721 réponses à ce sujet

[TEWR]

Your answers put me at ease, Allan. To hear that an idea I had floated around ages ago has indeed made it in to the game is great to hear. It adds a tactical level to the games that was sorely missing.

As for perfect overlap, I'm fine if it's not perfect. I just hope it's about... 60% there? I dunno. As long as the effort is made, I'm happy. Sort of.

[Uccio]

thats1evildude wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

We do have castles and siege engines, however. If one can smash down castles with swrds and shields, that makes every castle every buildt in thedas completely pointless.

I would note that, in real life, the type of siege warfare favoured by films and literature did not occur very frequently. Sieges of fortresses tended to involve simply waiting your enemy out, hoping they'd eventually run out of supplies.

If you want invading a stronghold to be more realistic, then you should demand Bioware implement a function where you wait three to six weeks in real time waiting for your enemies in the fortress to eventually starve and be forced to surrender.

Myself, I just assume that most of the low-level peons in Thedas can't simply knock in a gate with a shield, because they don't have the benefit of being legendary heroes.

Castle siege with an army is not comparable to Cassandra hulk smashing her way in. Yes, armies did sit out the surrounded enemy, even negotiated. But they also did used siege equipment and battering rams. fought their way in.
Saying movies do not portrait sieges with 100% accuracy is no where near on the same level as acceptin hulk Cassanda as believable.

[Rawgrim]

Plaintiff wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...
It snowed in the sacred ashes trailer. That is weather technology from the engine. At no point in any DA games were we told, or shown, that rain doesn`t excist in Thedas.

Why do we need to be told that? Rain is never seen or mentioned. There is no evidence that the people of Thedas even have a concept of rain. The default presumption is that it does not exist.

We do have castles and siege engines, however. If one can smash down castles with swrds and shields, that makes every castle every buildt in thedas completely pointless.

They were already pointless. You can paralyse everyone inside by singing real loud. Defenses are worthless with nobody able to operate them.

Its snows...ergo it can rain...Pretty obvious, even if you chose to ignore it.

Not everyone gets paralyzed by the singing. It also doesn`t break down walls or doors. Just because a few inside a castle is paralyzed, it doesn`t mean the gates just swing open.

[Flurdt Vash]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

What can you say about easing the disparity between the player and the enemies? Like, will enemies use the same animations as the player, the same abilities?

I do not know the answer to this question. I wouldn't expect perfect overlap, however. There will probably be some level of abilities that only the player has, while at the same time there being some abilities that only NPCs have.

I remember a tweet about enemies using actual tactics (archers behind shield walls, for example) but that's all I can really say has been said about combat.

I have seen some of the behaviour trees (since I'm ramping up on them) and this sort of stuff does exist, at least in an early way. Whether or not the finished product has it done sufficiently will likely depend on the person. Hopefully everyone is happy, but there will probably be some that feel it's too deterministic, and others that feel the opposite, and so forth.

Dude, you cant please every one, no point in trying My encouragment as opposed to torchs, the game looks fantastic so far, cant wait for whats next

[Rawgrim]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Kind of feels like a staged fight. I am given an uzi, my opponents are given clubs.

The fight was definitely not set up to be an overly challenging fight by any means (or even a challenging one in general)

There's still a lot of AI work that would need to be done, and it's mostly just a challenge of how do you include things in the demo.  For the purpose of this, it's simply the idea that the tactical camera is back, and how you as a player can utilize it.  There were also elements such as Cassandra charging a frozen enemy down and shattering the enemy.


Some of the specific fights and conflicts shown in the demo have already been changed and whatnot in more recent builds.

Thanks for the reply. I was speaking in general terms, though. Enemies not using the abilities the players have access too. Its an ongoing thing in the DA games, it seems.

The demo looks pretty good, in my opinion. It portrays the combat rather well, so that we know wat we should expect.

[Vilegrim]

In Exile wrote...



1)I'm going to stop being snarky. I had hoped that someone would draw the (to me) obvious inference, but that wasn't the case. 

