. On the other hand, there may be other factors involved since even the N7 missions in ME3 weren't nearly as annoying. Or it's just that there weren't as many of those.