46 réponses à ce sujet

[Wulfram]

Agreed. And it can work if you get the balance right. But it works as a game, rather than as any sort of model of how the game-world could actually work. In any sort of realistic universe, the enemies would do what a human player does -- put down the glass cannons as hard and fast as possible.

Though in a realistic universe you'd find it a lot harder to ignore the fighter getting in your face in order to get at the glass cannons. Not because of taunts but because they'd stab you in the back if you try to run past them.

[AnimalBoy]

In DA2, I'd get obsessively fixated on watching Anders do his mage thing. It was like he was a dancer!   

 

[Deanna Troy]

So you all remember how Dragon Age Origins combat animations were. Slow, sluggish, but looked physically realistic and feasible to perform.

 

Then in the later games we have rogues who literally disappear into a vacuum and blink 20 meters out of nowhere behind their targets or out of danger.

 

Smashing a chemical concoction, and freezing time.

 

Throwing one dagger summons 4 apparitions to strike the target from all angles. 

 

Slamming your shield into the ground summons 4 spirits armed with shields on your flanks 

 

Some warriors are strong enough to smash the ground and leave a crater of mantle magma escaping the cracks. 

 

Is this meant to be taken at face value and related to lore? These are specifically NOT mages, though I suppose templars and reavers have some sort of limited magic abilities. 

 

How do people do this in-universe without magic and by that I mean pure non-magic using warriors and rogues?

 

Or do I just disregard this because game mechanics. These animations are of course common in the universe mechanics of a JRPG, but this is a WRPG with a clearly defined system of magic involved. 

Well it is obvious that this is ridiculous but people here worship anything Bioware does so...
People talk about immersion, how the hell someone can have immersion when you feel like your Inquisitor could battle Goku Super Saiyajin God Super Saiyajin and win? It is not even level related, a lvl 1 character could do any of those skills which is completely absurd for a game the supposedly happens in a "serious" world.
Now just sit and wait the worshippers claim how it is all perfect, makes sense and how Bioware decisions are always right, I mean, it is completely ok to take this direction when it comes to the game animations, even when it makes the lore laughable because Bioware did it, so it is right.

[Wulfram]

Rogue's teleporting is one thing I'm pretty willing to accept as an abstraction. Rogues are tricksy and agile and show up in unexpected places. The Warrior Magma thing I have more trouble with, though.

I'd say what we see in cutscenes is probably the best representation of how combat is really supposed to look. Generally fairly grounded, though Bad Future Leliana shows some fancy tricks and probably reflects what a high level rogue can pull off.

[In Exile]

Though in a realistic universe you'd find it a lot harder to ignore the fighter getting in your face in order to get at the glass cannons. Not because of taunts but because they'd stab you in the back if you try to run past them.

In a realistic universe you wouldn't have 4 people fire teams as your base unit of combat.

[CardButton]

In a realistic universe you wouldn't have 4 people fire teams as your base unit of combat.

Yeah, now that you say it I do really kind of realize just how many "unrealistic" aspects there are for DA combat in general just to facilitate game-play.  I guess when you put it that way the combat animations aren't really that big a deal.  

[PapaCharlie9]

OMG! I had never seen that before. Oghren motorboating Wynne had me ROFL.

[Wavebend]

The movement is so realistic, yet all inquisition soldiers somehow have 60 inch verticals

[AlanC9]

Though in a realistic universe you'd find it a lot harder to ignore the fighter getting in your face in order to get at the glass cannons. Not because of taunts but because they'd stab you in the back if you try to run past them.

True. D&D tries to do that with AoOs. The problem is that a single melee attack can't be all that dangerous past low levels or combat would be over real fast,and there are too many ways to beat AoOs anyway. Remember ToEE bugbears?

[CronoDragoon]

I wouldn't say the combat animations in DAO were plausible so much as they were boring as s**t, especially if you were a warrior or an archer rogue. Mages also had that stupid "pew pew" attack with their staff where it looked like they were ejaculating balls of white sperm at the enemy. And I absolutely despised how sustained abilities would cause you to be enveloped in pink glowing mist or little red arrows or constantly have little pebbles dropping off of you. Thank the Maker that ended with Dragon Age 2.

Warriors and rogues had the worst of both worlds. They had moves and abilities that didn't look physically realistic at all or make any in-universe sense (Leliana's songs, anyone?) while also just being slow and clunky. If you're going to have immersion-breakers like those songs and Momentum, might as well make it tighter, more responsive, more fun.

[cindercatz]

Warriors and rogues had the worst of both worlds. They had moves and abilities that didn't look physically realistic at all or make any in-universe sense (Leliana's songs, anyone?) while also just being slow and clunky. If you're going to have immersion-breakers like those songs and Momentum, might as well make it tighter, more responsive, more fun.

