161 réponses à ce sujet

[FKA_Servo]

OK I put it this way, the gameplay looks half-assed and cheap, the combat design for each different classes is boring, and animations still needs work. But DA2 combat system is slightly better than Origins and Inquisition it just needs an overhaul and adding new features.

 

DA2 is flashier and faster, but otherwise functionally more or less identical (if not slightly more deep mechanically) to both DAO and DAI. It's still as far from a GoW or an AC as either of the other games - less so than DAI, I would argue, considering the jumping feature in the latter.

 

I still reject that it needs an overhaul that involves fundamentally transforming the gameplay, and you still haven't offered any reasons why it needs one beyond your own tastes and opinions (which aren't universally held).

 

Once again, what you're proposing is not necessarily a logical and natural evolution - you're describing something much like the change from Fallout 2 (an isometric view turn-based RPG) to Fallout 3 (for all intents and purposes, a first person shooter). That's not an indictment of FO3's quality - nor is it an indictment of action games in general. Rather, it's simply recognizing that everything doesn't need to be everything. I think the DA series succeeds admirably at what it does, just as TW3 succeeds admirably at what it does. You say "why not both?" but you've got both - they're just different games.

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

DA2 is flashier and faster, but otherwise functionally more or less identical (if not slightly more deep mechanically) to both DAO and DAI. It's still as far from a GoW or an AC as either of the other games - less so than DAI, I would argue, considering the jumping feature in the latter.

I still reject that it needs an overhaul that involves fundamentally transforming the gameplay, and you still haven't offered any reasons why it needs one beyond your own tastes and opinions (which aren't universally held).

Once again, what you''re proposing is not necessarily a logical and natural evolution - you're describing something much like the change from Fallout 2 (an isometric view turn-based RPG) to Fallout 3 (for all intents and purposes, a first person shooter). That's not an indictment of FO3's quality - nor is it an indictment of action games in general. Rather, it's simply recognizing that everything doesn't need to be everything. I think the DA series succeeds admirably at what it does, just as TW3 succeeds admirably at what it does. You say "why not both?" but you've got both - they're just different games.

* deep sigh* Just forget it.

[FKA_Servo]

*sigh*

 

What I don't understand why this is all so confusing for you.

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

What I don't understand why this is all so confusing for you.

I'm just going put put this simple as I can: The reason why I think the combat system should change is because it's inferior, doesn't have a feeling of being a bad mother******, and most of all just plain boring. The combat system needs tending to and they should learn from games are combat oriented to learn from to not to be like them, I'm not expecting DA to be like God of War or AC, I'm merely used them as examples of what can they use for their combat gameplay in general to put it to good use, or just find someone who's a master of combat design for Dragon Age. I know they're different games, I just think the combat system should change to stay ahead of RPG games and more fun to play, not slow and boring.

[FKA_Servo]

I'm just going put put this simple as I can: The reason why I think the combat system should change is because it's inferior, doesn't have a feeling of being a bad mother******, and most of all just plain boring. The combat system needs tending to and they should learn from games are combat oriented to learn from to not to be like them, I'm not expecting DA to be like God of War or AC, I'm merely used them as examples of what can they use for their combat gameplay in general to put it to good use, or just find someone who's a master of combat design for Dragon Age.

I get that, but you still haven't provided a convincing reason why it's inferior, boring, or in need of "tending" to beyond your deeply held conviction that it must be so. It's a different gameplay genre than what you enjoy. I believe you when you say that. That's not a good reason to fundamentally alter it.

Again, maybe you should come up with some better examples, because the lessons that they might take from those games - and the additions you have proposed - are flat out incompatible with the nature of the gameplay in this genre.

-Why should the success or failure of my character's powerful attacks be reliant on my dexterity as a player, inputting button combinations or responding to quick time events?

-What's the point of an agility stat if dodging is dependent on my reflexes as a player?

