181 réponses à ce sujet

[10K]

I can understand the point you are making, but you are going to need to explain the bolded part above. Why do you personally feel this way?

I personally feel this way because Origins combat is simply boring. There is no player involvement at all. The best part of Origins is its story and nothing more. I found myself uninterested in investing more playthroughs just because most of the time I'm in combat and it's not worth it. That's my main issue with Origins, no player involvement, I dislike watching my character do everything. I like DA2 combat more because it gave me a choice to play in a more interactive way. Even if it was a simple button that I mashed.

That being said, I much prefer DA2 and I thought it was the better overall experience. I play on both console an PC for all games. Using K&M for Inquisition on PC. Yes it's abit clunky but I have gotten use to it.

[Razir-Samus]

I personally feel this way because Origins combat is simply boring. There is no player involvement at all. The best part of Origins is its story and nothing more. I found myself uninterested in investing more playthroughs just because most of the time I'm in combat and it's not worth it. That's my main issue with Origins, no player involvement, I dislike watching my character do everything. I much DA2 because it gave me a choice to play in a more interactive way.

That being said, I much prefer DA2 and I thought it was the better overall experience. I play on both console an PC for all games. Using K&M for Inquisition on PC. Yes it's abit clunky but I have gotten use to it.

the involvement is setting the tactics correctly, learning over time, adapting them to make your team function better... and if that fails, micromanage to get the highest efficiency out of your team when the situation really calls for it

 

your character in DA:O/DA2 does nothing if you don't tell it to do something, i think you may be somewhat confused

[10K]

the involvement is setting the tactics correctly, learning over time, adapting them to make your team function better... and if that fails, micromanage to get the highest efficiency out of your team when the situation really calls for it
 
your character in DA:O/DA2 does nothing if you don't tell it to do something, i think you may be somewhat confused

What are you taking about? I agree Inqusition has the best combat out of all games. I was explaining way I liked DA2 combat over Origins.

[TobyJake]

Yeah, I'm a fanboy because, as Selea so elegantly put it, i'm not a daydreamer like you. This is a new game on  new engine with new game design incompatible with CRPG control scheme... Get over your nostalgia. Stop being a rampant consumerist that constantly whines because every detail didn't go your way. The console control scheme still has issues, that doesn't mean i get to act like a marginalized group suffering prejudice at the hands of a GAME developer. some of you seriously need to go to a third world country and really see what the world is really like... maybe then you would not be so attached to your video games and how developers deliver them to you.

We need comments like this especially after Lee and Laidlaw explained it so well. Shame on me for feeling let down. I should flagellate myself for being so crass as to expect to get what I was promised.  

[JessexYron]

The tactical view works fine as far as I can tell. I've been playing these games since BG1; the fact that the games evolve and change is fine with me. If you feel you were promised something by a business and you relied on that promise to be exactly what you had in your head in terms of what you wanted, you are maybe naive. People complained about DA2 as if it were the end of the world when it was actually a very fine game as far as I could tell, and I played it more than I played Origins because its approach was original. DAI is different from both in ways that are manageable and the game is huge and fun. I was frustrated with it until I learned how to use the tactical view. After that it made sense and has been a thrill to play.

 

Adapt or play something else. Simple choice, really.

[Ezkiel]

Actually the name of this thread explains most of our 'old fans' source of problems.

 

Well one thing that they did right was not to name it Dragon Age 3 because it really is different game from DA:O while only game universe is the same.

[1varangian]

DA:I does not have good action combat like Dark Souls or The Witcher. It does not have good tactical combat either - the stats and systems are too simplified and lacking. And the PC controls and tactical camera are simply horrible.

 

It's very disappointing since it seems otherwise the game is top notch - story, lore, characters, music are all great. But because of the bad gameplay the game is missing from the game and only after a few hours I find myself quitting DA:I.

 

It's baffling they are still trying to cater to both action players and RPG players in one title. And I like both genres but DA:I just fails badly at both.

 

Sad to see Bioware can't make good games anymore. Gameplay should always come first in a game and somehow they've lost sight of that.

[Doomsiren]

My problem with the combat is the small amount of abilities and the slow leveling. I am not an expert on the combat in the dragon age series, I will admit to that.

 

I am still playing the mage as of now and the amount of ability points you have and the slow leveling makes for a very monotonous combat experience. The very slow leveling and small amount of abilities and ability points you can get makes the mages spell arsenal limited and boring. especially early and mid game I just keep casting the same spells over and over again. Unless you distrubute your abilites among the different schools of magic but then you are the master of none of the schools.

