Ce sujet est fermé
Guest_E-Ro_*
I am surprised allot of people don't seem to like it. Eh, different opinions, I suppose.(and this is the internet after all, complaining is what we are good at!)
I for one think it looks awesome, and my only wish is that they would show the PC ui, but that's minor.
Guest_TheDarkKnightReturns_*
DA:I combat looks like a grown up version of DA2 combat complete with tactical view and dialed down animations. The surfboard wielding two-hander, epileptic mage, and fantasy ninja on crack are gone (or at least tempered to something a little more traditional). I really don't understand why people are complaining.
DA:I combat looks like a grown up version of DA2 combat complete with tactical view and dialed down animations. The surfboard wielding two-hander, epileptic mage, and fantasy ninja on crack are gone (or at least tempered to something a little more traditional). I really don't understand why people are complaining.
I would prefer turn-based as opposed to the chaos of DA2's combat.
DAO's was just about perfect, I thought. I liked the speed, the control, the flexibility. DA2 changed most of that, and improved none of it.
DA:I pretty much toned down the speed and gave the attacks more weight, seems like a nice middle groundFair enough. Origins was too slow for me. Maybe we'll both find something to like in Inquisition.
I am surprised allot of people don't seem to like it. Eh, different opinions, I suppose.(and this is the internet after all, complaining is what we are good at!)
I for one think it looks awesome, and my only wish is that they would show the PC ui, but that's minor.
Yeap i like to see the PC ui/menu as well. It seems after commands were assigned using the tactical camera, the camera pans down to third person. Any idea that we can remain the battle tactical all the time?
Yeap i like to see the PC ui/menu as well. It seems after commands were assigned using the tactical camera, the camera pans down to third person. Any idea that we can remain the battle tactical all the time?
Using Engage mode at the very least. Can we besides Engage mode? It's possible but we haven't seen such functionality yet. Although it seems odd for BW to say you can play "most of the game" in tactical view if that means holding down a button for most of the game.
DA:I combat looks like a grown up version of DA2 combat complete with tactical view and dialed down animations.
Lets say its in the last stage of puberty. Yes, it feels more grounded than in DA2 but with all the funky color splashes it tuns the battlefield into a 70's disco (let 70's disco funk play in your head next time you are watching the video), and there are still people doing giant leaps, weapons that smash the ground like an impacting meteor and that strange rubber band / BDSM leather leash that pulls you to enemies or pulls enemies to you. I hope the Indiana Jones theme plays whenever we use it.
Man, I so hope its possible to play the game without the latter, I'm so NOT going to use it.
I dunno. I want rpg combat. Not Soul Calibur 5 with 4 characters.
Bioware once again seem to toss out features from games that were actually popular and sold well, Dragon Age Origins, in favour of improving features from games that was less so, Dragon Age 2. It doesn't make much sense to me unless they truly hate traditional RPGs and don't think they would sell at all. Despite the fact that Origins did well.
In my opinion the entire idea behind tactical camera is that it's a party effort to handle the encounter. From that perspective it doesn't matter if rogues or warriors are not as flashy as the mages because they are just one piece of a whole and I will be controlling them all each encounter and not just one of them.
I never had a problem making a Fighter or thief main in Baldur's gate for example. Some fights they might just have auto-attacked or done very little compared to the NPC mages but it was the group that mattered and not the single individual. In Dragon Age Inquisition though it seems like every individual is equally flashy and I wonder if there will even be a point of making a balanced party. All in all the new combat system looks quite boring to me.
DA:I combat looks like a grown up version of DA2 combat complete with tactical view and dialed down animations. The surfboard wielding two-hander, epileptic mage, and fantasy ninja on crack are gone (or at least tempered to something a little more traditional). I really don't understand why people are complaining.
People complain, that's what they do.
I've come to the solemn realization that most "gamers" just want an endless stream of expansion packs to their favorite game, instead of new experiences altogether.
People complain, that's what they do.
I've come to the solemn realization that most "gamers" just want an endless stream of expansion packs to their favorite game, instead of new experiences altogether.
the only thing i want is a "skip combat" button 
Guest_E-Ro_*
I dunno. I want rpg combat. Not Soul Calibur 5 with 4 characters.
What exactly is this "rpg combat" you speak of?
I guess what I am asking here is, what constitutes rpg combat? do you mean you want it to be turn based?
I dunno. I want rpg combat. Not Soul Calibur 5 with 4 characters.
Guest_simfamUP_*
DA:I combat looks like a grown up version of DA2 combat complete with tactical view and dialed down animations. The surfboard wielding two-hander, epileptic mage, and fantasy ninja on crack are gone (or at least tempered to something a little more traditional). I really don't understand why people are complaining.
You always make me laugh, Batman :-)
I dunno. I want rpg combat. Not Soul Calibur 5 with 4 characters.
And what is that? Baldur's Gate combat? Fallout 1&2 combat? Elder Scrolls combat? Deus Ex combat? The Witcher combat? Board and Dice combat?
Combat looks fine. Animations were slowed down, so they don't look riddiculous anymore, Weapon animations seem to carry weight this time around, enemies doesn't materialize from thin air...All is well.
The only aspect troubling me, is weapon based damage for mages. They should stick to it being attribute based IMHO. But I'm willing to wait and see how it works in actual gameplay.
In my opinion the entire idea behind tactical camera is that it's a party effort to handle the encounter. From that perspective it doesn't matter if rogues or warriors are not as flashy as the mages because they are just one piece of a whole and I will be controlling them all each encounter and not just one of them.
This is not Baldur' Gate. Not every plays the game as a Tactical game. Console player's never really had the options.
You remember us, right? The Console players? Who Bioware is also making the game for? And who all don't play the game as invisible Sky-Generals? And might want their Rogue or Warrior to not be an auto-attack meat-shield for the Mage?
It looked good to me. Appears they have really found a good balance between action and tactical playstyles. However I noticed the hand magic attack was not present. I hope that isn't gone because I prefer that immensely over the staff twirling.
And what is that? Baldur's Gate combat? Fallout 1&2 combat? Elder Scrolls combat? Deus Ex combat? The Witcher combat? Board and Dice combat?
Combat looks fine. Animations were slowed down, so they don't look riddiculous anymore, Weapon animations seem to carry weight this time around, enemies doesn't materialize from thin air...All is well.
The only aspect troubling me, is weapon based damage for mages. They should stick to it being attribute based IMHO. But I'm willing to wait and see how it works in actual gameplay.
Jumping 50 feet backwards through the air from a stand still position isriddiculous. Summoning rocks from the ground by chopping your sword at it is dumb too. And every move seem to make the character sparkle and glow.
What exactly is this "rpg combat" you speak of?
I guess what I am asking here is, what constitutes rpg combat? do you mean you want it to be turn based?
Combat that doesn't go against the lore of the gameworld every damn second.
rpg combat varies
The deffinition of rpgs has started to vary. Mostly because calling something an rpg, sells.
The deffinition of rpgs has started to vary.
The deffinition of rpgs has started to vary. Mostly because calling something an rpg, sells.
Actually, the definition of RPG has varied because the terms Role, Playing and Game are incredibly vague. Kind of like Action/Adventure.
A Real RPG tends to mean nothing more or less than what a game that introduced the term to a player is. At least that's the common thread I've found.
Both.
Then I absolutely disagree with you, PC DAO combat was by no means slow or boring. You had the ability to play it as fast, or slow as you wanted. No clue if the console version allowed this.
Retour en haut