-Why should an archer's skill with a bow be dependent on my ability to aim as a player?

See what I'm getting at?

I know they're different games, I just think the combat system should change to stay ahead of RPG games and more fun to play, not slow and boring.

This is utterly subjective. Plenty of people don't think it's slow or boring. You said yourself that you've never played any of the older games, so I'm assuming DA is your first and only RPG in this tradition. Plenty of people enjoy or prefer that sort of gameplay. Adding action combat in the way that you describe would change it to its core - in a way that many players who enjoy these games might find really alienating.

[Giantdeathrobot]

The last thing RPGs need is to go the way of more action-orientated combat. Action games do that, and do that well. Let them. RPGs work best when they allow you to make tactical choices and decisions during battles. Else you get Witcher 2 and 3's combat system which was terribly repetitive and boring to me. I'd much, much rather play Origins or Inquisition, flawed as they are, than to suffer through the same attack-dodge-Quen pattern ad nauseum.

 

Heck, I'd even be partial to Dragon Age going turn-based, even if I know this will never happen. Maybe it's because we had several really good turn-based games recently, but still.

 

For Mass Effect, ME3 is a good template. Fast-paced action combat, but with a useful pause feature that allows you to plan your moves and an array of powers that spice up the mix, while a vast arsenal of guns and mods provide the variety and customization that makes RPGs interesting.

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

I get that, but you still haven't provided a convincing reason why it's inferior, boring, or in need of "tending" to beyond your deeply held conviction that it must be so. It's a different gameplay genre than what you enjoy. I believe you when you say that. That's not a good reason to fundamentally alter it.

Again, maybe you should come up with some better examples, because the lessons that they might take from those games - and the additions you have proposed - are flat out incompatible with the nature of the gameplay in this genre.

-Why should the success or failure of my character's powerful attacks be reliant on my dexterity as a player, inputting button combinations or responding to quick time events?

-What's the point of an agility stat if dodging is dependent on my reflexes as a player?

-Why should an archer's skill with a bow be dependent on my ability to aim as a player?

See what I'm getting at?


This is utterly subjective. Plenty of people don't think it's slow or boring. You said yourself that you've never played any of the older games, so I'm assuming DA is your first and only RPG in this tradition. Plenty of people enjoy or prefer that sort of gameplay. Adding action combat in the way that you describe would change it to its core - in a way that many players who enjoy these games might find really alienating.

I say why not change the combat system of Dragon Age? It will be a huge turn around and more successful if they have good story, good characters, great RPG elements and combat design that kicks ass. I just believe they can do better and I'm looking forward to the next DA to kick Witcher's ass, if they just have competitive edge to make games better than other RPG games. Buy anyhow to answer your example of what can they do to improve/revamp their combat system and what needs to be changed, I'll start with DA2 combat system because they've improved a bit and Inquisition's improved Class Specializations to have a unique touch of each class, but I think combat wise is that they can have a combo-based combat system, use motion capture for different fighting styles and improve movement to be fluid and dynamic for Warrior, Rogue, & Mage. I think they should have a similar layout combo-based button layout similar to God of War or Heavenly Sword. Here's my idea of a basic button system (PlayStation layout because I own a PlayStation)

Triangle- Heavy Attack
Square- Light Attack
O- Interact/Execute QTE
X-Dodge, hold X to sprint
L1- Block, tap to L1 to parry/counter
L1 + X,O,Triangle, Square- Weapon Abilities
R1 + X,O,Triangle,Square- Specialization Abilities
R2-Switch Characters
L2- Inventory Menu
L3- Activate Focus Power
R3- Switch Specializations
Left & right d-pad- change weapon enchantments/ (for mage class)change magic elements
Up-use selected potion/grenade
Down- Ping

Select- Map
Start- Menu

I'll get to class/specializations button layout in a bit because its a really long list.

