132 réponses à ce sujet

[TsaiMeLemoni]

Part of me would love a DA spin-off that has combat like XCOM Declassified.

[Allan Schumacher]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Filament wrote...

And spamming the button isn't intended design nor even particularly true, but we've been over that before.

I don't recall going over that with you, actually.

We don't actually know if it was intended. The very fact that it even exists, that spamming the button actually even makes me attack faster(as opposed to DA:O where it interrupted your attack and thus nullified it), makes me suspect it was.

I'd consider it a bug.

I'd also consider DAO's situation to be a design bug.  Issuing the same attack order shouldn't interrupt, as far as I'm concerned.

It's more a symptom of the game system being designed and implemented differently, than any sort of nefarious scheming on our part.


EDIT: I see quotes from Seb in the thread now.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 08 août 2013 - 07:01 .

[Maria Caliban]

EntropicAngel wrote...
So I will retract my claim about DA ][ turning "twitch" (except for the ARW, but that was a boss fight abstraction--mildly understandable).

Darth Brotarian wrote...

I just want combat where I do not need to rely on auto-attack for a default attack, where my character responds quickly and almost instantly to my commands, and where combat has a faster pace than watching molasses colored paint drying.

You have almost LITERALLY the entire market at your disposal.

Why does DA need to change?

Because it's not fun and it's not tactical.

DA isn't changing though. It's remaining like DA II in that none of those elements will be there.

[phunx]

I prefer the tactical approach and agree with other posters who stated there's a lot of other ARPGs on the market.

With that said, DA2 had some twitch abilities that IMO worked quite well. "Evade" for rogues saved me plenty of times in the last moment. "Glyph of Paralysis/Repulsion" and "Dispel Magic" protected mages (sometimes the whole party) in clutch situations as well.

What I would like to mention (a bit off-topic) is "plainess" of cross-class combos. I feel like DA:O's system with different combinations was just really exciting to use. Even discovering different ones was exciting. DA2 with it cross-combos only added extra damage and no other cool effects we got from DA:O. I hope more of different effects return, even if it's not mages who are causing them.

[Realmzmaster]

IMHO, I do not believe that my ability to use a controller to quickly push a button should have any affect on my character's ability in a party based crpg. For example if I am controlling a companion or the PC and that character has low dexterity and dodge capability my reflex skill with the controller should not compensate. What is the point in building a character if by using my reflexes alone I can win. I want to put my strategic and tactical abilities to work.

Yes, I like turn based games (TOEE is one of my favorites), but I am content with real time with pause (like BG1, BG2, NWN and NWN2..

[OLDIRTYBARON]

I wouldn't be surprised if the same thing that happened with Origins (and DA2, to an extent) happens with DA3. That is, the gameplay and will be tailored somewhat to the platform you're playing on. Isometrics and "pause and play" gameplay was intended for the PC versions, while on consoles you were expected to mash a little more. Treat the game like an action RPG instead of a classic CRPG.

From what little we've seen of the game I don't expect DA3 to be any different, really.

[Rawgrim]

Realmzmaster wrote...

IMHO, I do not believe that my ability to use a controller to quickly push a button should have any affect on my character's ability in a party based crpg. For example if I am controlling a companion or the PC and that character has low dexterity and dodge capability my reflex skill with the controller should not compensate. What is the point in building a character if by using my reflexes alone I can win. I want to put my strategic and tactical abilities to work.

Yes, I like turn based games (TOEE is one of my favorites), but I am content with real time with pause (like BG1, BG2, NWN and NWN2..

Spot on.

[Shevy]

A little bit faster than Origins, especially more responsive (attacks should be done faster after I gave the command) and more dynamic animations, but and that's a BUT, it should be as tactical as Origins was or even more and NOT as DA II with over-the-top animations, 3 twohanded sword swings per second and 30 trash mobs at a time which don't use many attacks besides auto-attack.

Fewer enemies, but some which work together, are trying to focus your weak spots; tough encounter that aren't created through the sheer number of trash mobs.

While Dark Souls doesn't have to deal with party based combat, that's the combat system I'am looking for. Challenging, fair und rewarding.

As always, ymmv.

[Leanansidhe]

I don't understand how people can keep saying Origins was tactical.  Once you played the game a few times, you learned where all the enemies were placed, which made combat trivial.

Sneak up, open a door, pull the camera way out, and have Wynne hit the mage a room over with a Mana Clash without them ever knowing you were there.   

Combat was kind of a joke in Origins.  Not to mention the slower than molasses animations.

People might complain about the waves in DA2, but at least they kept things interesting and dynamic.

I can pretty much sleepwalk through Origins.  DA2 actually takes some attention.

[abnocte]

uzivatel wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Positioning tactics, pre-combat stealth and scouting, the need to be careful with AoE

Yeah, right ... did you even play the same game?

The positioninig tactics were extremely basic, in most fights completely unnecessary.
Pre-combat scouting was pointless, since the enemies were highlighted on your map, many pre-scripted combats would start even if your characters were using stealth and the rogue would get in the way of AoEs ... in theory anyway.
Some of the best AoE spells had no friendly fire and considering the abundance of armours with elemental protection, you cold go pretty crazy with spells without worrying much about the consequences.

Enemies were only highlighted if you had the survival skill. Depending on its level you could detect enemies based on their class level. Meaning that the highligths on the map weren't to be trusted blindly.


About the topic at hand, this is not one of that times when you can ask for a toggle. This is a design decision that affects the core of the game.
An option to have twitch/action mode would mean the implementation of a totally different game mechanics to support it. Not only that, it will cause conflict with other design decisions ( whats the point of having dex/cons/etc points if combat is resolved by the player's ability to press buttons? )

And I remember that the twitch option in DA2 consoles was a bug, not an actual implementation of a different combat mechanics.