The issue of combat damage can be dealt through animations. Instead of having a fireball explode head on, in one example, a warrior could use a shield to block it, have the thing catch fire, and then stop-drop and roll. That would be a "more" realistic way of dealing with this, and we can say that we abstract away things like the burns based on the nature of the fire.

With combat blows, the entire HP bar could be tied to parrying. 

2)Bioware could spend months designing unique combat grabbling animations, parrying animations for every weapons, dodging and reaction animations for every type of spell imaginable....

... and if I asked for that, I would be speaking the language of this thread, which is ostensibly about "combat animations". 

The reality is that this gate has some HP bar which so happens that, game-wise, it can be pierced by a warrior. We can say that's an abstraction of lots of things for resource purposes, like creating a battering ram escort mission with unique animations for each type of gate and keep in DA:I. 

We all have to learn to live with it because that's the name of the game and setting.

Because I'm at a loss. I've said I'm for improving combat as a whole, I've said DAO had problems in combat and realism (understatement), and I'm trying to give a few ideas that would maybe... maybe grant a foundation for games to work off of.

3)My position is pretty simple: there's no way to make an RPG realistic without either changing the combat entirely or wasting an absurd about of money designing combat animations and a ruleset to achieve it. 

And all you get for this tremendous effort of manpower and money is... a slightly different aesthetitic to the game to help with our sensibilities. That's not worth.

So I accept the other solution: to stylize the combat entirely, and stop pretending like the gameplay is tied to the story. It's just purely segregated, it runs on rule of cool, and when a cutscene starts we just all pretend that the keep was stormed by a huge army with a battering ram because that's the precondition to playing the game. 

That's the serious answer to this thread. 

Edit:

And other people have their own idiosyncratic preference. But I'd like if it people at least said that it was their idiosyncratic preference as opposed to acting as if there was natural and objective divison - as if it was decided by some divine law - that combat animations, limited exclusively to how certain characters use weapons and a small class of things they interact with, are the arbiter of realism in a game or the most important priority to fix. 

1) the obvious inference was that you are a troll, os yea alot of people got that part.

2) To much to ask, how has 'realistic weapon animations' turned in your head into 'completly redo everything ever?' You keep hammering this strawman , but it isn't what I have seen people ask for

3)Then why have anim ations at all? In a way I would prefer nothing over what is being offered, make it a top down old school rpg with no combat animations at all would mess my immersion far less than this abomination

[thats1evildude]

Ukki wrote...

Castle siege with an army is not comparable to Cassandra hulk smashing her way in. Yes, armies did sit out the surrounded enemy, even negotiated. But they also did used siege equipment and battering rams. fought their way in.
Saying movies do not portrait sieges with 100% accuracy is no where near on the same level as acceptin hulk Cassanda as believable.

My point is that conventional sieges are pretty boring, and actual warfare is not conducive to the single-player action RPG experience. Kicking in the door and storming the castle looks pretty fun, though.

If you like, tell yourself that the fortress wasn't built by the Tevinter cultists - they probably just took the place over - and the fortifications were likely very old and poorly-maintained. (What does some Tevinter demon-worshipper know about door repair?)

Modifié par thats1evildude, 22 septembre 2013 - 08:10 .

[Rawgrim]

thats1evildude wrote...

My point is that conventional sieges are pretty boring, and actual warfare is not conducive to the single-player action RPG experience. Kicking in the door and storming the castle looks pretty fun, though.

If you like, tell yourself that the fortress wasn't built by the Tevinter cultists - they probably just took the place over - and the fortifications were likely very old and poorly-maintained. (What does some Tevinter demon-worshipper know about door repair?)

Thats one thing to go about it, sure. But aparantly we need to capture fortresses and such in the game. If all it takes is sword smack and a shield bash to break them down, what would be the point of having them?

[thats1evildude]

Rawgrim wrote...

Thats one thing to go about it, sure. But aparantly we need to capture fortresses and such in the game. If all it takes is sword smack and a shield bash to break them down, what would be the point of having them?

Because, as I said, most of the low-level peons in Thedas can't knock down huge gates. And armies are mostly made up of those peons.

But in truth, magic and monsters would render fortresses mostly useless. Take "A Song of Ice and Fire" for instance. Harrenhal was supposed to be impregnable, but the Targaryens levelled the place pretty easily with their dragons.

