721 réponses à ce sujet

[KristinCousland]

Xilizhra wrote...

Well you get my drift? Braveheart, LOTR or 300. They are all good approximations of what I feel is an appropriate level of realism.

300? What? The Spartans breaking their phalanx and not getting slaughtered is realistic? Not to mention their near-nudity?

"approximations" "what I feel" "appropriate levels of realism"

Makes sense? 

Noone expects or wants (I suspect) a 100 percent simulation of reality.

Besides, even in reality the Spartans did "Hold the line" 

Modifié par KristinCousland, 18 septembre 2013 - 12:24 .

[Thomas Andresen]

No amount of fancy effects is going make the combat mechanics seem more or less abstract and unrealistic than they already are.

Rule of Cool trumps inconvenience any day. And yes, more realism does mean more inconvenience. At least if you're trying to be consistent.

simfamSP wrote...

I'm sure there are a set of rules for these things and someone has possibly written them down.

I'm sure there are, but they wouldn't be universally applicable.

simfamSP wrote...

Because there is accepted fantasy and unaccepted fantasy. Dragon fights, and impossible odds is something we have grown to accept as the 'norms' of the genre. Even when things *seem* possible, they truly aren't. Still, unaccepted fantasy tends to break that illusion entirely.

All those things are immensely subjective. There is a very few things that fans of the genre can universally agree on being "the norms of the genre." Like with fantasy as it is with role-playing video games.

Modifié par Thomas Andresen, 18 septembre 2013 - 12:27 .

[KristinCousland]

So Thomas?
What about these sword stroke boulders?
Rule of Cool?
I will go to a funeral in unusally heavy rain, and break down just like a DA2 companion 

[Star fury]

Xilizhra wrote...
300? What? The Spartans breaking their phalanx and not getting slaughtered is realistic? Not to mention their near-nudity?

Think like a general, fight like a spartan lulz. 

Modifié par Star fury, 18 septembre 2013 - 12:37 .

[Aaleel]

I don't think it really has anything to do with "realism". I think some people just think it looks over the top and out of place. In some cases ridiculous.

One of the reasons I didn't like the combat in DA2 was because people rolling around on ground, butterfly twisting while throwing strikes, teleporting all the way across the battlefield in an instance just came across as silly to me and over the top.

Same thing for a warrior slamming his sword to the ground and shattering the earth, or pulling a spear and chain out, throwing it into an enemy and yanking a knight in full armor across the field.

To each his/her own though.

Modifié par Aaleel, 18 septembre 2013 - 12:32 .

[Navasha]

It would look a lot better if the stones were significantly smaller and perhaps their sudden appearance was masked by a cloud of dust as well. Its still an early build so I think they will make some adjustments on that before release.

It is supposed to look like the sword is fracturing the ground and right now it does come off as suddenly summoning up a pair of rocks. I also noticed on one of the mages spells that similar rocks appear clearly above the ground. I am assuming this largely part of production to make sure its working correctly and can be repositioned lower than when most of the rock is out of sight in the floor.

[crimzontearz]

Star fury wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
300? What? The Spartans breaking their phalanx and not getting slaughtered is realistic? Not to mention their near-nudity?

Think like a general, fight like a spartan lulz. 

TWITCH TWITCH....

But hey, they could always implement THIS kinda combat right?

 

[Thomas Andresen]

KristinCousland wrote...

So Thomas?
What about these sword stroke boulders?
Rule of Cool?

I haven't seen it, so I couldn't comment specifically one way or the other.

The point was, though, that I'd rather have combat be consistently stylistic than consistently realistic.

I'd also rather have combat be consistent than inconsistent.

[Taura-Tierno]

KristinCousland wrote...


Whilst cratering a stony floor with your sword does not pass the test.

A magical sword Swung by someone who probably has magical gloves. 

On the note about parrying and stuff in combat ... I liked how they did it in KotoR, especially consider how old that game is. Sure, the animations weren't always perfect, but they tried, and often succeeded, in getting good parries back and forth. Until you started using special abilities, at least. 

Modifié par Taura-Tierno, 18 septembre 2013 - 12:53 .

[Rawgrim]

Bleachrude wrote...

If we're going for REALISM, then there's ABSOLUTELY no way that a warrior can beat an OGRE in sword to sword combat.

