883 réponses à ce sujet

[Nashiktal]

Korusus wrote...

Navasha wrote...

I am actually of the same mind.   When the battles got really intense in the DA games, I turned off the AI combat rules and issued orders individually to each character every few seconds.   The AI is good for easy difficulty levels or small confrontations where there is no real danger anyway.   Any major fight on nightmare difficulty usually is best done by disabling the AI and micromanaging each character.

Agreed. That to me makes for an interesting and exciting encounter.  Letting the AI do everything while you go button mash on some baddies God of War style kind of defeats the point of a tactical party-based game.  I don't understand the appeal of that playstyle.  And I don't think adding in some Dark Souls-style gimmicks makes it better.

I remember the excitement and amazement I felt the first time I saw the isometric camera in a screenshot for DA:O.  I just want that back.

I resent that remark sir. Half of the fun I had with DA2 and DAO combat was preprogramming the AI to perform as best as it could without needing my input thus allowing me to focus on only one character and his/her abilities.

Its not any less tactical party base if I play that way and if you "don't understand it" then don't bash it! 

[Vilegrim]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Navasha wrote...

I am actually of the same mind.   When the battles got really intense in the DA games, I turned off the AI combat rules and issued orders individually to each character every few seconds.   The AI is good for easy difficulty levels or small confrontations where there is no real danger anyway.   Any major fight on nightmare difficulty usually is best done by disabling the AI and micromanaging each character.

Very similar, though I disagree that the tactics are only good for easy. I use them for normal and also for my latest playthrough on hard. They're sufficient if you can get them to work--and I intensely enjoy doing so.

But like you for those encounters like the inevitable High Dragon fight the tactics aren't always useful enough.

Vilegrim wrote...

yes, yes they are.  You can have an action game with a good plot, (Witcher I am looking at you) and some RPG bits, but it isn't an RPG, especailly when to be done well, it needs a set, single protagonist. 

This is a nonsensical statement. I've been arguing against this dodge mechanism since I first saw it but that doesn't make this game a non-RPG--we don't know hardly any information about our control over the Inquisitor, and THAT is what will ultimately determine if we can call this an RPG (or, for the Witcher, why it's harder to call it an RPG--it wasn't the action combat, it was the fact that Geralt is pre-defined).

For me it was borth, action combat and RPGs do not mix.   I would love combat manevers to look realistic, as, for me that is far more awesome than fantasy flyinning, but for me to b in full button mashing control? NO, no thanks.

Modifié par Vilegrim, 19 août 2013 - 05:28 .

[esper]

Nashiktal wrote...

Korusus wrote...

Navasha wrote...

I am actually of the same mind.   When the battles got really intense in the DA games, I turned off the AI combat rules and issued orders individually to each character every few seconds.   The AI is good for easy difficulty levels or small confrontations where there is no real danger anyway.   Any major fight on nightmare difficulty usually is best done by disabling the AI and micromanaging each character.

Agreed. That to me makes for an interesting and exciting encounter.  Letting the AI do everything while you go button mash on some baddies God of War style kind of defeats the point of a tactical party-based game.  I don't understand the appeal of that playstyle.  And I don't think adding in some Dark Souls-style gimmicks makes it better.

I remember the excitement and amazement I felt the first time I saw the isometric camera in a screenshot for DA:O.  I just want that back.

I resent that remark sir. Half of the fun I had with DA2 and DAO combat was preprogramming the AI to perform as best as it could without needing my input thus allowing me to focus on only one character and his/her abilities.

Its not any less tactical party base if I play that way and if you "don't understand it" then don't bash it! 

I resent that too. I hope that da:I give us even better options for tactics and don't just limit us to 20 slot.

I had a lot of fun of not just setting up the ai for tactical combat, but also according to the how the characters interacted.

[Linkenski]

Evazin wrote...

It seems like they are making Dragon Age into the witcher...

And failing apparently. What we saw in that pre-alpha build looked like DA2's fighting mechanic with a action-oriented TPS view on top of it. That's not what anyone wants. That's just a bland mix of two things that just wont work together.

[Vilegrim]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Vilegrim wrote...

For me it was borth, action combat and RPGs do not mix.   I would love combat manevers to look realistic, as, for me that is far more awesome than fantasy flyinning, but for me to b in full button mashing control? NO, no thanks.

Why don't they mix for you?

Are you just claiming personal preference here? Or are you saying that games with any action combat whatsoever, like the entire DA series, are definitely, absolutely, not RPGs?

DA:O Was about as actiony as I feel you can get, and still be a 'proper' RPG, but yes this is arbitary, when you start having active dodges and twitch gameplay you are moving away from what makes RPG gameplay, RPG gameplay.  You can tell great stories in other genres, Spec Ops: The Line in my opinion has a great, semi branching story, that is genuinly creepy at times, and brings home crumbling sanity...but it is no way an RPG.  The Witcher series does branching stories really well, but they are action games with a level system, not, to me RPGs, but then I am a total neckbeard grognard at times.

