158 réponses à ce sujet

[Noelemahc]

Where's the "dislike post" button when you need it?

 

OP, the core mechanic of Dragon Age was party-based combat, because it was supposed to refill the niche left after Baldur's Gate became unfashionable (and was finished seventeen times) and which NWN failed to even reach the edges of.

 

If you want to play a Skyrim-like game, there's plenty of wannabes out there in the void, but the point is, abandoning genres that made you famous is a surefire way to suicide. It's what killed the olden giants - Sierra and LucasArts first among them.

[TheJiveDJ]

Hmm...I can see what you're saying OP, but the old school BW fan in me can't bring myself to fully agree with nixing the party. I'm not sure what the answer is. BW definitely has a problem right now IMO...maybe not financially...but definitely a lack of direction, a lack of focus in my humble opinion. As a fan of their older games, I see BW as being everywhere and nowhere...attempting to do everything, but not getting far...what the exact problem is...is hard to narrow down.

Meddling from upper management? Multi platform focus? Lack of experience on the new engine? Exodus of talent? Online integration? The AAA games culture? Trying to cater to the fans TOO much? I'm not sure.

 

Does BW even recognize any of these "issues", or are they happy appealing to the new breed of fans that enjoy the current direction of the series? Are these even issues in the first place? I'm not arrogant enough to think that my opinion is the only opinion that should matter, or that my idea of a "BW game" is objectively better than someone else's. Perhaps we are looking at BW games through rose-colored nostalgia goggles? Perhaps our expectations are too high?

 

On the other hand, I can't see how a vast majority of BW's consumers enjoy grinding fetch quests...maybe story and tactics don't matter anymore? Maybe that's not where the money is?
 

Back in the day, games would live or die by word of mouth, hence the success of DAO...now, it's all about getting those pre-orders and day one purchases. That is THE bread and butter...thats what brings home the bacon for EA...and it's...sad, to be honest. Word of mouth can still vastly affect post launch-week sales though, so we'll see what happens...once they have the numbers, EA will decide on the direction BW will take with the series, regardless of our opinions on the matter...

[Pauravi]

Right now, most people will have to agree that the combat system in DA:I is 'acceptable' at best.

 

They will?  Is this the result of some sort of properly conducted survey?

Oh no wait, it's you asserting a premise because you want your opinion to sound like a vetted factual statement.

 

 

 

It doesn't have ... the accuracy/timing of Skyrim combat.

 

LMFAO! XD XD

 

 

 

To me, the next logical step which could actually improve the combat greatly, is removing party members (who can be controlled manually) from the equation. ... It would be a heckuva lot easier to make responsive, skill based combat when Bioware only has to consider one or two party members in all.

 

First, you're assuming that combat mechanics are the most important thing to everyone.

Second, you're assuming that people want "skill based combat".

Neither of those are true.

 

 

The Dragon Age series used to have it's (old school) tactical mechanics - which have since then been stripped away. ... Again, I'm not trying to say it's inherently bad they they aimed for more action oriented combat, I just think they should go the full mile.

 

I disagree with both the idea that the tactical mechanics are gone, and that it is now more "action oriented".  I don't understand the basis for this argument at all.  It appears to boil down to "combat isn't slow and unresponsive".  The lethargically slow sword-swinging and skills that don't happen until 3 seconds after you click the button appear to be the only significant aspects of DA:O that are missing.  Oh, and you have to hold the mouse button down to auto-attack.  It still requires no dexterity or skill to aim your sword swings or spells or arrows, you can still pause combat and select everyone's skill usages, there are still skill combos... the idea that the current combat regime is some half-assed version of an action game is patently ridiculous from where I'm sitting.  And then your solution to "improve" it is to remove one of the most popular and well-executed parts of BioWare's games at large?  One of BioWare's biggest strengths as a development studio is in their character writing, and you want to discard that in order to turn Dragon Age into Skyrim?  Eff that.

 

 

What do you guys think?