Do people not realize jjust how silly the "I want realism" argument sounds when you have no problem with a human having even the slightest chance of fighting a creature that can pick up a fully armoured human in one hand????

And said human can then become strong enough to actually beat down a creature that can pick up said ogre in one claw (High dragon)/

Yet a human being able to create craters and being able to bring down a porticullis...THAT's unrealistic??!?!

People killed momoths back in the stone age. And its not 1 guy vs an ogre, its 4. Big difference.

[Darth_Atreyu]

So people see a hidden camera gameplay of DA:I with a year left of development and immediately get in a fit basically saying that Bioware should scrape everything and start from scratch because they didn't like the rocks moving on the ground? incredible, I believe that not having these types of animations in the game is unrealistic and is what would actually break the immersion,why? because characters in a fantasy world were we are supposed to believe can perform feats and rush head on against demonic beings,dragons and death cultist but can't swing their swords with purpose and agency enough to hit and break a rock is not believable in that context.
I can't understand the argument of people nitpicking and pulling apart this game that is still in development and basically want remove everything to the point where it becomes your run of the mill LotR-esque fanstasy when we should be moving away from that.
If I were conspiratorial I would think some people are gunning for this game to be mediocre and bland with nothing to show for but the same old non innovative game mechanics, but that can't be the case.
We should be excited and looking forward to not going inside the volcano to get a key to open a simple door when we have the awesome warrior Cassandra that can crush it, or when an enemy is frozen it actually shows them being frozen instead of a snowflake on their head or when a strong warrior hits the ground it shows the impact. I'm excited for what Bioware have instore for us with a new generation of game engines and hardware where these types of amazing physics and animations are possible for artist and developers. I'm not saying that we shouldn't give constructive criticism and feedback on the contrary we should definitely give feedback to Bioware becuase it means they can make better stuff in the future and frankly I loved the combat that was shown at PAX, it made me excited to play a Dragon Age game ^^ .

[Bleachrude]

Braveheart, 300 and even LotR are ALL bad examples IMO to use.since you're notice, every single opponent is roughly human sized. Even in LotR, I don't remember them actually figihting any non-human sized opponents.

Again , we're talking about a game where

You know that scene in LotR where they all ran like little babies from the Balrog? In Dragon age, you're expected to be able to go and smack that thing in its face and take its lunch money.

A well trained war elephant in the ancient era could not be defeated by a single melee opponent. Yet in a world where there are creatures that would consider an elephant a meal, humans can go one on one with those things and WIN

Personally, I think it's internally consistent that a warrior that can stand up to a charging ogra and not get smashed for 6 by that ogre's swing should EASILY be strong enough to smash a porticullis.

I mean...would anyone have a problem if said ogre actually was strong enough to smash a porticullis?

[crimzontearz]

See that is why I end up preferring to play as as a supernatural protagonist....no one complains then.

[fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb]

Maria Caliban wrote...

The solution here is to get rid of realism when it comes to combat animations. That way, an animation that's obviously stylistic doesn't feel out of place.

Gotta agree with Kristin the rocks are ridiculous. It's not so much just an animation, but why is he summoning rocks? isn't that like, magic?

But on that topic yes I like realistic animations. Before people shove dragons and magic down my throat (which I'm not really a big fan of anyway), there's a difference between a fantasy setting and characters doing downright stupid actions. For example someone throws a weapon at Hawke, and Hawke, who seems to have plenty of time to react, doesn't just quickly move to the side or duck, but instead decides to exert himself the hardest, most ineffective way possible to evade it by jumping all the way above it and then doing a freaking backflip.

I'm not saying the game should be a sword fighting simulator but I think realistic animations just LOOK good.

Modifié par fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb, 18 septembre 2013 - 01:18 .

[Cirram55]

While I don't have a problem with the concept of a sword cratering the ground (fantasy game and yadda yadda), I do find that the animation looks really bad with the whole rock cluster sinking into the ground at the end of the attack, and it bothers me a little.
I'd much rather if it'd disappear after a tad longer, not just right away when you're looking at it, or if they made those rocks a bit tinier.

EDIT: this is even more evident in the Fire Storm spell Vivienne casts at around 9:15 here www.youtube.com/watch

Modifié par Cirram55, 18 septembre 2013 - 01:32 .

[KristinCousland]

Darth?

