283 réponses à ce sujet

[zMataxa]

sorry dp.

Modifié par zMataxa, 09 août 2013 - 05:53 .

[zMataxa]

[quote]zMataxa wrote...


Quote other poster (sorry accidentally deleted your alias)
[/quote]

""Well, actual fighting means moving economically and effectively, not like a hot rod samurai ninja on meth. If they want to be flashy, fine. But a little part of it has to be somewhat convincing.""

[/quote]

___________________________



See...for me if one person can freeze others or call forth fireballs...or a little guy can defeat a dragon or an ogre...then for me  a hot rod smaurai ninja on meth fits right in  for me.

[/quote]

[slimgrin]

Enigmatick wrote...
TW2 is good example of this, Geralt moved flashy as hell but all of his moves are actually capable of being done by a Master Swordsman.

Ehh...not all of them. I've ragged on CDPR for this as well. I think devs get too exaggerated on this front. I'd welcome a return to a more realistic and visceral style.

Modifié par slimgrin, 09 août 2013 - 05:39 .

[zMataxa]

Enigmatick wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

zMataxa wrote...

Ariella wrote...

Jayne126 wrote...

Roundhouse kicking a flask instead of simply throwing it was just retarded.

Not to mention the constant jumping and back flipping. It tried waaaay too hard to be "cool".

And tromping around, back hunched over, every attack looking exactly the same was better how???

I'll take visually interesting over stats any day.

This ^  +1

Well, actual fighting means moving economically and effectively, not like a hot rod samurai ninja on meth. If they want to be flashy, fine. But a little part of it has to be somewhat convincing.

TW2 is good example of this, Geralt moved flashy as hell but all of his moves are actually capable of being done by a Master Swordsman.

_______________

I just don't get that.
One moment you worry about realism ( doable by a master swordsman) - the next thing in TW2 - you're along side an elf, dwarf, and a mage (which don't exist and are not doable for the forseeable future).  I guess you're just drawing a line in terms of what you want to see in a different spot in the sand -  than me or someone else.
What a pain that must be for studios to figure out how to make enough mulla by appealing to enough of us with wide ranging tastes.:innocent:

[Sylvius the Mad]

When people talk about realism in a fantasy setting, they're usually talking about the rules of that reality, not ours. So the elves and the magic aren't a problem, because the rules of the setting allow them. And those rules are clearly presented for us.

But that's not true with these melee attack animations. Everything else about how people move (running, for example) or how materials behave (falling rocks are heavy, metal holds an edge) is very much like the real world, and then these incongruous jumping and flipping about events happen. They don't fit the world that's been defined for us.

When reading a fantasy novel, the reader only needs to learn the rules of the setting insofar as they differ from reality. Everything else can be left with the reader assuming them to be unchanged from real world rules. If ever the plot then demands the rules behave a certain unexpected way, and that way wasn't previously established, then that plot even doesn't feel earned - it's arbitrary, and robs that story arc of any weight or authenticity.

The same is true with games. If swords are super light, that needs to be established in some non-combat and non-contrived way. If the PC can jump 3 metres in the air, that needs to be justified. Otherwise it's all just silly, and it prevents the events that take place in the world from mattering to the player, since they're all potentially arbitrary.

The player (or reader) needs to trust the author (or developer). If that trust is eliminated, the game (or book) doesn't work.

[zMataxa]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

When people talk about realism in a fantasy setting, they're usually talking about the rules of that reality, not ours. So the elves and the magic aren't a problem, because the rules of the setting allow them. And those rules are clearly presented for us.

But that's not true with these melee attack animations. Everything else about how people move (running, for example) or how materials behave (falling rocks are heavy, metal holds an edge) is very much like the real world, and then these incongruous jumping and flipping about events happen. They don't fit the world that's been defined for us.

When reading a fantasy novel, the reader only needs to learn the rules of the setting insofar as they differ from reality. Everything else can be left with the reader assuming them to be unchanged from real world rules. If ever the plot then demands the rules behave a certain unexpected way, and that way wasn't previously established, then that plot even doesn't feel earned - it's arbitrary, and robs that story arc of any weight or authenticity.