[Allan Schumacher]

I'd prefer we not distract this into a "what is an RPG" type of discussion because in my experience the term is not easily defined and very personal.

[KennethAFTopp]

I'd be interested to know if there is an active blocking button now or is it more akin to DA:O or do all hits actually strike home as in DAII

[esper]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I'd prefer we not distract this into a "what is an RPG" type of discussion because in my experience the term is not easily defined and very personal.

And you are still not going to answer my question about what kind of mechanic the dogde roll was? Talent, manuel, automatic?


If it is because I have missed the answer then please redirect me to where it was.

[Fast Jimmy]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I'd prefer we not distract this into a "what is an RPG" type of discussion because in my experience the term is not easily defined and very personal.

There are three things you don't talk about - religion, politics and the definition of an RPG.

[Nashiktal]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Nashiktal wrote...

Korusus wrote...

Agreed. That to me makes for an interesting and exciting encounter.  Letting the AI do everything while you go button mash on some baddies God of War style kind of defeats the point of a tactical party-based game.  I don't understand the appeal of that playstyle.  And I don't think adding in some Dark Souls-style gimmicks makes it better.

I remember the excitement and amazement I felt the first time I saw the isometric camera in a screenshot for DA:O.  I just want that back.

I resent that remark sir. Half of the fun I had with DA2 and DAO combat was preprogramming the AI to perform as best as it could without needing my input thus allowing me to focus on only one character and his/her abilities.

Its not any less tactical party base if I play that way and if you "don't understand it" then don't bash it! 

You ninja!

I agree with your statement, and I dislike that posters equation (?) of "not controlling everything all the time" equalling "button mash God of War style."

Programming the tactics--including that for your character if you have the proper mod--and letting them run out is micromanagement too, just of a different kind.

Indeed it also requires much more patience and trial and error than just grabbing the party and directing them yourself. I digress however as things are going off topic.

Personally I like what I see combatwise with what little notfinalnorevenalpha footage we have seen. 

esper wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I'd prefer we not distract this into a "what is an RPG" type of discussion because in my experience the term is not easily defined and very personal.

And you are still not going to answer my question about what kind of mechanic the dogde roll was? Talent, manuel, automatic?


If it is because I have missed the answer then please redirect me to where it was.

Woah patience esper. He might not know, or might not be able to tell us, or he might just be too busy to get into a full on answer.

Demanding him to answer isn't likely to get results.

Modifié par Nashiktal, 19 août 2013 - 05:54 .

[Vilegrim]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I'd prefer we not distract this into a "what is an RPG" type of discussion because in my experience the term is not easily defined and very personal.

but then that question is part of the debate, we are shown a snippet of what looks like a pretty generic action game, after having been told that the franchise was moving away from that after DA2, and the discussion will always lead to why people like/don't like it, part of that will be peoples definitions of what an RPG is, and what they want from it.

[Nashiktal]

Vilegrim wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I'd prefer we not distract this into a "what is an RPG" type of discussion because in my experience the term is not easily defined and very personal.

but then that question is part of the debate, we are shown a snippet of what looks like a pretty generic action game, after having been told that the franchise was moving away from that after DA2, and the discussion will always lead to why people like/don't like it, part of that will be peoples definitions of what an RPG is, and what they want from it.

I realize I probably look like a heavy defender of bioware at this point but I have a point of contention with "Generic action game." This is pre alpha. As in, earliest of early test footage. Not only are the mechanics not nailed down yet but neither is the feel.

Not to mention that no one can agree on what an RPG is anyway.

[hoorayforicecream]

Vilegrim wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I'd prefer we not distract this into a "what is an RPG" type of discussion because in my experience the term is not easily defined and very personal.

but then that question is part of the debate, we are shown a snippet of what looks like a pretty generic action game, after having been told that the franchise was moving away from that after DA2, and the discussion will always lead to why people like/don't like it, part of that will be peoples definitions of what an RPG is, and what they want from it.

The easiest and best way to deal with it is to simply say what you like and what you dislike, and leave the interpretation up to the developers. Game developers rarely rigidly adhere to a set of genre requirements anyway; there's no governing body that forces them to have to follow some industry standard of what separates a role-playing game from an action adventure game.

The vast majority of talk about what is and isn't specific to RPGs as a genre will be ignored by devs anyway since it is almost never constructive.

Modifié par hoorayforicecream, 19 août 2013 - 05:59 .

[esper]

Nashiktal wrote...

EntropicAngel wrote...

Nashiktal wrote...

Korusus wrote...

Agreed. That to me makes for an interesting and exciting encounter.  Letting the AI do everything while you go button mash on some baddies God of War style kind of defeats the point of a tactical party-based game.  I don't understand the appeal of that playstyle.  And I don't think adding in some Dark Souls-style gimmicks makes it better.

