721 réponses à ce sujet

[fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb]

Zanallen wrote...

fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb wrote...

much better than da2. have you seen how many more slashes it takes to kill an enemy in da2. an eyeball popping out? pft da2 turned people along with their armour into mincemeat.

Plus "you have a lot of guts oscar" was a really good pun

True. Alternately, we could have combat like in Bushido Blade: www.youtube.com/watch OHKO!

That's really cool, I'd like to see more games implement that if not neccessarily dragon age.


Or at least they could do it purely visually and only animate a fatal blow when the health bar lowers for human enemies. The finishers in DAO were a little bit like this

[Allan Schumacher]

'I don't like it' is a fine reason to not want something in the game.

I'd just like to echo this.

I can appreciate people willing to attempt to substantiate their position, but you do run the risk of obfuscating your point.


Saying "I think this looks silly/bad/whatever" is a pretty unambiguous thing to say. Saying that you find something unrealistic provides opportunities for me to overthink: "Are there other things that she feels are unrealistic? How much realism does she want? There are other things I consider unrealistic, how come that isn't an issue."


By extension, it doesn't give these outs to people that may challenge you (with varying degrees of aggression).

If someone asks "Why not?" and "I think it looks silly/stupid/bad/whatever" is not sufficient, you at least have enabled yourself with the ability to determine whether or not you really want to continue down this path of discussion.

It's okay to simply not like the way something looks!

Cheers.

[d4eaming]

Mages setting people on fire, flash freezing them, conjuring stone out of thin air and sending it zipping across the screen, electrocuting people, levitating them, conjuring meteors from the roof, metamorphosing while losing or gaining mass (hellooooo conservation of mass, how does Morrigan have enough stuff in her body to turn into a giant spider?), plus flaming swords, electric swords, and being literally chewed on by a dragon and surviving.

But a warrior darting forward to intercept a mob, or slamming the ground with enough force to shatter stone, naw man, that's just not right. All I can do is LOL.

Really, in DA2, Fenris is just a modified spirit warrior under a new name. The rest, well, I can easily accept that warriors in a magical world can have abilities that seem somewhat magical themselves without actually being mages. I can't play a warrior in DAO, it's incredibly slow and tedious and boring to me, but I finished DA2 first with a warrior. I have no problem simply enjoying the visuals. I like fantasy. I like fantastical things happening in my fantasy.

Modifié par d4eaming, 20 septembre 2013 - 01:03 .

[gangly369]

I like the fact that warriors can make giant craters and can knock down gates with pure strength. Why should mages get all of the awesome animations and not warriors? And I've always had the train of thought that there are dragons, there are demons, and there are talking possessed cats, so why are a few animations in combat such a break in immersion when you have all of those other things which are just as unrealistic

Modifié par gangly369, 20 septembre 2013 - 01:06 .

[Shadow Fox]

Wulfram wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

'I don't like it' is a fine reason to not want something in the game.

"I think it's too unrealistic" is a fine reason to not like something.

So can I **** about arrows not one hit killing the PC or fire spells not turning the pc into charcoal?:innocent:

[Allan Schumacher]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...
So can I **** about arrows not one hit killing the PC or fire spells not turning the pc into charcoal?:innocent:

You sure can.  Whether or not we feel it's appropriate is another thing altogther

[Shadow Fox]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...
So can I **** about arrows not one hit killing the PC or fire spells not turning the pc into charcoal?:innocent:

You sure can.  Whether or not we feel it's appropriate is another thing altogther

Joke at that argument's expense as I despise it.

[Ieolus]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

'I don't like it' is a fine reason to not want something in the game.

Saying "I think this looks silly/bad/whatever" is a pretty unambiguous thing to say. Saying that you find something unrealistic provides opportunities for me to overthink: "Are there other things that she feels are unrealistic? How much realism does she want? There are other things I consider unrealistic, how come that isn't an issue."

How about this?  I think it is safe to say that most (if not all) of the people on the "realistic" side, for lack of a better term, were okay with DA:Origins.  Why not use that as the baseline as to what we feel is realistic vs. unrealistic?

See, what I don't get is this... DA:Origins was in development for atleast five years.  An engine was developed for it, lore was developed for it, combat system, art style, etc.  Why throw most of that out for the sequal?  Why take all that time to make new animations and new art style, when so little time was given for development?  Makes no sense.