I loved Momentum, actually improved immersion for me. Yeah, you see airstreams coming off them, but it's not a bad abstraction of how actual cqc can seem like a blur with moments where time seems to stop, combining with the slow down finishers, I mean. That's basically my experience in real fights. It's basically like a series of blurs and these flash perception moments where your mind kind of goes into this extreme focus and you're perceiving everything occurring in these little slices of time where you decide how to intercept that and how you're going to execute your next action. And you're operating in this heightened state. Firing on all cylanders. I used to actually enjoy the physical part of it, because it's just this high. Adrenaline high. That's how it really is in my experience.

That's what "the zone" is really describing too, in sports for example. For instance, I played baseball as a kid (not really my favorite sport, prefer hoops, but I liked playing), and at one point this guy hit a line drive straight into my teeth and layed me out. The next time that happened, same scenario, it seemed like time stopped with the baseball sitting right there in front of my face, and I had time to swing my glove up and snag it out of the air. Because that focus kicked in.

So that whole flow between momentum boosted combat and finishers was probably the most immersive thing about DA:O combat to me. Plus it has the effect of just speeding up combat and improving efficiency, so it's great imo.

[Ieldra]

I have the impression that combat in Bioware games has more and more become its own game rather than part of the story over time. I can't take it seriously at all any more. DAO was slow and clunky at times but it didn't break immersion because it didn't feature impossible feats of movement. DA2 made a parody of fighting, and DAI, while not nearly as bad, goes in the same direction.

 

The silliness of fighting in video rpgs in general doesn't help. Fighting shouldn't be a routine occurrence. In any remotely realistic scenario, you'd try to avoid, and successfully avoid, about 90% of the fights we see in a typical video rpgs, if not more. Combat should be an exceptional high-tension event, reserved to confrontations especially meaningful for the story. Instead, we're implausibly attacked by bears and wolves at every turn, and by bandits who should know of our reputation and back off once we've killed the first few bands.

 

IMO, the nonsensical presentation of rpg combat in Bioware games is a symptom of much bigger problem. Video rpgs need more activities they simulate, they should make activities other than combat interesting, and dialogue should be able to make visible changes in the world. Dialogue in Bioware games is its own game, too. Results are always told but almost never shown. That, too, needs to change. Game locations - game levels, technically - should be designed in a way that everything that could plausibly be changed by player character actions actually can be changed by player actions. More interactivity, more dynamism.

[In Exile]

I have the impression that combat in Bioware games has more and more become its own game rather than part of the story over time. I can't take it seriously at all any more. DAO was slow and clunky at times but it didn't break immersion because it didn't feature impossible feats of movement. DA2 made a parody of fighting, and DAI, while not nearly as bad, goes in the same direction.

 

The silliness of fighting in video rpgs in general doesn't help. Fighting shouldn't be a routine occurrence. In any remotely realistic scenario, you'd try to avoid, and successfully avoid, about 90% of the fights we see in a typical video rpgs, if not more. Combat should be an exceptional high-tension event, reserved to confrontations especially meaningful for the story. Instead, we're implausibly attacked by bears and wolves at every turn, and by bandits who should know of our reputation and back off once we've killed the first few bands.

 

IMO, the nonsensical presentation of rpg combat in Bioware games is a symptom of much bigger problem. Video rpgs need more activities they simulate, they should make activities other than combat interesting, and dialogue should be able to make visible changes in the world. Dialogue in Bioware games is its own game, too. Results are always told but almost never shown. That, too, needs to change. Game locations - game levels, technically - should be designed in a way that everything that could plausibly be changed by player character actions actually can be changed by player actions. More interactivity, more dynamism.

 

That's absurd, though, because fighting in DA:O was nonsense. The cutscenes tried to portray combat with actual weight - a single ogre crushed Cailan like a cheap plaster doll and Duncan was overwhelmed by darkspawn. The Warden could massacre four ogres alone. A single ogre could grab and crush you without even scuffing the armour. Dragons munched on you. Mages set you on fire and froze you. And you walked it all off with nary a scar while drinking a poultice. 

 

DA:O was the greatest parody of fighting. DA2, at the very least, embraced the demi-god level absurdity of fighting power in DA games. Same with DA:I - these are games that accept that pretending that combat is realistic is insanity. 

 

To the extent combat exists in an RPG, it will always be an absurdity and unrealistic. And pinning away for a particular type of unrealistic portrayal as being more realistic is silly. For a dialogue heavy game, you can maybe get away with rare combat. But that won't work for an AAA production, and frankly apart from PS:T I don't think we've ever seen a top-tier RPG waive combat. 

[Wulfram]

The Warden could massacre four ogres alone.