 

And while it is logical that different creatures have different weaknesses and strenghts, I find it hard to specialize in a certain school because doing so severly limits your damage against creatures resistent to said school of magic. I feel the game forces me to take spells from all schools of magic, but that means I can't really grow to be a master of a school of magic untill much later in the game.

 

And where in the hell did they leave blood magic and the magic skill tree of earth?

[Gel214th]

DA:I does not have good action combat like Dark Souls or The Witcher. It does not have good tactical combat either - the stats and systems are too simplified and lacking. And the PC controls and tactical camera are simply horrible.

 

It's very disappointing since it seems otherwise the game is top notch - story, lore, characters, music are all great. But because of the bad gameplay the game is missing from the game and only after a few hours I find myself quitting DA:I.

 

It's baffling they are still trying to cater to both action players and RPG players in one title. And I like both genres but DA:I just fails badly at both.

 

Sad to see Bioware can't make good games anymore. Gameplay should always come first in a game and somehow they've lost sight of that.

The stats do not mean anything.

 

Dexterity does not determine whether you hit or not, neither does cunning. You don't need a certain amount of stats to wear armor, use weapons, or learn abilities.

That's why players have no visibility or control of stats, because they are meaningless.

 

There are no dice rolls to determine whether your character parries or dodges going on in the background. Thost attributes even being there is just a holdover from the time when Dragon Age was a stats based computer RPG. 

 

IF you don't move out of AOE, you get hit. If you don't time your Evade, you get hit. If you the player don't time your parry or your shield wall...well...you get hit. You're not controlling a strategic team of characters with attributes that you grow and mold into a particular direction. You are basically in an Action RPG where your reflexes, timing, and aim matter more than anything you do on your character sheet. 

 

The character sheet is redundant in DA:I, and that is why it does not even have numbers anymore. It's just coloured bars. 

 

The combat and design of this game would work perfectly with just Health and Stamina/Mana as the two "attributes". All the rest can actually be simplified into the weapons and armor that the character is using. Oh, Critical Chance has a place in combat, but that can be tacked onto the weapons as well.

 

Health and Energy, that's what you need to track for a character. 

 

With the style of combat we have, this would have worked for our characters.

 

 

And the important console gamer demographic would have felt right at home 

 

Here is someone else who defines and explains the problems from the perspective of the Rogue class in melee. 

 

http://forum.bioware...2#entry17866982

 

Makes a lot of sense! 

Modifié par Gel214th, 25 novembre 2014 - 03:32 .

[Sevitan7]

That's why players have no visibility or control of stats, because they are meaningless.

 

I'd just like to add two things. First, you do get limited control of your stats, through crafting, and visibility on the attributes page. Some of it seems outright wrong, and some is obfuscated behind unknown formulas so it's worthless. It's just the effect of these stats are tiny.

 

Second, I don't know if you know how right you are! Difference between your stats at level 1 and say 15 isn't in fact very large. Any stat differences comes from the few passives you picked up, and your weapon + armor. While the difference between a level 1 and 15 in Origins and DA2 is very clear, it's barely noticeable here.

 

And yet, you obviously becomes easier to defeat higher level enemies as you match their level despite almost not statistical progression. Alas, from my limited testing I have found that the primary factor in combat performance is not your stats/tactics/builds but the difference in levels between you and your target. It's more or less some sort of hidden scaling system. Enemies below your level deal far less damage to you and take more damage. Enemies in higher level than you take less damage, and deal far more damage to you. Despite the fact your stats barely change at all between levels.

 

This is really the worst part. Not only is this game a gutted RPG mechanically on surface, but at its core it's just pretending to be one, artificially determining the mechanical challenge of combat on hidden values we don't have access to.

 

Bioware is quite well known for illusion of choice in their games. Now it seems they threw in an illusion of a rpg progression and game play.

[Nerevar-as]

I personally feel this way because Origins combat is simply boring. There is no player involvement at all. The best part of Origins is its story and nothing more. I found myself uninterested in investing more playthroughs just because most of the time I'm in combat and it's not worth it. That's my main issue with Origins, no player involvement, I dislike watching my character do everything. I like DA2 combat more because it gave me a choice to play in a more interactive way. Even if it was a simple button that I mashed.

That being said, I much prefer DA2 and I thought it was the better overall experience. I play on both console an PC for all games. Using K&M for Inquisition on PC. Yes it's abit clunky but I have gotten use to it.