Another good example was the Order of the Stick webcomic I mentioned earlier. A city with high walls and 10,000 defenders doesn't last a day - or even a few hours - against the baddies of the comic The 30,000 hobgoblins and undead besieging it are just cannon fodder; the real threat is the goblin cleric and lich sorceror leading them. In D&D setting, the presence of a few high-level characters can change the course of an entire war.

Modifié par thats1evildude, 22 septembre 2013 - 08:20 .

[Rawgrim]

thats1evildude wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Thats one thing to go about it, sure. But aparantly we need to capture fortresses and such in the game. If all it takes is sword smack and a shield bash to break them down, what would be the point of having them?

Because, as I said, most of the low-level peons in Thedas can't knock down huge gates. And armies are mostly made up of those peons.

But in truth, magic and monsters would render fortresses mostly useless. Take "A Song of Ice and Fire" for instance. Harrenhal was supposed to be impregnable, but the Targaryens levelled the place pretty easily with their dragons.

Quite true that. But I am sure you agree that if Harrenhall fell that way, it would be odd if, later, Stannis broke the gate of King`s Landing during the siege, using a shield, and the only explanation given is that he is a hero and by default can do that.

[thats1evildude]

Rawgrim wrote...

Quite true that. But I am sure you agree that if Harrenhall fell that way, it would be odd if, later, Stannis broke the gate of King`s Landing during the siege, using a shield, and the only explanation given is that he is a hero and by default can do that.

If A Song of Ice and Fire was heroic fantasy and Stannis an actual hero, I wouldn't bat my eyelids at him smashing in a door or climbing the walls of King's Landing while leading his men. But it is not.

On the other hand, he was involved in one of those long sieges I mentioned earlier when Storm's End was attacked by Mace Tyrell, That lasted the better part of a year, and he and his men were forced to eat their horses and rats when there was no other food left.

So if we're sipping at the troth of realism, we really need to take several months to take each fortress. It'll be tedious, but it won't break anyone's immersion.

Modifié par thats1evildude, 22 septembre 2013 - 08:31 .

[Rawgrim]

thats1evildude wrote...

If A Song of Ice and Fire was heroic fantasy and Stannis an actual hero, I wouldn't bat my eyelids at him smashing in a door or climbing the walls of King's Landing while leading his men. But it is not.

On the other hand, he was involved in one of those long sieges I mentioned earlier when Storm's End was attacked by Mace Tyrell, That lasted the better part of a year, and he and his men were forced to eat rats when there was no other food left.

Quite right. A good thing the Tyrell army didn`t have any heroes.

Just as a side note: You know that Hero`s Journey "plotline". The only character in a song of ice and fire, that really fits that one is actually Stannis. I think George Martin tossed out a comment about Stannis being the only one resembling a proper hero in his story too. Kind of fits with the way Martin writes. Keeping the hero on the fringe of the story. And the real villains possibly being the main characters.

[Vilegrim]

thats1evildude wrote...

If A Song of Ice and Fire was heroic fantasy and Stannis an actual hero, I wouldn't bat my eyelids at him smashing in a door or climbing the walls of King's Landing while leading his men. But it is not.

On the other hand, he was involved in one of those long sieges I mentioned earlier when Storm's End was attacked by Mace Tyrell, That lasted the better part of a year, and he and his men were forced to eat rats when there was no other food left.

With attempts at break out, and attempts at a counter seige, a traditional siege can provide a great oppurtunity for character deveolpment and story telling, with some brutal action sequences.  Just saying.

[thats1evildude]

Vilegrim wrote...

With attempts at break out, and attempts at a counter seige, a traditional siege can provide a great oppurtunity for character deveolpment and story telling, with some brutal action sequences.  Just saying.

Which is why Martin wrote so many long sieges in his books! Yes, once all the dragons died in Westeros, the setting was there and ever on grounded in cold, hard reality.

He never featured anything as silly as, say, setting fleets of ships aflame with alchemical fire enhanced by the presence of dragons, or wildmen scaling the Wall, or shadow monsters being birthed by high priestesses.

