20 réponses à ce sujet

[CybAnt1]

Given that we know so little about the combat system for DAI so far, I can only make the most generic of requests. 

 

However, here they are:

 

1. Please don't drop people out of the sky. It's stupid, and it makes no sense. 

2. Whatever "action-RPG" crap you want to put in, just leave it out of the PC version, and put it only in the console version. 

2a. Especially nonsense like warriors forward/tumble-rolling in plate armor, or people pulling shields off of peoples' arms. 

3. Make terrain more varied AND more part of (outdoor) combat .... I think you're doing this already. If so, good on you! 

4. All that stuff you said about making combat more strategic and tactical than DA2 ... go ahead and do it! 

5. Keep improving AI Tactics, make the defaults have more depth, and give the players more opportunities to tweak it. 

6. In general, whenever you can make combat more like DAO and less like DA2, do it.

6a. I will take the better ability trees and abilities of DA2, though. Just with slightly less over the top animations. 

 

 

 

 

[Br3admax]

 

1. Please don't drop people out of the sky. It's stupid, and it makes no sense. 

2. Whatever "action-RPG" crap you want to put in, just leave it out of the PC version, and put it only in the console version. 

2a. Especially nonsense like warriors forward/tumble-rolling in plate armor, or people pulling shields off of peoples' arms. 

3. Make terrain more varied AND more part of (outdoor) combat .... I think you're doing this already. If so, good on you! 

4. All that stuff you said about making combat more strategic and tactical than DA2 ... go ahead and do it! 

5. Keep improving AI Tactics, make the defaults have more depth, and give the players more opportunities to tweak it. 

6. In general, whenever you can make combat more like DAO and less like DA2, do it.

6a. I will take the better ability trees and abilities of DA2, though. Just with slightly less over the top animations. 

1. Agreed

2. What? Also, I don't get the whole "only in the console version" thing, but I assume that's only because you won't be getting that one..

2a. Considering you can even walk in what DA calls armor is unrealistic, tumbling is the least of worries. (see Warden riding dragon)

3. Agreed

4. Not really that important to me, but sure.

5. Agreed

6. No, quicksand combat with clunky animations was awful. Sure DA ][ was weirdish, but I much prefer the combat there than to Origins'. Origins' combat was awful. 

[CybAnt1]

1. Agreed

2. What? Also, I don't get the whole "only in the console version" thing, but I assume that's only because you won't be getting that one..

2a. Considering you can even walk in what DA calls armor is unrealistic, tumbling is the least of worries. (see Warden riding dragon)

3. Agreed

4. Not really that important to me, but sure.

5. Agreed

6. No, quicksand combat with clunky animations was awful. Sure DA ][ was weirdish, but I much prefer the combat there than to Origins'. Origins' combat was awful. 

 

2. Look up definition of action-RPG. 

2a. I'm willing to live with action-RPGness, as long as they keep it to the console version, and don't contaminate the PC version. (*)

6. As long as the animations aren't silly and ridiculous, I don't really care about how quick or slow they happen.

 

(*) Sorry, my master-raceness showing through, again. 

[Aldric Shepard]

1. I believe they've already said they won't be doing that.

2. BioWare is at its best when mixing action and RPG elements.

2a. If you want complete realism in heavy armor they'll also need to take out running. Jogging might be okay, as long as the Inquisitor gets a good rest every fifty feet or so.

3. They've already shown this off in gameplay.

4. They've already shown examples of how combat is more strategic than DAII.

5. I totally agree on this. Also, making the companion AI more reactive. There's nothing more frustrating than when Varric needs to be healed, but Anders just stands there.

6. This is a debate with a lot of sides. I think both games have combat advantages over the other, so I'm glad they say their trying to take the best from each.

6a. DAII had far more style than DAO when it came to animations, for the better. My maxed out Force Mage had some of the most visually-appealing magic abilities I've seen in a game. My DAO mage just stood there doing the same awkward animation over and over.

[CybAnt1]

 

2. BioWare is at its best when mixing action and RPG elements.

 

 

We will have to agree to disagree.

Combat-wise, I still prefer KOTOR-style combat to DA2's. KOTOR style combat is PERFECT for me. And there was nothing "action-y" there at all. Instead, there was an action queue that you could load up with several actions, and let your character execute them. Good stuff. 

 

BTW, I had no real problem with DAO's combat, most of the things people are talking about never bothered me. But again, I think that has to do with both prior experiences, and expectations. 

 

That said, I do agree that there are things they could take from DA2's. I *do* like the new ability trees, they work much better than the "foursquare" system of ability advancement they used before. As well as most of DA2's abilities. Just dial the over-the-top animations down from 11, 7 or 8 should work. 

[Brass_Buckles]

6 and 6a.  Yes.  Speedier animations are okay, but all the flipping around, and the teleporting rogues, kind of annoyed me.  It felt more like a Japanese RPG than Dragon Age should--too much flash, not enough substance.  I preferred tactically getting behind an enemy to backstab, for instance.