¿?

 

The only thing the PC made in Origins by itself was autoattack, and whatever tactics you chose. The rest was by player input. DAII was similar but with the worst mechanics I´ve ever come across, unless you like to button mash attacks I guess. But spamming basic attacks is not very involving to me.

[Razir-Samus]

What are you taking about? I agree Inqusition has the best combat out of all games. I was explaining way I liked DA2 combat over Origins.

in a vague sense that's what you did... i was responding to the larger portion of text though, the point you made about there being no player involvement in DA:O, which i think is utter **** and i explained why it simply wasn't the case

 

DA2 to me was faster-paced, a bit streamlined, definitely had better synergy because you had those spinning icons appear above mobs when they were afflicted by the numerous status effects, though not too different to the combat in DA:O, both needed a decent grasp of tactics and/or micromanagement to prevail

[AlanC9]

This is really the worst part. Not only is this game a gutted RPG mechanically on surface, but at its core it's just pretending to be one, artificially determining the mechanical challenge of combat on hidden values we don't have access to.

Bioware is quite well known for illusion of choice in their games. Now it seems they threw in an illusion of a rpg progression and game play.

Wait a minute. What you've posted makes it sound like it's the gutting that's the illusion; there actually is progression, but we can't see it.

[AlanC9]

¿?
 
The only thing the PC made in Origins by itself was autoattack, and whatever tactics you chose. The rest was by player input. DAII was similar but with the worst mechanics I´ve ever come across, unless you like to button mash attacks I guess. But spamming basic attacks is not very involving to me.

I don't see what was different about DA2's actual mechanics. A bit faster, and different animations, but other than that? Unless you deliberately turned button-mashing on, of course.

[Teshayel]

Sadly true. The Banner Saga, Divinity: Original Sin, and Wasteland 2 (and Pillars of Eternity soon, hopefully) are proof that indies are where the tactical RPG love is. AAA developers just want to make Michael Bay movies.

 

Don't forget Torment: Tides of Numenera They have managed to raise quite a bit of money for that game. I thought it worth backing, and am waiting for the beta right now Pillars of Eternity reminds me very much of Temple of Elemental Evil. Looking forward to that one

[panda_express12]

i can live without auto attacks but I still can't believe that they got rid of the Tactics system. I have to babysit my party members all the time instead of only occasionally like in Origins.

[Z.Z]

My problem isn't about the change, it's about the lack of excitement in normal action mode and the bad controls in tactical mode. Providing more options is never a bad idea, providing unpolished, compromised options is.

I love action hack and slash games like Demon's Souls series. I love old school fantasy RPGs like Baldur's Gate. I love Mound & Blade and Borderlands and Civilization and Divinity and many more. I have no problem with the genre, or innovation. I play lots of indie games so I can handle new ideas. But there is one thing I don't like: Jack of all trades. And currently, DA:I combat feels exactly like that.

In normal mode, you have a targeting system and a skill based dodge mechanic. It's what I call watered down action, like the one Guild Wars 2 has. It's good for a MMO, but unfortunately can't keep me entertained. Tactical stuff is cool so I opted using tactical mode, and I had to suffer from the lack of multiple character selection, camera glitches, auto-center, etc., none of which exists in DA . So instead of getting a good action experience or a tactical one I got an underwhelming hybrid.

Now you may like hybrid, or you've experienced no problems in extensive use of tactical mode, or you find the action and control in normal mode sufficient. That's good. But it doesn't mean my complaint is based on the lack of understanding and adaption.

[BobaFett]

I have seen this happen time and time again with many games.  A lot are EA game series.  Mass effect, DA, F.E.A.R., dead space and the list goes on and on.  these games started out clearly in one genre and have morphed into action games, which really just kills them for me.  there is a difference in evolving the game and just making them action titles.  This game (and partly ME3) made me realize Bioware and EA no longer no how to evolve games in a genre for the fans that love them, so this will be my last EA and Bioware title.  

 

This makes me sad because ME and DA, both have been 2 of my favorite game series until their recent iterations.  ME3 was OK, i didn't even mind the ending that everyone was up and arms about, but mostly the fact that the game started as a sci fi tactical RPG and basically just turned into another CoD/MW clone with a tacked on RPG element.  Now I have watched DA:O do the same thing.   Thank you for the many great years of gaming I had with you Bioware.  Hopefully no more of these smaller design studios let the 800 lbs gorilla buy out and take control of their companies, as they are ruining all the great series.