Modifié par thats1evildude, 22 septembre 2013 - 08:45 .

[Vilegrim]

thats1evildude wrote...

Vilegrim wrote...

With attempts at break out, and attempts at a counter seige, a traditional siege can provide a great oppurtunity for character deveolpment and story telling, with some brutal action sequences.  Just saying.

Which is why Martin wrote so many long sieges in his books! Yes, once all the dragons died in Westeros, the setting was there and ever on grounded in cold, hard reality.

He never featured anything as silly as, say, setting fleets of ships aflame with alchemical fire enhanced by the presence of dragons, or wildmen scaling the Wall, or shadow monsters being birthed by high priestesses.

Why does one invalidate the other, and why is only a SoiaF a valid example?  

[thats1evildude]

My point is that, despite your insistence that there's lots of drama to be found in long siege-type situations, even Martin skips over them in his books because he realizes THAT S***T IS BORING.

On another note, guys, never play Diablo 3. You'll wake up screaming most nights over the sheer amount of inanimate objects you'll be smashing.

Modifié par thats1evildude, 22 septembre 2013 - 08:59 .

[Rawgrim]

Well, he doesn`t skip over them. He writes them if there is a POV character involved with the siege. Theon, Tyrion, and Sansa all had chapters involving sieges in the series.

[Vilegrim]

thats1evildude wrote...

My point is that, despite your insistence that there's lots of drama to be found in long siege-type situations, even Martin skips over them in his books because he realizes THAT S***T IS BORING.

One of my favourite films (Iron Clad) is set during a seige, and it is brutal, compelling, violent and just all round great so we differ here.

[Rawgrim]

Iron Clad was great.

[Vilegrim]

Rawgrim wrote...

Iron Clad was great.

I loved Marshall with the greatsword, hollywoodised certainly, but changing grip and style depending and the situation, showing why people in armor win fights (they may need lots of downtime afterwards), but that doesn't help the guys who said hello to mr pointy while the knight was still fighting.  Wear armor people or the mad man will beat you to death with your mates severed arm while screaming at you.

[Rawgrim]

Vilegrim wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Iron Clad was great.

I loved Marshall with the greatsword, hollywoodised certainly, but changing grip and style depending and the situation, showing why people in armor win fights (they may need lots of downtime afterwards), but that doesn't help the guys who said hello to mr pointy while the knight was still fighting.  Wear armor people or the mad man will beat you to death with your mates severed arm while screaming at you.

Purefoy is fantastic in roles like this. He really shines as Solomon Kane as well.

[thats1evildude]

Rawgrim wrote...

Well, he doesn`t skip over them. He writes them if there is a POV character involved with the siege. Theon, Tyrion, and Sansa all had chapters involving sieges in the series.

You're referring to the battle for King's Landing, correct? That was hardly some dry "let's wait them out" affair.

You've lost me on Theon, though, aside from him taking Winterfell. He scaled the walls and killed the guards there, didn't he? Hardly a protracted siege.

Modifié par thats1evildude, 22 septembre 2013 - 09:07 .

[Bleachrude]

What the hell does Heroic fantasy have anything to do with combat animation?

Berserk and Demon/Dark souls are dark fantasy and have over the top weapons and combat manoeuvers while Dragonlance is standard heroic fantasy and there isn't any high end combat descriptions involving arriors in the books.

[Uccio]

thats1evildude wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Well, he doesn`t skip over them. He writes them if there is a POV character involved with the siege. Theon, Tyrion, and Sansa all had chapters involving sieges in the series.

You're referring to the battle for King's Landing, correct? That was hardly some dry "let's wait them out" affair.

You've lost me on Theon, though, aside from him taking Winterfell. He scaled the walls and killed the guards there, didn't he? Hardly a protracted siege.

Theon taking Winterfell was combination of luck, timing and carelesness by Stark boys. Too few guards and too ease mind. Had they considered a betrayal it could have gone differently, but they didn´t. However, that daring night raid was in no way superhuman nor was it impossible. All the chips were just in right position for the invader.

Modifié par Ukki, 22 septembre 2013 - 10:28 .