The same is true with games. If swords are super light, that needs to be established in some non-combat and non-contrived way. If the PC can jump 3 metres in the air, that needs to be justified. Otherwise it's all just silly, and it prevents the events that take place in the world from mattering to the player, since they're all potentially arbitrary.

The player (or reader) needs to trust the author (or developer). If that trust is eliminated, the game (or book) doesn't work.

_______

Thanx for your reply.
I do take issue with the flow of logic - but I do see where your priorities are coming from.

I guess I just have a different approach to fantasy.
For me - in fantasy there are NO rules.  Everything can be reinvented.
Elves can look this way or that way...gravity doesn't have to be OUR normal, materials can have totally different properties, and I don't need alot of explanation.
If I like the new appearance - like rogues flying through the air - then so be it.

I'll always love my DA2 flying rogue..with all the cool different moves.
Whereas - Dark souls or witcher moves are totally forgettable for me.

So yeah - i'd totally pay extra for exgagerated moves.
Threw that in for the Bioware mods

[Savber100]

o Ventus wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

What does that have to do with the animations? Point is, Bayonetta knows how to do a money shot, Hawke didn't. All of it was spastic and flashy.

... Those things I mentioned ARE the animations in Bayonetta?

How is something as relatively simple as swinging a sword at 2x normal speed on the same level of ridiculousness of what's in Bayonetta?

\\

The thing is that Bayonetta knows what it wanted to be. It fit the setting, the genre, and the rules set by the game developers. 

In DA2, it came across as schizophrenic. It wanted to be a realistic, dark fantasy RPG but at the same time allowed ridiclous, over-the-top animations that wasn't grounded in the setting of the game.

The problem isn't that fast, flashy combat is bad. It's how you show it within the context of your game that matters. 

[zMataxa]

Savber100 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

What does that have to do with the animations? Point is, Bayonetta knows how to do a money shot, Hawke didn't. All of it was spastic and flashy.

... Those things I mentioned ARE the animations in Bayonetta?

How is something as relatively simple as swinging a sword at 2x normal speed on the same level of ridiculousness of what's in Bayonetta?

The thing is that Bayonetta knows what it wanted to be. It fit the setting, the genre, and the rules set by the game developers. 

In DA2, it came across as schizophrenic. It wanted to be a realistic, dark fantasy RPG but at the same time allowed ridiclous, over-the-top animations that wasn't grounded in the setting of the game.

The problem isn't that fast, flashy combat is bad. It's how you show it within the context of your game that matters. 

_________
"....that wasn't grounded in the setting of the game."

It could be argued that.... by the fact that you -  as the warden with your friends have survived soooo many battles and insurmountable odds....THAT you must have have super abilities given to you.  You don't just handle a sword/staff/dagger/bow like the darkspawn...or you logically wouldn't be alive over time.  The odds are simply not logical for survival if you are about the same as your enemies.  So you must have special abilities that set you part and they are observable.  Ergo...your physical/spiritual abilities far exceed those of your enemies.   Just the Studio didn't focus on this or make it part of the codex.  AND they didn't have to.   THere it is on the screen.  YOUR "over the top animations" are actually naturally understood maifestations of why you are a hero that survives all.

To me that's what makes all the "over the top" animations fit in just fine.
No it's not traditional for many games.
That's fine with me.
I like out of the box - fresh air experiences.
But i get the preference of your mind.  You want fantasy and some parts of reality the way you like it to blend together.

Modifié par zMataxa, 09 août 2013 - 06:56 .

[o Ventus]

Savber100 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

What does that have to do with the animations? Point is, Bayonetta knows how to do a money shot, Hawke didn't. All of it was spastic and flashy.

... Those things I mentioned ARE the animations in Bayonetta?

How is something as relatively simple as swinging a sword at 2x normal speed on the same level of ridiculousness of what's in Bayonetta?

The thing is that Bayonetta knows what it wanted to be. It fit the setting, the genre, and the rules set by the game developers. 

In DA2, it came across as schizophrenic. It wanted to be a realistic, dark fantasy RPG but at the same time allowed ridiclous, over-the-top animations that wasn't grounded in the setting of the game.