[FKA_Servo]

I say why not change the combat system of Dragon Age? It will be a huge turn around and more successful if they have good story, good characters, great RPG elements and combat design that kicks ass. I just believe they can do better and I'm looking forward to the next DA to kick Witcher's ass, if they just have competitive edge to make games better than other RPG games.

 

I'm still asking why, if it's not something that needs to be changed? And you still haven't given any reason for that. It's not apparent that, after three games, Dragon Age needs to drastically change its gameplay style. And you're still ignoring the fact that Dragon Age's gameplay is neither broken nor horrible, and a lot of people enjoy it and prefer it.

 

Buy anyhow to answer your example of what can they do to improve/revamp their combat system and what needs to be changed, I'll start with DA2 combat system because they've improved a bit

 

As an aside, this is one of the most confusing things you've written. DA2's gameplay is basically identical to DAOs. How on earth is it improved in your eyes? Especially when DAI is arguably a step further in the direction you're advocating.

 

and Inquisition's improved Class Specializations to have a unique touch of each class, but I think combat wise is that they can have a combo-based combat system, use motion capture for different fighting styles and improve movement to be fluid and dynamic for Warrior, Rogue, & Mage. I think they should have a similar layout combo-based button layout similar to God of War or Heavenly Sword.

 

Since every point I've attempted to get across is apparently water off a duck's back, I'll just ask some fairly simple questions:

 

What if someone wants to play a party RPG without action combat or combo attacks?

 

And what if they don't want to play a game like God of War or Heavenly Sword?

 

I guess I'll ask a one more question, too - have you actually read and understood a single one of my posts? Are you just ignoring them?

 

Here's my idea of a basic button system (PlayStation layout because I own a PlayStation)

 

Snip

 

What if someone wants to play with a keyboard and mouse? That seems like it would be pretty clumsy and awkward.

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

I'm still asking why, if it's not something that needs to be changed? And you still haven't given any reason for that. It's not apparent that, after three games, Dragon Age needs to drastically change its gameplay style. And you're still ignoring the fact that Dragon Age's gameplay is neither broken nor horrible, and a lot of people enjoy it and prefer it.


As an aside, this is one of the most confusing things you've written. DA2's gameplay is basically identical to DAOs. How on earth is it improved in your eyes? Especially when DAI is arguably a step further in the direction you're advocating.


Since every point I've attempted to get across is apparently water off a duck's back , I'll just ask some fairly simple questions:

What if someone wants to play a party RPG without action combat or combo attacks?

And what if they don't want to play a game like God of War or Heavenly Sword?

I guess I'll ask a one more question, too - have you actually read and understood a single one of my posts? Are you just ignoring them?


What if someone wants to play with a keyboard and mouse? That seems like it would be pretty clumsy and awkward.

Ok. OK. The reason why I think it needs to be changed is because the combat system is silmpy boring and I have explained earlier on my last posts of why it needs to be changed, the fighting animations are crappy, choppy, and stale, everything is copy/paste on every Dragon Age game, and most of all Dragon Age combat looks cheap and primitive, and forget about what I said about broken, it's not broken it's just repetitive I'll put it that way. It's repetition of their combat system what makes it so boring, and I'm well aware that combat system with Origins and DA2 are the same the only difference is DA2 is more fast paced, fighting animations have improved and each class have different fighting styles that's the part of why I think the DA2 combat system has been improved, and I just come up with an idea that they should have a combo-based combat system with RPG elements to satisfy both gamers who likes one or the other or both. Once again I'm not saying that Dragon Age should be like God of war or Heavenly Sword or any combat oriented game that's out there, I'm simply saying if what BioWare should do to give their combat design an edge over all RPG games by looking, playing, and learning from these games that are combat oriented of what makes their combat system great and how can they use that to their advantage and come up with creative ways making their combat design the ****, like for example of how CDPR learned from Skyrim and learning their flaws such as combat animations, story, quests, and character development to create a game that can be better than Skyrim by having a better story, better world, good characters and better combat. That's why Witcher 3 is a successful game because they learn from games' strengths and weakness and how they can use their weaknesses to their advantage and turn them to strengths and why it is better than Skyrim (and Skyrim is my favorite game. And the button layout is just my example for a PlayStation system and I'm not a PC guy so I wouldn't know how the layout works so my mistake. And maybe they can find ways to satisfy both RPG combat players and action players by having both in the same game as long they are balanced. And I apologize for not understanding you I just thought if I can explain myself better by offering some new ideas to the franchise by having new thingsthings of what they could do to upgrade their combat design and I jump the gun at times so my mistake. If I'm confusing you again let me know.