 

That said, DAO was a bit clunky in the combat department, and a bit slow.  That's realistic, but I can see how it bored some people.  I liked it; others are welcome not to if it isn't their cup of tea.  The slowness did provide opportunities to pause and think about tactics before you were killed--DAO was very tactical, compared to DA2.  Though, to be fair, tactics were not totally eliminated in DA2.  Somewhere in between the two, without the flashy animations, would be a good place to be.

 

Oh yeah, and everybody needs to wear armor.  Honestly I'm not sure why mage robes aren't at least made of some sort of light armor like lamellar (which was surprisingly effective--look it up!).  I don't care if everyone has their own favored clothing outside of combat, but if you're on the road, expecting combat to happen, your squad should be prepared for that by wearing honest-to-goodness armor, and yes, I'd like to be able to customize my squad's gear more, like we could in DAO.  I don't want to be stuck with just three or four armors per character, even if I don't like the upgraded set.

[Pasquale1234]

 

. 

2. Whatever "action-RPG" crap you want to put in, just leave it out of the PC version, and put it only in the console version. 

2a. Especially nonsense like warriors forward/tumble-rolling in plate armor, or people pulling shields off of peoples' arms. 

 

I liked your post until I read those lines.

 

I know I've said this before - and you have acknowledged it before - but people play on consoles for reasons that have nothing to do with a preference for action combat.

 

I play on a console, and I don't want those action elements you described, either.

[CybAnt1]

Sorry. Yes, it should not be imposed on console players, either.

 

Thing is, I would leave that stuff out, altogether, but it seems to be something some people want. 

 

Much to your disadvantage - alas - it seems the majority of them are playing on console. The reason for my comment is you may note that the infamous "awesome button" comment I mentioned, and then was rebuked about, was meant to apply only to the DA2 console version. 

[Zack_Nero]

I agree (on most of them) make a more challenging combat system. I would also like to see the enemies use the environment to there advantage. Example at the Pax demo we saw achers on a unstable bridge and we were able to destoried. If it was reverse I would like to see the enemy destory the bridge while am on it.

[bEVEsthda]

I understand where CybAnt1comes from, but I have to agree with Pasquale1234.

I do understand that CybAnt1 assumes the consoles don't concern him and he'll like to not be bothered, but I also think that the consoles have a right to as good content as the PC. The new consoles will become more important than ever before in defining the games. The reason is both that the new consoles have powers which were previously denied consoles (memory and processors with real crunching power for things like AI, path-finding, simulation) and the steep decline of the PC as a gaming platform. The latter must be fought, of course, and I'll do my part in that. But consoles should still start to get richer, more PC-like content, as far as that is possible. It should not be assumed that console owners are only action-players wanting to bash buttons.

...And Dragon Age should never  become an action game. The feel of the combat flow is a different thing.

[CybAnt1]

I'm sorry. This is one case where I want to fully back-track my remarks. 

 

I never meant to imply that console players "deserve" an inferior experience, or that I am in fact part of a superior "master race" to them, though I've joked about the later trope. I am, however, allowing things I noted relating to the development of DA2 to color my worldview. And now, having worn my cilice a few days, I'll stop making counterproductive remarks. 

 

Everybody deserves the game they feel they want to play, regardless of platform. 

 

So I'll again reiterate: yes, I'm sure there are console players that want less of an action-rpg experience too, and they are welcome among the Grognards (yes, it's an actual group here). 

[Knight of Dane]

Dragon Age 2 was Dragon Age Origins but flashier and without traps.

 

Though I agree about the enemy spawning. I would much prefer tougher prepared challenges than random drop-ins.

[CybAnt1]

Dragon Age 2 was Dragon Age Origins but flashier and without traps.

 

 

Sure, if you want to ignore the loss of overhead camera, the different philosophy of encounter design (which the other thread here in "combat mechanics" discusses with excellence, and everyone typically ignores, and went beyond the infamous falling-from-the-sky enemies), the fact that there most definitely WAS an awesome button for console players, the complete disappearance of all "crunchiness" (like the combat log or in-game descriptions of mechanics), and other kinds of streamlining that occurred ... like the complete disappearance of skills (combat-related and otherwise) .... 

 

Then you're absolutely right. 

[BallaZs]

I agree with the OP.

[Knight of Dane]

Sure, if you want to ignore the loss of overhead camera, the different philosophy of encounter design (which the other thread here in "combat mechanics" discusses with excellence, and everyone typically ignores, and went beyond the infamous falling-from-the-sky enemies), the fact that there most definitely WAS an awesome button for console players, the complete disappearance of all "crunchiness" (like the combat log or in-game descriptions of mechanics), and other kinds of streamlining that occurred ... like the complete disappearance of skills (combat-related and otherwise) .... 

 

Then you're absolutely right. 