The problem isn't that fast, flashy combat is bad. It's how you show it within the context of your game that matters. 

I don't recall DA ever trying to be "realistic".

"Dark" and "flashy combat" are not mutually exclusive. Look at Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood. That series is darker than anything in DA (except perhaps the broodmothers), and it's full of OTT anime fighting (primarily BECAUSE it's an anime).

[o Ventus]

slimgrin wrote...

Well, actual fighting means moving economically and effectively, not like a hot rod samurai ninja on meth. If they want to be flashy, fine. But a little part of it has to be somewhat convincing.

Hunching over like a gorilla and holding your arms out at odd angles while you swing a sword is hardly "economic and effective". Especially if you hunch over and jut your arms out while wielding a magical wooden staff.

[Uccio]

shinobi602 wrote...

I don't want to go back to the canned attack animations of DA: O, but also would like more fluidity to combat animations unlike the extremely twitchy animations of DA2.

Playing as a mage in DA2 is badass though.

Just let me play it as an action RPG if I wanted to.

I felt the opposite. Mage in DA2 was like a pole dancer, I had to fight my urge to throw dollar bills at the screen while watching the combat.

[Ieldra]

BeauRoger wrote...
I think it looked childish, ridiculous and completely out of place.

This x 10000000

I have no idea how anyone can think that was a good idea. Probably a suggestion of David "Awesome Button" Silverman. I hope that ridiculous stuff is completely gone in DAI. By all means, make impressive finishing moves for boss-type enemies. But if those things become commonplace, they make the game look like a parody.

Ukki wrote...
I felt the opposite. Mage in DA2 was like a pole dancer, I had to fight my urge to throw dollar bills at the screen while watching the combat.

Indeed. I have to keep myself from bursting out laughing every time I see that staff-thumping animation. Such things should be reserved for epic situations, and then have a really awesome effect (like Gandalf in Moria). They have no place in bandit fights.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 09 août 2013 - 08:15 .

[Sejborg]

Well. Some people like the over the top stupid action as seen in Die Hard 4.0 were you have Bruce Willis taking down a jet with a car. (DA2)

And some people like the more grounded action were you just have people shooting at eachother as seen in the first Die Hard. (DAO)

[Bleachrude]

Ah yes, the dea that a fantasy world where humans apparently can interbreed with dwarves and elves means that it naturally obeys the same laws as typical medieval europe....

That's a-ok..but the fact that a high level fighter can move faster than normal human movement...thats too much....

[Xilizhra]

This x 10000000

I have no idea how anyone can think that was a good idea. Probably a suggestion of David "Awesome Button" Silverman. I hope that ridiculous stuff is completely gone in DAI. By all means, make impressive finishing moves for boss-type enemies. But if those things become commonplace, they make the game look like a parody.

At least looking at it was interesting. DAO combat was less entertaining in many ways.

[RedArmyShogun]

DA2 was far too flashy, DA:O far too boring. Something in the middle would be nice. Also no more paratroopers please. If they must spawn have them come out of doors and manholes.

[redBadger14]

o Ventus wrote...

Savber100 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

What does that have to do with the animations? Point is, Bayonetta knows how to do a money shot, Hawke didn't. All of it was spastic and flashy.

... Those things I mentioned ARE the animations in Bayonetta?

How is something as relatively simple as swinging a sword at 2x normal speed on the same level of ridiculousness of what's in Bayonetta?

The thing is that Bayonetta knows what it wanted to be. It fit the setting, the genre, and the rules set by the game developers. 

In DA2, it came across as schizophrenic. It wanted to be a realistic, dark fantasy RPG but at the same time allowed ridiclous, over-the-top animations that wasn't grounded in the setting of the game.

The problem isn't that fast, flashy combat is bad. It's how you show it within the context of your game that matters. 

I don't recall DA ever trying to be "realistic".

"Dark" and "flashy combat" are not mutually exclusive. Look at Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood. That series is darker than anything in DA (except perhaps the broodmothers), and it's full of OTT anime fighting (primarily BECAUSE it's an anime).

Can we please get it through our heads that "realistic" in this context means going by the rules of the reality set by the world that was created, not the reality of the world we inhabit.