Anyway we still don't know what we are going to get this time, its a new engine afterall.

[Fast Jimmy]

And I remember that the twitch option in DA2 consoles was a bug, not an actual implementation of a different combat mechanics.

I realize that may have not been intentional, but this is little consolation to those console players like myself who don't have their systems hooked up to the internet.

I can't get through DA2 because of the combat, exploding blood bags and terrible animation glitches with every other cutscene.

[Fast Jimmy]

I'm thinking that there should just be an option starting out in the game to say "twitch" or "tactical" that does nothing more other than automatically change the difficulty to the easiest so people can button mash.

[FieryDove]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I'm thinking that there should just be an option starting out in the game to say "twitch" or "tactical" that does nothing more other than automatically change the difficulty to the easiest so people can button mash.

Haha you made me laugh. Almost a bad thing as I was taking a drink of java. lol

They could make two games. One party based and one solo action/twitch rpg. I'll pass on the solo action rpg, I already have too many of *those*. thanks.

[CronoDragoon]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Sluggish--again, subjective, and hard to quantify. What is sluggish? What is sharp?

I would say sluggish is defined by the gap of time between when you tell your character to do something, and when it actually does it (an unintended gap of time, not casting times, for example). Now, I can definitely see how PC gamers would have a higher opinion of Origins' combat since point/click is built for PC, but personally I did not think it translated well to consoles. The most obvious examples of sluggish combat were playing as a melee with grouped enemies. Targeting did not work all that great, first of all. But more importantly was the tendency of the warrior to get hung up on enemies on the way to the enemy I targeted (a problem compounded by the poor targeting). Often this resulted in my warrior politely skirting around enemies at half-pace before lining up for a swing. That pressing X again screwed things up often led to confusion on my part, since I would press X to attack an enemy, see nothing but my character banging into other enemies, and think it didn't register or something. So I'd press X again and he'd attack a different enemy.

It was just sort of a mess.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 08 août 2013 - 02:55 .

[Fast Jimmy]

CronoDragoon wrote...

EntropicAngel wrote...

Sluggish--again, subjective, and hard to quantify. What is sluggish? What is sharp?

I would say sluggish is defined by the gap of time between when you tell your character to do something, and when it actually does it (an unintended gap of time, not casting times, for example). Now, I can definitely see how PC gamers would have a higher opinion of Origins' combat since point/click is built for PC, but personally I did not think it translated well to consoles. The most obvious examples of sluggish combat were playing as a melee with grouped enemies. Targeting did not work all that great, first of all. But more importantly was the tendency of the warrior to get hung up on enemies on the way to the enemy I targeted (a problem compounded by the poor targeting). Often this resulted in my warrior politely skirting around enemies at half-pace before lining up for a swing. That pressing X again screwed things up often led to confusion on my part, since I would press X to attack an enemy, see nothing but my character banging into other enemies, and think it didn't register or something. So I'd press X again and he'd attack a different enemy.

It was just sort of a mess.

I can almost categorically say this will not be an issue with DA:I. Given that it is based on Frostbite3, which is an engine created for shooters and, hence, excels at collision detecting, there will be no shuffling to a target or hitting something that is not there.

So rest easy - while DA:I may be tactical and not ridiculous ninja-rogue jumps, nothing about its underlying systems would indicate that it will suffer the same "sluggish" qualities you are talking about.

[CronoDragoon]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
So rest easy - while DA:I may be tactical and not ridiculous ninja-rogue jumps, nothing about its underlying systems would indicate that it will suffer the same "sluggish" qualities you are talking about.

Yeah, I wasn't really worried about DA: I. Just trying to give my perspective on why console players might see improvements in some areas of DA2's combat over Origins, specifically as regards "sluggishness" or "unresponsiveness".

[Jaulen]

Ieldra2 wrote...

There's nothing I hate more about DA2 than its combat, and I know of no game I otherwise like where I hate the combat so much. I'm usually tolerant of sub-optimal combat gameplay, but in DA2 the insane speed, the over-the-top animations and the wave mechanics affected my enjoyment of the game as a whole. It's good that they're going to reduce those elements.

DAO did nothing wrong unless you were a warrior. The slow animations and limited reactivity were mostly a class-specific problem, not a problem with combat as a whole. Yes, that needed speeding up, but not to the insane speed of DA2's combat which made tactics impossible without pausing every two seconds, and even then your orders were often outdated because things were moving so fast. 

I have to agree with this.

I liked in DA:O Having to do tactics for my crew, being able to pre-cast spells or attacks....and playing as a rogue was a good balance between the OP of a mage and the slowness of a warrior....

I disliked the 'you can look away from the screen and just keep madly pushing 'X' and win 90% of encounters' combat of DA:2. Also, I never set ANY tactics for my companions on ANY of the plathroughs I did (and I did a lot).  But I did like the more responsive, faster combat (although the animations and exploding bodies were....wtf?). I liked the Mage casting animations. Much better than the simple 'stab the air with the staff' casting from DA:O

[PillarBiter]

 I agree with the OP, but then again, I'm an action game fan. So I'm somewhat biased.

That said, DAO's combat was good fun in it's own right, but I didnt play DAO for the gameplay. I'm hoping I doesn't turn out to be more O then II, though. That'd be a downer for me. And many others, I'm assuming.

[byarru]

Nononono, let them fix that terrible DA2 combat animation. I don't want to see all this jumping and flying of acrobats again

[philippe willaume]

dp

Modifié par philippe willaume, 08 août 2013 - 06:21 .