209 réponses à ce sujet

[Sidney]

Realmzmaster wrote...

What you have is a difference in the definition of fun. I like resource management planning. Unlimited arrows and the ability to carry enormous loads takes some of the fun out of the game for me.

I had many a tense moment in the Fallout series where the character could run out of ammo or a weapon break and have to fall back on either unarmed combat or a melee weapon.

The ability to repair a weapon in the field from other weapons of the same type was fun.Fallout also allowed for crafting of unique weapons.

None of which was required to finish the game, but added that additional touch.

The thing is in the realm of Fallout the repairing and such made sense and really fit with the universe and world. That is a world of great scarcity,,,,and functionally all of that was needed to finish the game because you couldn't just keep grabbing new eapons all the time. Truthfully a weakness in the game is that feeling passes after a time and you are well awash in ammo.

In the end, unless you have a world like fallout where that scacity is part of the atmosphere resource management is generally nothing but a tedious wreck. The problem being that there is no middle ground between "can carry everything" and "can carry realistic amoutns of stuff". I mean technically there is because BG had limits on resources or TES games with weight...the problem is that their limits are no more realistic than the DA games because in both cases you are carrying stupid insane amounts of stuff just in TES you carry slightly less stupid amounts of stuff. Any game where I can carry an additional suit of armor or 2 spare battle axes or 3000 gold coins has already shipped any pretense of "management" off to the farm.

[In Exile]

Realmzmaster wrote...

What you have is a difference in the definition of fun. I like resource management planning. Unlimited arrows and the ability to carry enormous loads takes some of the fun out of the game for me.

I assume that your Fallout example is an FO1-2 example? Thoug i I would say that even in D&D games and other early 2000s/late 1990s isometrics the inventory was always "huge'. Like in BG where you had numerous pages of slots. You could carry like 4 suits of armour. 

[CybAnt1]

DA2 did one thing I loved, and it's this.

Everything that was vendor trash went automatically into Junk, and I could always sell all my Junk at once into any vendor.

Gloriously simple, and yes this is a DA 2 feature I loved.

Almost as good as not even bothering with Junk at all, but what can I say, no game seems to be without some kind of Junk/vendor trash (useless things only worth coin, but instead of giving you the coin, they take up space/weight until you sell them).

[Realmzmaster]

In Exile wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

What you have is a difference in the definition of fun. I like resource management planning. Unlimited arrows and the ability to carry enormous loads takes some of the fun out of the game for me.

I assume that your Fallout example is an FO1-2 example? Thoug i I would say that even in D&D games and other early 2000s/late 1990s isometrics the inventory was always "huge'. Like in BG where you had numerous pages of slots. You could carry like 4 suits of armour. 

Actually in Fallout:New Vegas Hardcore mode most of what is being carried has weight including ammo. The character had a weight limit which has to be improved by putting points into strength or picking certain perks..

Pool of Radiance: Myth Drannor (2001), Temple of Elemental Evil (2003) (page 95 of the manual talks about carrying capacity) , Neverwinter Nights 1 (2202) & 2 (2006), BG 1 (1998) & 2 (2000) (had maximum weight and weight carried), Ultima 1-9 (1981-1999), Might & Magic 1 - 9 (1984-2003) and Wizardry 1-8 ( 1981-2001)(Load), Anvil of Dawn (1995)  had weight restrictions.

The armor the character was wearing was included in the weight restriction. The amount that could be carried was based on strength and constitution. If the character was overburden movement was slowed and fatigue set in. Everything that was carried had weight except for gold.

Yes you could carry 4 suits of armor in BG1 & 2 if you had the strength to do it, but then the weight restriction limited what else could be carried.

Might & Magic actually had banks to deposit the party's gold in case of emergencies. 

So resource planning was necessary. Now the party can carry almost eveything including the kitchen sink!

[Realmzmaster]

discosuperfly wrote...

I hated the combat in DAO, with a passion. I found anything other than playing a mage to be extremely dull. DA2 was a definite improvement for me, though for archery, I would like to see something more in line with Skyrim's archery, if at all possible, and rogues to be able to stealth ahead/outside of combat and scout ahead, disarm traps, and silently take out individual enemies before combat starts.

I do not like Skyrim's archery system because it relies to much on the gamer's ability to aim and shoot not whether the character has the actual ability to perform the action. 

If my character's archery ability is low my skill at aiming and shooting shoulkd not compensate for that lack. Conversely if I have specced my character to be a great archer he/she should not be hindered by my inability to aim and shoot.

[BraveVesperia]

I would like somewhat realistic combat.

Origins did not have that either. Unless when you see an enemy running towards you, you usually slowly pivot on the spot and watch them go by. Or shuffle sideways like a crab to move around the battle area. Or squat while you run.

[Abraham_uk]

 Skyrim Archery won't be doable in this setup without a drastic change to gameplay.

Everything in Skyrim inhinges on you being the main character.
You shoot foes with your bow.
Your accuracy is dependant on your player accuracy.
You aim your spells.
You wield your melee weapons.
You block with your shield.


Dragon Age is a strategy game.

Dragon Age 2 might look faster and flashier (with fewer abilites and spells) but it is very similiar to Dragon Age 2.

You have auto attacks and icons that expend stamina or mana.
You have a party under your control too.

You don't play as Hawke/Grey Warden. You play as an invisible puppet master who controls player character and party.

Despite animation changes, cosmetic changes and some reduction in features, Dragon Age 2 was very similiar to Dragon Age Origins. It always bugs me when people tell me they're completely different games. They both have a different feel to them, but the game play elements of both games are similiar.



If you want combat to look realistic, just change the animations to make them less over the top.
If you want actual realistic combat, set the game in the real world, remove the mages and have real life gameplay mechanics. No one on this thread is asking for actual realistic combat. Not even the opening poster is asking for trully realistic combat. Just toned down animations. That's all.

Modifié par Abraham_uk, 01 février 2014 - 10:15 .

[Sidney]

Skyrim is a shooter mechanically in combat I agree - it is actually a crappy shooter even worse. The only thing worse than shooting is the gawd awful first person melee combat.