The skills didn't really do anything besides allowing crafting and unlocking skill tiers. I didn't mind them but didn't miss them either. I hope that if Skills are in DA:I they will be something more.

 

I rarely used the overhead camera, but that's already been confirmed back, so stop pretending that's still an issue mate.

[CybAnt1]

The skills didn't really do anything besides allowing crafting and unlocking skill tiers.

 

I guess, if you ignore Survival, which allowed you to know if enemies were nearby (which made up for the Darkspawn sense the Gray Warden protag was supposed to have in Origins but was never game-implemented), although you could or could not consider it a combat skill (and whether MC likes it or not); Combat Training (which translated into combat bonuses or helped mages concentrate and cast spells better while under attack); Combat Tactics (which allowed you to upgrade AI tactics, but disappeared once they basically became based on Cunning and level); and the Awakening skills of Vitality and Clarity (which gave bonuses to health, stamina, and mana, although it's sorta weird they were "skills"). 

 

P.S. personally, I also missed the fact that my rogues not only lost their ability to make traps, but also to STEAL and PICKPOCKET. As for the loss of Coercion, well see debates elsewhere about whether linguistic/persuasive "skills" are good or bad in a CRPG. I can't see reintegrating Coercion with the current wheel-structure, so I don't think it's making a comeback. I won't mention trap-making, since you already said "without traps" (although we still had to avoid traps in DA2, but we just couldn't set/place them.)

[Knight of Dane]

Coercion was already in Dragon Age 2, it was just personality based rather than skill based which I actually liked.

 

I never used survival until I had used up all combat and coercion skills, and pickpocketing was never useful in the first place.

 

But that's a discussion for another topic, this is supposed to be about combat

[CybAnt1]

Coercion was already in Dragon Age 2, it was just personality based rather than skill based which I actually liked.

 

 

Which was the coercive option?

 

Becoming angry/aggressive/etc.?

 

Because, see, yes, it often led to Hawke becoming confrontational, rude, and nasty, but that's not always the technique for good coercion. Is it? 

 

I mean, the Mob could walk into your store, and do all those things, but if they want to "make an offer you can't refuse" (like "pay the don $200 a month for 'protection' or else"), I think it's often highly more effective if they do it in quiet, understated tones, lacking overt aggression, with implications of possible future swimming with the fishes in concrete shoes made clear. No? 

 

Yeah, I guess we are moving away from combat, but you've touched on a favorite alternate topic of mine. Some people seem to think the tones of tonal DA2 wheel were clear. I feel otherwise. 

[Knight of Dane]

If you are humoristic you can talk Karras out of enterin the cave with Grace in it.

If you are diplomatic Hawke you can talk the Dalish Girl on the wounded coast down and calm the Fereldan approachers in act 1.

If you are agressive you can talk Varnall and Pertrice into supporting you.

 

Those are some examples, there are more around,

 

Though, many instances also just have a companion act it out. And there are also bribes at times that you can only make if you have money for it. (Not that money is difficult to get in DA2, but it's still there.)

 

I appreciate the idea Bioware had with dominant personality, I just didn't think it was executed to its full potential.

[rocsage]

1. looking at mark of assassin and legacy, I'd say it's getting fixed.

2. not sure what you mean by "action-RPG". the game has almost no aiming requirement and perennially permits pausing.  Yes, it can be played thoroughly as an action game (saw someone do this, solo, on nightmare mavernus, #^#@ insane...), but any time the pace feels to fast, you get indefinite mental respite.  If that's the feature you're talking about, well...

2a. well, that could be annoying; pause option means required roll usage will be more of a nuisance than challenge.  I do hate "Simon says" mechanisms (for example, the fire wheel in legacy and the ignition ring in mark of assassins, as well as sky horror: move or die)

3. think that's inevitable...is it me or did the character really cross less horizontal distance while moving along incline? that could add quite a bit of depth to positioning and reduce dependence on kiting ridiculously low ai.

4. second that.

5. current the tactics are sufficiently pithy, problem is there's a fundamental coding error that screws up sequential tactics in dragon age 2.  according to the wiki, for example, "go to tactics #9" really brings AI to 8 or 10.

6. but I like the autoattacking speed and the real 2h impact that procs every single hit, not every third...

6a. having more branches didn't necessarily mean better. If anything, the shale style comprehensive mode enhancement+active seems more intuitive and gratifying.

not every ability point have to go to strict a passive OR an active OR a sustain; why can't it be 2, or possibly all 3?

[ReadingRambo220]

On one hand DA II combat was over the top and ridiculous. On the other, my most recent playthrough of berserker reaver vanguard warrior was a blast. Felt like cheating when using all ranged companions.

Varric, Merrill, Anders, Sebastian, but I used a mod to give Isabela the archer tree which makes her so much safer and better than dual wield. My favorite party was Merrill (Modded to have creation tree) Varric, and Isabela-archer.