 

 

I think you're insane.

[Novos]

No need to be shy. While they are at it; why not make it an online only multiplayer game with co-op and pvp. They might implement a zombie survival mode as well...

 

Joke aside; they are already playing with the core elements helping the franchise stand out against others. That is the visible trend we are observing throughout the last two installments. I believe that dropping the party would be the last step of making it a generic action title. Which would bring us to the question; why should we buy that transformed title instead of plenty others already established and very good at what they do ?

 

Why can' t we have unique titles as they are is beyond me. Why does every title needs to be dumbed into an imaginary stereotype of mass appeal ? I really don' t get it. It is not about profits as they already have good ROI; even DA:O which is considered the most oldschool and hardcore sold around 6 million.

 

There is no need to waste time and resources. Transforming Dragon Age franchise into a blockbuster is a lost cause. It is never gonna get there. Up to now; they got away with changes and returns here and there. But a move like that, i don' t know. I beileve they would be in for a nasty surprise if they go on with that route...   

[wright1978]

No removing party members would be suicidal.

[pengwin21]

Getting rid of companions (the thing Bioware is probably the best at) because party based combat is harder to do well than single character combat doesn't seem like a good tradeoff. 

[Pauravi]

On the other hand, I can't see how a vast majority of BW's consumers enjoy grinding fetch quests...maybe story and tactics don't matter anymore? Maybe that's not where the money is?

 

I don't understand.

Do you not remember all the fetch quests from DA:O or Baldur's Gate?

Did your copy of Inquisition not come with a tactical cam, or the ability to pause the game and issue attack orders like in Origins?

[Lianaar]

The issue is not that they should get rid of companions. That has been a hallmark of their games for several years now. At least since ME1 which was my first BW game and I think that was around 07 or 08? The issue is that if they are going to have companions and create all this content around them (conversations, relationships, quests, banter) then they need to step it up and be a grown up company who really puts effort into the AI. If freaking Capcom can do it with Dragon's Dogma then BW/EA can. There is no reason they cannot. It's been proven it is absolutely possible to make AI that plays as if it is a player playing. Actually, on my half wind almost no sleep days, the AI pawns played BETTER than me. On days for fun where I wanted to just watch my pawns do what I taught them and see how good they were, I would sit back and do nothing and they would flawlessly kill some brutal foes without me lifting a finger. That is impressive AI. And if Capcom can do it, BW can do it because capcom doesn't even make anywhere near what EA/BW makes on most of its games. I've seen the financials. There's just no excuse. I won't even pretend there is one. Nor will I stick up for any company that actually makes a new game with AI that is inferior to previous versions. That's instant EXTREME disapproval.

You list games you like and that is great. It kind of indicates you are a mainstream gamer, that has many or a considerable amount of games you enjoy and love. I am happy for you.
I am a niche gamer, which means very few games I like. I do try them out and I fail to enjoy them. Because they deliver nothing I seek. Combat, AI and other terms you use mean nothing to me and add nothing to my fun.
This is the reason I am so vehemently opposed to altering the very few games, that I actually enjoy.

 

Yes, BW has the damn right to change their games however they want, whenever they want. If they want to make a DA:Shooter, that is in their right. If they want to do a DA:strategic board game, it is still their right. But I prefer the ones I have. I am one of the few who didn't like DA:O the most.

If they want to change the combat and AI? I personally don't give a damn (as long as I can play it without having to dedicate too much attention to the fighting part, if I want to shoot I use shooter, if I want to plan strategy, I play a game like that). But I want to have my party. I want to have the personalities and stories that are presently given.

Again, if BW decides to totally change it, I'll accept albeit I won't be happy. But I will voice my hope they won't change it. I totally accept you enjoying other aspects of games. I just don't want to lose something I enjoy due to 'community request'.

[Pauravi]

This new ai is bad but it's still slightly better than my wall shooting Ashley and Liara in me 1. Love both those girls dearly but they weren't much help for me on that entire mission.