DA:O most of the fighting animations (sans mage) were realistic, although stances and movement were very robotic. DA2 fixed the movement and stance issue, but made the fighting animations very over-the-top and flashy, or manga-like as the OP put it.

A balance between what both games had, for DA:I would be nice.

[Aurora313]

I didn't mind the faster paced actions in the second game, but in the first game - particularly the rogues, every sword move for example had a different and unique animation. I kind of missed that.
There's also the fact that as cool as the combat animations were in 2, after the intial battle I quickly got very bored with them.

[draken-heart]

redBadger14 wrote...

Can we please get it through our heads that "realistic" in this context means going by the rules of the reality set by the world that was created, not the reality of the world we inhabit.

DA:O most of the fighting animations (sans mage) were realistic, although stances and movement were very robotic. DA2 fixed the movement and stance issue, but made the fighting animations very over-the-top and flashy, or manga-like as the OP put it.

A balance between what both games had, for DA:I would be nice.

For the Warrior, maybe. But the rogue would and should be moving alot more than "walk up to enemy, then swing like a warrior" in terms of combat, if not for the flare, which is what a rogue should be about.

[redBadger14]

draken-heart wrote...

redBadger14 wrote...

Can we please get it through our heads that "realistic" in this context means going by the rules of the reality set by the world that was created, not the reality of the world we inhabit.

DA:O most of the fighting animations (sans mage) were realistic, although stances and movement were very robotic. DA2 fixed the movement and stance issue, but made the fighting animations very over-the-top and flashy, or manga-like as the OP put it.

A balance between what both games had, for DA:I would be nice.

For the Warrior, maybe. But the rogue would and should be moving alot more than "walk up to enemy, then swing like a warrior" in terms of combat, if not for the flare, which is what a rogue should be about.

Well of course, that's what should stand out between the classes. What's the point of playing a Rogue if they are just as fast as a Warrior?

If they can find a healthy balance between how animations were in DA:O and DA2, and make sure the classes could be noticeably different in a number of ways, that would be ideal.

[Browneye_Vamp84]

I didn't mind what they had in DA:O or DA:2. DA:2 made playing a mage alittle bit more fun. In the middle of both and I'll be good.

[Veronix]

We are worried about speed of combat, here? How about in the story animations, victims die from one perfectly thrown dagger or an arrow to the head, but in the game, it takes like fifty hits to kill some mediocre opponent? Yeah, well, that is more ridiculous than the speed, to me. There is nothing realistic about the combat. Worrying about the speed seems trivial.

And it is quite annoying to run around collecting better weapons, runes, and armor, only to discover that the same type opponent you just easily killed, is suddenly much tougher, just because your character leveled up. I hate that in games. Why bother running around getting all the goodies, just to stay even with, or lose ground, to your enemies?

[Tarek]

say no to power rangers in DA

[xnode]

Zeldrik1389 wrote...

What games you played? If you played games like Fallout , BG, or Diablo, I gotta say they are harder than today's games. ....

Actually I was one of the guys coding back then for those games, they where not harder we just cheated to make them "seem" harder. Just fyi

Today's games can be actually more difficult to play as far as the difficulty of strat is concerned , I hate to say
it bud, but I think you have "back then envy" something like "the first girl friend remembrance" you think it's great now, back then if you actually remember all the crap that came with that time, many would say "Oh yeah, that sucked!"
.....

In the end most games made back then where very much a guessing game in slapping things together to actually make it playable. I remember coding a group fight where the designer required these fights to drop in variations based on player abilities.

It was a nightmare and just to many variables to even consider so we fixed it with level=variation=additional. Point being, games back in the day seem more difficult for the wrong reasons, not the right ones.

"we need to make this harder".... "Simple, more hp" , the AI was minimal my friend.

Modifié par xnode, 09 août 2013 - 07:08 .

[Maria Caliban]

Zeldrik1389 wrote...

Today's standard = jokingly easy compare to the 90s "standard" games like BG or D2, let alone real challenging games like DS.

Diablo 2 was a wonderfully simple and easy game. It's addictive quality was a combination of how much you could get done in 30 minutes plus the fact that if you quit, the level would reset.