Baldurs Gate vs Baldurs Gate II... there were UI improvements and lots of other little things, but overall it was just a better version of the original.

Mike L. talks alot about lessons learned... I don't think THIS lesson (DA2 combat style) has been learned.

[Boycott Bioware]

Jackie Chan Kung Fu is fantasy, but yet it look realistic in his movies. He hit, dodge, making acrobatic moves, he also got hit and pain, sometimes he failed, he's not a super mighty awesome Kung Fu guy but he extremely fantastical skillful awesome guy in his movies

Bruce Lee Kung Fu is also fantasy, but it is not realistic in his movie, one punch and kick send peoples flying to show off  awesomeness is so unrealistic, he's a super human always win Kung Fu master in his movies

That is what i mean about realistic combat

Modifié par Qistina, 20 septembre 2013 - 02:15 .

[badboy64]

d4eaming wrote...

Mages setting people on fire, flash freezing them, conjuring stone out of thin air and sending it zipping across the screen, electrocuting people, levitating them, conjuring meteors from the roof, metamorphosing while losing or gaining mass (hellooooo conservation of mass, how does Morrigan have enough stuff in her body to turn into a giant spider?), plus flaming swords, electric swords, and being literally chewed on by a dragon and surviving.

But a warrior darting forward to intercept a mob, or slamming the ground with enough force to shatter stone, naw man, that's just not right. All I can do is LOL.

Really, in DA2, Fenris is just a modified spirit warrior under a new name. The rest, well, I can easily accept that warriors in a magical world can have abilities that seem somewhat magical themselves without actually being mages. I can't play a warrior in DAO, it's incredibly slow and tedious and boring to me, but I finished DA2 first with a warrior. I have no problem simply enjoying the visuals. I like fantasy. I like fantastical things happening in my fantasy.

Oddly Warriors dart forward towards enemies in DA2 when equipted with a sword and shield. I like them breaking stone or shatter the ground to knock enemies back with a 2-handed sword. It shows me they have alot of power in that move. I played alot of hours in both Dragon Age games to see this and I welcome it.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Bleachrude wrote...

What exactly was "fun" about playing a warrior in DA:O. The shuffling movement ? The fact that unlike ranged combat, there is a noticeable delay between inputs? The weird sense of combat where a warrior would simply stand there playing whack a mole while the hp counter slowly went down?

One could just as easily ask what was "fun" about playing a Warrior in DA2.  I certainly didn't find that fun.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Why would anyone?

As it happens, I used that avatar for 10 years before I even knew who Dr. Strange was.

[Allan Schumacher]

How about this? I think it is safe to say that most (if not all) of the people on the "realistic" side, for lack of a better term, were okay with DA:Origins. Why not use that as the baseline as to what we feel is realistic vs. unrealistic?

I still don't think that the term realistic is very accurate in this sense. It'd probably be clearer to simply say that you prefer the way DAO did it. I think people use the term often use the term "realistic" because it justifies that what they like is simply more appropriate and more in line with what they would like to see. If a person can convince other people that it's realistic (and hence, believable and appropriate) then you've "recruited more people."

See, what I don't get is this... DA:Origins was in development for atleast five years. An engine was developed for it, lore was developed for it, combat system, art style, etc. Why throw most of that out for the sequal? Why take all that time to make new animations and new art style, when so little time was given for development? Makes no sense.

The Eclipse engine is part of an evolution of an engine, going as far back as Aurora (with some attempted quick fixes and emergency rebuilds in there, from what I hear, as well). But the roots go back to Neverwinter Nights. It wasn't a new engine created specifically for Dragon Age.

A lot of what you saw in DAO (i.e. hornless Qunari) were because of fundamental issues with the state of the engine, and as you say, the game was in development for 5+ years so suggesting that you break down the issues with the character rigging design would have added more time onto that. Which would have meant even more risk and so forth, and the greater chance of a game having dated visuals and other things like that.

Given that spending even more time wasn't really an acceptable option, the choice would have come down to whether or not the Qunari (and Sten) simply get cut from the game altogether.

Mike L. talks alot about lessons learned... I don't think THIS lesson (DA2 combat style) has been learned.

This is where the challenge lies. How does one make a game for someone that prefers DA2's combat over DAOs, while you give the impression that any sort of legacy of DA2's combat is a negative thing for the game.