 

LMAO.  I often feel that way about BioWare companions.  It's a good thing I love them to bits because they aren't helping much.

 

I have to say, DAI is a lot better, though.  They finish combos, taunt enemies, cast barriers at useful times, and do plenty of damage.  They aren't as careful or intelligent as I'd like them to be, but for an AI it is pretty competent.

[Dubya75]

Hahahaha, OP.....NO.

 

Party-based combat is at the very heart of Dragon Age games! You are suggesting ripping out the heart. Simply not going to happen.

 

Best you just run along and go play some other game.

[Hizoku]

nah just get rid of the gamplay and add in the point and click style combat similar to the telltale games', but keep the exploration.. that way they can focus more resources on whats important 

[Shechinah]

Considering I play for the story and the companions, the party gives a feel of comradey and makes sense, I have to say no because holy ****, have you seen what lives in the world who would go alone?

 

Seriously, though, I adore the feeling of (sometimes teeth-clenched) teamwork, the friendly (bickering) banter and general atmosphere a party gives.

[hafiznero]

i hope they put more party members like 10. like warcraft 3

[rafoquinha]

Dont drop the party, but allow human players to control the rest of the team.IN short: co-op campaign next time

[Namea]

A) Swinging wildly like I'm flailing noddles, in some of the most lazy animations I've ever seen - Usually in the rhythm of "In, swish, out , clang" is not what I'd consider "Accurate" or proper "timing", most of the game (Especially if you Meta'd), you could waltz in, pull the attack trigger, and win. 

 

Just because they went for Action Oriented Combat, doesn't make the party any less relevant. Short of them Standing in the Dragon's Breath sometimes, my AI has been rather responsive - and I'd prefer to keep things as they were.

 

A1 Steak Sauce) While I do like Dragon's Dogma approach to Combat, being able to grab onto an enemy or climb large-scaled monsters; truly the best thing since Shadow of the Colossus. The AI There was much much much worse.

 

Pawns attempting to use useless spells/attacks for the encounter at hand, riding monsters off a ledge because their AI tells them to hold onto it for an advantage, repeating the same five lines of dialogue about an enemy in a single fight. I even had one pick me up and almost throw me off a ledge once. Then I proceeded to reciprocate by throwing him off a ledge.

 

Next thing we know it'll be "Ramirez, Do this!"

 

Actually the Pawn AI in DD can be really great and refined if you train your pawns properly and use properly trained ones as well. Your pawn learns from your main character AND from other pawns in your party or in the parties that rent them. Occasionally you may have to use a potion to change their inclination if they start going too far in a way that doesn't suit your playstyle. You also have to make sure that you take a look at the pawns inclinations in the rift and pick ones that suit your playstyle as well so they work cohesively as a team. 

[BammBamm]

hell no!!!

 

they should make the combat more tactical and not less. divinity original sin is great mainly through its turn based combat, this system combined with dragon ages storytelling and the graphics of inquisition would be a beast. but maybe the target audience would be way smaller with it.

[mav805]

As much as I may like ANOTHER Bioware franchise that is more like what the OP is describing, that isn't what I play Dragon Age for. One of the best things about the game is the companions. It's bad enough now with how infrequently banter triggers.

[Dee-Jay]

Sounds like you want the Witcher 3 as it offers exactly what you described.

 

And I disagree. A party of characters is one of the defining features or Dragon Age especially and Bioware games in general. Sacrificing that would sacrifice what Bioware does best and make the title more generic.

 

But I agree that combat ultimately isn't satisfying the way it works now. Relying on AI too much sucks and the tactical mode is built for Mouse and Keyboard and doesn't really work well with a controller, which is still the primary market.

 

Maybe turn-based combat, like in the Final-Fantasy series would be the best compromise. It allows for controller-friendly yet tactical combat. Bioware could put their own twist on the formula and see how it goes.