I remember the excitement and amazement I felt the first time I saw the isometric camera in a screenshot for DA:O.  I just want that back.

I resent that remark sir. Half of the fun I had with DA2 and DAO combat was preprogramming the AI to perform as best as it could without needing my input thus allowing me to focus on only one character and his/her abilities.

Its not any less tactical party base if I play that way and if you "don't understand it" then don't bash it! 

You ninja!

I agree with your statement, and I dislike that posters equation (?) of "not controlling everything all the time" equalling "button mash God of War style."

Programming the tactics--including that for your character if you have the proper mod--and letting them run out is micromanagement too, just of a different kind.

Indeed it also requires much more patience and trial and error than just grabbing the party and directing them yourself. I digress however as things are going off topic.

Personally I like what I see combatwise with what little notfinalnorevenalpha footage we have seen. 

esper wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I'd prefer we not distract this into a "what is an RPG" type of discussion because in my experience the term is not easily defined and very personal.

And you are still not going to answer my question about what kind of mechanic the dogde roll was? Talent, manuel, automatic?


If it is because I have missed the answer then please redirect me to where it was.

Woah patience esper. He might not know, or might not be able to tell us, or he might just be too busy to get into a full on answer.

Demanding him to answer isn't likely to get results.

I am not demanding the answer, but so far Allen hasn't been shy of saying: "I don't know" and "I can't answer that."

Both which is answer I would accept. The only reason for me to sound so upset, I because it is the only way to get heard in this discussion because it keeps going off rail every time I try to ask, and add in that I live in a time zone which does not mesh well with this forum. (The developers always begins to appear when I am ready for bed).

Edit, you can't say it didn't work. I got two answers almost immediatly after I began sounding just a little impatient.

Modifié par esper, 19 août 2013 - 06:02 .

[Vilegrim]

Nashiktal wrote...

Vilegrim wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I'd prefer we not distract this into a "what is an RPG" type of discussion because in my experience the term is not easily defined and very personal.

but then that question is part of the debate, we are shown a snippet of what looks like a pretty generic action game, after having been told that the franchise was moving away from that after DA2, and the discussion will always lead to why people like/don't like it, part of that will be peoples definitions of what an RPG is, and what they want from it.

I realize I probably look like a heavy defender of bioware at this point but I have a point of contention with "Generic action game." This is pre alpha. As in, earliest of early test footage. Not only are the mechanics not nailed down yet but neither is the feel.

Not to mention that no one can agree on what an RPG is anyway.

The debate has a poiint because it is pre-alpha and nothing is set, if this was beta, their would be no chance of a change that central,.

[AlanC9]

Korusus wrote...


Because that is exactly how I played all the Infinity Engine games, and Dragon Age: Origins.  I'll sick my tank on a big-bad to auto-attack and take threat, then switch to my mage and lay some AOE on the archers in the distance.

It's called tactics.  

Couldn't the AI handle the tank's part of that on its own? It'd handle the mage part too if it was smarter about AoEs.

[esper]

EntropicAngel wrote...

My apologies.

And esper, I suspect it's a manual input. Though I will say in Allan's defense that he may not be authorized to make statements like that.

Of course, it's also quite possible that having it confirmed would be the exact wrong thing to do and that's why he isn't saying anything.

OR it could be that that IS the case--it's manual--but Allan is detailing our concerns to people like Laidlaw so it could still be up in the air. I hope it's this one, if it is in fact a manual input event.

I suspect manuel too, but only because it is manuel in every other game, and da2 does have the rouge backflip think, so there is some precedence for 'escape talent'.

[ghost_ronin]

Nashiktal wrote...

Korusus wrote...

Navasha wrote...

I am actually of the same mind.   When the battles got really intense in the DA games, I turned off the AI combat rules and issued orders individually to each character every few seconds.   The AI is good for easy difficulty levels or small confrontations where there is no real danger anyway.   Any major fight on nightmare difficulty usually is best done by disabling the AI and micromanaging each character.

Agreed. That to me makes for an interesting and exciting encounter.  Letting the AI do everything while you go button mash on some baddies God of War style kind of defeats the point of a tactical party-based game.  I don't understand the appeal of that playstyle.  And I don't think adding in some Dark Souls-style gimmicks makes it better.

I remember the excitement and amazement I felt the first time I saw the isometric camera in a screenshot for DA:O.  I just want that back.

I resent that remark sir. Half of the fun I had with DA2 and DAO combat was preprogramming the AI to perform as best as it could without needing my input thus allowing me to focus on only one character and his/her abilities.

Its not any less tactical party base if I play that way and if you "don't understand it" then don't bash it! 

This. I loved it when companions leveled up to finally get that extra tactics bar i needed to condition them to act exactly how i would. They had to be micromanaged in the worst possible scenarios but they would usually keep each other safe and work pretty well autonomuously. This all happened on hard in DAO and DA2 mind you, i suppose lower difficulty levels required little to no micromagament for those who just wanted to breeze through.