Only in the final battle maybe. Otherwise Ogres are at least Lieutenants and make challenging opponents 1 on 1.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

Disregard for a number of reasons, mechanics being one. Add: because they had to out-Skyrim Skyrim. Add: because Witcher 3/CD Projekt owns the lore-based game mechanics trophy, who can compete with that? Add: because the game design team doesn't talk to the writing team enough.

 

Add: because ...

 

CDPR > Bioware.

[In Exile]

Only in the final battle maybe. Otherwise Ogres are at least Lieutenants and make challenging opponents 1 on 1.

 

Absolutely not. Past level, say, 6-8, a single ogre and a few Lieutenants are a joke. 

[Silcron]

I'll be honest, if the combat was fun, precise and responsive I wouldn't give a crap, but having bought the dlcs and gone back to my sword and shield warrior, man, it's bad enough I have to hold one button to attack but it's also difficult to know when I'm close enough that I'll be actually attacking and when I have to get closer.

And yes, as a fencer it makes no sense. Lunge forward 10 meters? Sure, and the other guy should have enough time to drink a coffee before parrying you.

All in all, I think the problem can be enjoyment. If I enjoyed the combat I'd suspend my disbelief, if I don't my mind isn't engaged and start thinking, that's when I start picking it apart. Maybe I should just play a mage, it sucks that I can't enjoy it with my favourite class, but I dunno.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

The problem comes from the fact that Bioware is being hypocritical about this. You see them talk about wanting to have a believable world and environment yet the pull out the "gameplay segregation" and "its space magic" cards whenever it suits them.

 

By contrast, developers like CDProjektRed say they want to make a believable world and align their combat as well as their gameplay mechanics to match the in-game lore. Geralt's powers and tracking abilities reflect his skills as a Witcher. Yennefer and Triss' spellcasting reflect their proficiency as mages. Triss is a pyromancer and it shows in game where she mostly casts fire spells. Geralt's and Ciri's sword strikes and parry feel real. There is almost no gameplay segregation.

 

That is the core of the problem. Before Witcher 3, Bioware could use the "gameplay segregation" excuse but after Witcher 3, they simply can't because another RPG developer has demonstrated that yes, it is perfectly possible to make a role playing game where the gameplay mechanics and lore align with each other instead of requiring segregation.

[AlanC9]

So you all remember how Dragon Age Origins combat animations were. Slow, sluggish, but looked physically realistic and feasible to perform.

Realistic? A two-handed sword moving at that speed would never hit anyone who wasn't pushed into it.

[AlanC9]

That is the core of the problem. Before Witcher 3, Bioware could use the "gameplay segregation" excuse but after Witcher 3, they simply can't because another RPG developer has demonstrated that yes, it is perfectly possible to make a role playing game where the gameplay mechanics and lore align with each other instead of requiring segregation.

Has Bio ever said that they have to use gameplay segregation? I've read that they are using it, and even that they like using it, but I've never read that they felt they had to use it. It's not an excuse if you're doing it because you want to. Though maybe your bad taste needs an excuse.

Hypocrisy? Yeah, sure. But they're just playing along with a lot of the fans, who claim to dislike JRPGs but like everything they do. Well maybe not everything -- I don't think we're going to see a Bio turn-based combat system anytime soon.

Anyway, if you can swallow Threat you can swallow anything, so I've made my peace with this. Still can't bring myself to use Earthshaking Strike, though.

[fhs33721]

Geralt's and Ciri's sword strikes and parry feel real. There is almost no gameplay segregation.

 

You mean aside from the part where Geralt munches down 15 grilled chicken wings during combat in order to magically regain health? Or the part where you can get hit by multiple arrows in the face and continue to fight because your healt bar isn't depleted yet? Or the part where Geralt, a superhuman badass, can slaughter entire platoons of trained soldiers on his own, yet goes down after three hits in a fistfight because the guy, he is fighting, is 6 levels above him?

Yeah, in terms of gameplay segregation it's much better than Bioware games. But there still is plenty of it.

[Pavan]

You mean aside from the part where Geralt munches down 15 grilled chicken wings during combat in order to magically regain health? Or the part where you can get hit by multiple arrows in the face and continue to fight because your healt bar isn't depleted yet? Or the part where Geralt, a superhuman badass, can slaughter entire platoons of trained soldiers on his own, yet goes down after three hits in a fistfight because the guy, he is fighting, is 6 levels above him?

Yeah, in terms of gameplay segregation it's much better than Bioware games. But there still is plenty of it.

 

They are all false except the last one.

 

Clearly you haven't played on Death March - the difficulty you are meant to play at for immersion and realism.

 

- You can't eat anything during combat

- You die in about 4 arrows (Considering Witchers are supposed to be basically Achilles level, (from the movie Troy) 4 - 5 arrows makes sense)

 

The ONLY thing that doesn't make sense is as you mentioned, the fist fights.

 

And that is one minor gripe out of what is othwerwise a very immersive and realistic combat system