[Z.Z]

I have seen this happen time and time again with many games.  A lot are EA game series.  Mass effect, DA, F.E.A.R., dead space and the list goes on and on.  these games started out clearly in one genre and have morphed into action games, which really just kills them for me.  there is a difference in evolving the game and just making them action titles.  This game (and partly ME3) made me realize Bioware and EA no longer no how to evolve games in a genre for the fans that love them, so this will be my last EA and Bioware

It's not just EA. I feel your pain, but to me it would have been fine if DA:I was indeed a complete action game, relying on player's skills and timing to beat the enemies. But no, it's still a numbers game because it has to sacrifice the action potential in favor of tactical possibilities.

[Nerevar-as]

I don't see what was different about DA2's actual mechanics. A bit faster, and different animations, but other than that? Unless you deliberately turned button-mashing on, of course.

Party and enemies playing by different rules and a combat assimetry the size of the Everest are very big different mechanics to me, and not for the worse.

[Shelled]

I have seen this happen time and time again with many games.  A lot are EA game series.  Mass effect, DA, F.E.A.R., dead space and the list goes on and on.  these games started out clearly in one genre and have morphed into action games, which really just kills them for me.  there is a difference in evolving the game and just making them action titles.  This game (and partly ME3) made me realize Bioware and EA no longer no how to evolve games in a genre for the fans that love them, so this will be my last EA and Bioware title.  

 

This makes me sad because ME and DA, both have been 2 of my favorite game series until their recent iterations.  ME3 was OK, i didn't even mind the ending that everyone was up and arms about, but mostly the fact that the game started as a sci fi tactical RPG and basically just turned into another CoD/MW clone with a tacked on RPG element.  Now I have watched DA:O do the same thing.   Thank you for the many great years of gaming I had with you Bioware.  Hopefully no more of these smaller design studios let the 800 lbs gorilla buy out and take control of their companies, as they are ruining all the great series.

way too true. They start off as unique experiences that should remain unique, then they evolve into mindless action games that require little to no thought at all to play.
 

This happened to dead space 3 massively, it wasn't scary at all it was just a pure corridor shooter action game. It didn't even attempt to startle you at all.

[Sunlight Heart]

Exactly this is not just about PC ui. its a clear dumbing down of the game franchise to cater soley for a Console to try to capture an audience other then RPG players. the problem is the Action combat and implementation of this is so terrible Zenimax is laughing at all the way to the bank. They did a better job with action combat in a MMO then this did for a single player game. this is the Death nail for me ill not buy another BW product ever i passed on ME3 after reading reviews. this i had hopes for and pre ordered. Shame on me

 

I hope you don't really believe that the dumbing down came from the need to cater to consoles. It came from devs and publishers thinking that gamers are stupid and impatient, which the loud minority is. 

 

DA:O had the same systems as Final Fantasy XII(PS2 exclusive). You're telling me that they dumbed down a PS2 game for the current gen consoles? Naw, me thinks they are just trying to pull in people who can't be bothered to think to much when they play games. Hardware was irrelevant.

 

They failed with what they are trying to do. Action games don't like the fact that they have to do a bit of micromanagement and build intelligently. RPG players are simultaneously confused, baffled, and disappointed by the lack of depth in the games mechanics/ puzzling design choices (no healing magic, dafuq?). 

[Sevitan7]

Party and enemies playing by different rules and a combat assimetry the size of the Everest are very big different mechanics to me, and not for the worse.

Asymmetry was in Origins too, just done a lot better. Though it's true, DA2 pumped it up, I would argue those aren't exactly mechanical differences; different mathematics didn't change the core game play elements, they were rather calculated differently.  The combat, tactics wise, played mostly the same and better in some aspects and worse in other compared to Origins.

 

I agree that asymmetry in combat system is generally a bad thing and a move for the worst though, it didn't make the combat in DA2 a lesser experience than Origins to me.

[Sunlight Heart]

 

4. Cannot allocate attribute points. I want my own customization, thank you bioware. I do not own a console and I am not 14 years old. It also eliminates the potential for different kind of builds but basically you stripped us of that freedom.

 

I wish people would stop adding consoles into their argument like they are a factor... Consoles have nothing to do with their dumbing down of mechanics.

[Razir-Samus]

I wish people would stop adding consoles into their argument like they are a factor... Consoles have nothing to do with their dumbing down of mechanics.

don't they? i bet many design choices were made with consoles in mind, hell, i'll state that as a fact