[Sidney]

Combat is a limiter in terms of what makes the DA games marketable. I'd guess DAI sells a lot better if it is a first person shooter based combat like Skyrim or Fallout 3 or even if it was the timing/counter system from TW because that would appeal to AC and Arkham type players. Twitch is a bigger market and both those games are a lot more twitchy than DA. All that said from a business sense I understand why they might change the combat system I personally like the party based point n' click combat system -- mostly because I suck at twitchy combat.

[Tsunami Chef]

It seems the problem is pandering to mainstream so much that they take a brilliant game and dumb it down to the extent that the combat ends up completely messed up. And they don't care because that mainstream is getting the a lot of customers that will play anything or nearly anything. We in this forum are the smallest group of who actually purchases this game. We have the tiniest voice that they choose to ignore.

 

I had hope for this game after the reviews but the reviewers review so much mainstream that this is probably a bright shining star to them. However, to fans of older BW games it is a lackluster one for sure. I has a lot of good things that can't be dismissed but in the end the story is uninspired, the gameplay is terrible or not particularly good, half the maps are vast wastelands of boring, and it really just isn't half as great as it was made out to be. Such a shame to see so much squandered potential.

In many people's opinion the DA:O combat was "completely messed up", in that it was a slow, boring, potion spamming, OP class fest. You guys are free to act as if Bioware has passed you by, but please don't act as if you are the sole bastions of true gaming left while Bioware leaves to appeal to the mainstream losers.

 

Anyone can do what you did. DA:O really isn't half as great as it was made out to be. It was such a shame to see them waste so much potential. All the maps are stagnant with no life. Hell the village in redcliffe in DA:I is more lively than any location in DA:O or Dragon Age awakening. So sad they did this to appeal to lesser fans.

 

Pandering to the mainstream is a modern term for not getting stuck in the middle ages of gaming. If programmers didn't pander to the mainstream we would still have baldurs gate graphics and combat system.

[daveliam]

I am definitely in the camp that would prefer a weaker combat system if it means that I can keep the party dynamics.  I have little to no interest in a single player action RPG with no party members in the DA setting.  That's not what I play Bioware games for.

[Rocambole4]

Hey guys,

 

Whether you like DA:I combat or not, it is quite apparent that Bioware does not consider tactical party RPG's to be financially feasible for this generation of hardware. Right now, most people will have to agree that the combat system in DA:I is 'acceptable' at best. It doesn't have quite the weight of Dark Souls combat or the accuracy/timing of Skyrim combat. A large reason the combat is like this is because it allows for some degree of tactical control utilizing all your party members. 

 

To me, the next logical step which could actually improve the combat greatly, is removing party members (who can be controlled manually) from the equation. I know, Bioware games usually lean heavily on party banters and such - that's why I think it might still be feasible to have perhaps one non controllable NPC with you in the next DA games. It would be a heckuva lot easier to make responsive, skill based combat when Bioware only has to consider one or two party members in all.

 

The Mass Effect series has the benefit of FPS mechanics which invoke skill. The Dragon Age series used to have it's (old school) tactical mechanics - which have since then been stripped away. I'm trying to form a concept in my head on how this will evolve over their next games. Again, I'm not trying to say it's inherently bad they they aimed for more action oriented combat, I just think they should go the full mile.

 

What do you guys think? 

While Bioware seem to have lost the way of the group combat, I think they gotta stay at their strong side or they'll become one more skyrim-wanabee copycats.

That said... c'mon, skyrim combat? Skyrim combat is complete thrash. The first time Bethesda EVER hit the nail was in Dishonored.

[Aurok]

I honestly don't know where they go from here. Their fanbase wants one thing and the audience EA desperately wants to attract wants something else entirely.

If they want to risk losing their fans & go for the big sales they pretty much need to turn this entirely into Thedas Scrolls: Dragonrim. If they want to play it safe they stick with this pseudo-tactical button-awesome which seems to do just enough to keep the faithful on board, and just enough to keep the masses away.