"So people see a hidden camera gameplay of DA:I with a year left of development and immediately get in a fit basically saying that Bioware should scrape everything and start from scratch because they didn't like the rocks moving on the ground? "

Go back to the OP, read slowly and try again.

[Ziggeh]

Filament wrote...
It does feel a bit out of place with the other attacks. And I feel like we should be past the time where rocks just shoot up regardless of where you are, or Shale pulls a boulder out of a wooden floorboard.

Magic isn't an argument against realism, because it has it's own set of rules. It has an in context explanation for non realism.

However:

KristinCousland wrote...
So what are your thoughts on the rocks emerging from the ground after a particular fanciful sword stroke in inquisition, and combat "realism" in general?

It's important to understand that "Realism" in this context does not mean pertaining to reality. What is meant is conforming to expectations. And expectations are so very varied and subjective.

You're making the argument that you would not expect rocks to come from the ground if it is hit hard by a sword, yet smashing that same sword into a dude will, unless it outright kills him, and with the exception of a short term knockback or down, be of no detriment to his ability to continue moving, fighting and keeping him internal organs internal.

The combat is inherently abstract and you're not going to be able to construct an objective argument to condemn any one element of it that does not reject the whole process.

But, with that said I believe that even if neither interfered with our disbelief I think we would all place "sudden appearance of rocks" higher on a sliding scale than "health bars", because those expectations are based upon experiences, many of which will be shared. 

There's an extent to which "realism" is a common language, and I believe that a fictions conformity to this is neither right or wrong, is independant of immersion and is simply a stylistic choice made by it's authors.

On those terms, I do not disagree I would be interested to see more "realist" combat. I think it lends weight to the narrative if the overall style feels grounded.

Modifié par Ziggeh, 18 septembre 2013 - 01:50 .

[Vilegrim]

Blackrising wrote...

Screw realism.
If it looks cool and makes the combat fun, I'm for it.

That is exactly what realism does, eploding the grpind whileagic chains fly everywhere is so cliche as tp be uninteresting.   Ironclad has way more exciting foghts than any wuxai effort at spectacle.

Mages get a pass because magic, but even there make the fore/lighting 'feel' right, fire moves a certain way the closer to that you get the more intimidating it is.

[Beerfish]

I agree with the op. I can see a shield bash to break a gate, I can see all sorts of wonderous magic spells but beating the ground and having that effect was over the top. I didn't like it.

[KristinCousland]

Very good post Ziggeh,

I give you High Distinction for it 

And, I agree wholeheartedly.

Modifié par KristinCousland, 18 septembre 2013 - 03:09 .

[Tonishi]

Personally, I didn't find it that much disturbing. As someone other had stated, it would make sense if it was a giant Warhammer™. Those weapons actually make holes on the ground, swords should either get stuck in the ground or just make a scratch.

From what I've seen, I'm pretty satisfied with the combat animations. Granted, I did like the DA2 animations as well, even if they were a bit circus like. I need to see rogue's fighting style, let's hope they're not flying monkeys anymore. Also, I'd prefer if backstabs didn't cause the enemy to explode into little pieces... THAT was weird.

[Topsider]

I could accept the sword cratering the ground if it also cleaved the guy in half - straight down the middle! Gory, yes, but consistent. Or more likely his body parts would be flying in all directions after a bloody explosion. What's that shield made of? Adamantium? Anyway, it looks like a 'finishing' move not a regular attack so might be used sparingly

I'd prefer realistic melee combat but most people don't care if its fun and soon overlook silly animations. The crazier the better.
So long as the staff twirling mages of DA2 don't return, I'm happy... oh the indignity.

[myahele]

After replaying dao I must admit that combat for warriors and rogues are boring. I say make it stylistic....though maybe not quite like god of war

[Ziggeh]

KristinCousland wrote...

Very good post Ziggeh,

I give you High Distinction for it 

And, I agree wholeheartedly.

Conversely, I actually prefer DA2's combat to DA:O's. It was more immediate and satisfying. I think it tended more towards repetition, but the reasons why are more complex than it's worth going into here


But I do think it presented a narrative problem. It's harder to take a threat seriously when you're rolling around with the power of demi gods. Army of demons falling from the sky? No worries, we have a Hulk.

[phunx]

Get the hell out of my keep with that damned 2-handed sword causing craters wherever you hit!