I think that, between DA:O and DA:I, this is really what it boils down to. There are many things about DA II's combat that I would consider to simply be poor combat design; DA:I is mostly decently designed mechanically, but not at all to my taste (I do like the game despite that, however). DA:O is also well designed, although not perfect, but far more to my taste mechanically.
I can and do easily adapt to different systems in games, but I have a strong preference for auto attack and auto dodging in RPGs because I feel that's a better fit for the genre. It represents more fully that it's your character who's doing the attacking, and you're controlling your character by coming up with the strategy and building the character as they level up and so forth. I'm actually fairly fond of action combat, in action games -- I like first-person shooters, for instance -- I just don't feel that it mixes well with RPGs. It also often creates a disconnect between the lore of the game world and what one hears in character and the mechanics, and that is not a good thing. It's a problem I have with DA:I.
Which is why I say it is all about personal preference. Personally, I never associate the RPG genre with any particular game mechanic. It is about me assuming the role of a character and that's it. The rest are all meta gaming.
To me, I am assuming the role of one character and the need to control my companions makes me feel like I am playing WH40k.





Retour en haut