I see people make call outs to "Press a button, something awesome happens" and how this is just another example of it, when in reality the idea we were looking for for DA2 was that the combat was simply responsive. When you pushed the button, your character did something.

[Boycott Bioware]

Bruce Lee's hits aren't necessarily unrealistic. My martial arts teacher could send me flying himself. Chi/Qi seem fantasy like, but it's very real. I could cover myself with a phonebook, and he could still make me ache and winded with just a quick jab of his fingers. In turn, I could also punch him in the same spot with just physical strength, and he'd take it like it was merely "pretty good". My best wasn't all that great to him.

Yeah, but surely an average cook in Enter the Dragon don't Qi Gong everyone out, what i mean is over-stylize Kung Fu by him make it unrealistic

Look at Neo, now we know Matrix is not real, and Neo is super human in the Matrix, yet the fights look realistic, it still follow the basic rule of fighting and the rule of the Matrix. All the fantastical stuff Neo did we justify it with "it's in the Matrix and Neo is the Chosen One"

DA is a fantasy world, of course, but that fantasy world is not the Matrix, there is no indication saying that a human can jump 12 foot high anywhere. It is a world of magic, but magic itself is confined and separated by the rest of it's inhabitants. So magical stuff are only for mages, why non-mages are also "magical"?

Unless it is specified that DA world inhabitants are super human or Thedas have different gravity, DA world is so much like our real world, only that it contain Orges, darkspawns, Archdemon, demon, dragons, and mages.

Modifié par Qistina, 20 septembre 2013 - 03:10 .

[Boycott Bioware]

StreetMagic wrote...

Qistina wrote...

Bruce Lee's hits aren't necessarily unrealistic. My martial arts teacher could send me flying himself. Chi/Qi seem fantasy like, but it's very real. I could cover myself with a phonebook, and he could still make me ache and winded with just a quick jab of his fingers. In turn, I could also punch him in the same spot with just physical strength, and he'd take it like it was merely "pretty good". My best wasn't all that great to him.

Yeah, but surely an average cook in Enter the Dragon don't Qi Gong everyone out, what i mean is over-stylize Kung Fu by him make it unrealistic

Ah, you mean Return of the Dragon. Not Enter the Dragon. :happy:

That movie was so badass. His best. He was never just a cook though. He was just some FOB who got a job there (FOB = Fresh Off Boat).

Yeah, either one lol

Bruce Lee is show off in his movie to fit Hollywood demand, he's not a show off person, i have following his interviews and he admit that, he must make his movies like that to make western people feel awe, that is why he show his body and exaggerate, Jackie Chan was one of his "punching bags" in his movies lol, and Jacky have different idea on how to entertain viewers. Jackie don't like much to show off might in Kung Fu, that is why he show he's weak but skillful in his movies

[Boycott Bioware]

StreetMagic wrote...
True enough. It was apparently Chuck Norris who encouraged him to be more flashy. Bruce didn't even like incorporating too much kicking in Jeet Kune Do (he taught low shin kicks and groin kicks), but Chuck told him the crowds like the flashy kicks. The rest is history.

I like Jackie Chan too, but he's part clown. He's partly inspired by Charlie Chaplin and movies like that.

So, realism still count to make us believe, else it just entertainment, too much stylize make we believe it's just "for fun' and not serious. Exaggeration does kill the fun.

Let say we live in Dragon Age world, we are not Mages, but we can teleport behind enemy to backstab, so it break "Mages are dangerous because they have magic" because "i can teleport behind everyone and murder them"

To say about it, default female Hawke does look like female version of Bruce Lee especially if she's a rogue

Modifié par Qistina, 20 septembre 2013 - 03:30 .

[Star fury]

Allan Schumacher wrote...
This is where the challenge lies. How does one make a game for someone that prefers DA2's combat over DAOs, while you give the impression that any sort of legacy of DA2's combat is a negative thing for the game.

I see people make call outs to "Press a button, something awesome happens" and how this is just another example of it, when in reality the idea we were looking for for DA2 was that the combat was simply responsive. When you pushed the button, your character did something.

Don't make a game for someone that prefers DA2's combat over DAO? DA:O outsold DA2 and it's combat was tactical, not a over the top mess of DA2.

Maybe I'm blind but Origins' combat was responsive too. 

Modifié par Star fury, 20 septembre 2013 - 03:41 .