[BatarianBob]

The next Dragon Age won't kick the Witcher's ass no matter what they do. It's become too trendy to hate Bioware. Trying to ape CDPR (or Bethesda, or whoever else is popular at the moment) will just alienate the few fans they have left for no real gain.

[FKA_Servo]

Ok. OK. The reason why I think it needs to be changed is because the combat system is silmpy boring and I have explained earlier on my last posts of why it needs to be changed, the fighting animations are crappy, choppy, and stale, everything is copy/paste on every Dragon Age game, and most of all Dragon Age combat looks cheap and primitive, and forget about what I said about broken, it's not broken it's just repetitive let's put it that way. It's repetition of their combat system what makes it boring, and I'm well aware that combat system with Origins and DA2 are the same the only difference is DA2 is more fast paced and fighting animations have improved.

 

Essentially, though, the combat system is what it is because that's the type of game it is. People like that type of game, and they want to play that type of game. It's ok that you don't. But you're proposing a solution without a problem.

 

Speeding up the pace or gussying up the animations is fine - that doesn't change the core gameplay.

 

Once again I'm not saying that Dragon Age should be like God of war or Heavenly Sword or any combat oriented game that's out there, I'm simply saying if what BioWare should do to give their combat design an edge over all RPG games by looking, playing, and learning from these games that are combat oriented of what makes their combat system great and how can they use that to their advantage and come up with creative ways making their combat design the ****, like for example of how CDPR learned from Skyrim and learning their flaws such as combat animations, story, quests, and character development to create a game that can be better than Skyrim by having a better story, better world, good characters and better combat. That us why Witcher 3 is a successful game because they learn from games strengths and weakness and how they can use weaknesses to their advantage and turn them to strengths. And the button layout is just my example for a PlayStation and I'm not a PC guy so I wouldn't know how the layout works so my mistake.

 

What constitutes an "edge"? Would adding a driving minigame to Bejeweled give it an edge over Tetris?

 

Changing the gameplay as you propose, and adding active dodging, QTEs, and combo attacks, and the like - all of which you just said you wanted - would make it very much like God of War and very unlike Dragon Age. It would make it difficult or flat out boring for countless players who like it the way it is and don't think it needs any sort of fixing. Not every game needs to be an action game, and not everything needs combo attacks or goddamn QTEs. If you really prefer them, there's no shortage of games that are overflowing them. No need to inflict them on folks who want nothing to do with them.

 

And I apologize for not understanding you I just thought if I can explain myself better by offering of what can they do something new to the franchise by having new things and come up with ideas of my own, their combat system would've been a lot better. If I'm confusing you again let me know.

 

The only thing that's confusing to me is how you seemingly won't accept that this game falls under a certain genre, with certain gameplay conventions, and that changing things in the way you propose would transform it into a different genre, which would alienate the (many, many, many) fans who don't share your opinion. It's not an unambiguous improvement.

 

How would you react if I hopped onto the Ubisoft forum and said that I wanted the next big AC game to be a semi-turn based party RPG, because I felt that those games were more fun and rewarding than the current AC design?

 

What if I hopped onto the Activision forums and made the case that the next Call of Duty installment should be a tower defense game because that sort of gameplay rewards skill and strategy far more than a FPS could?

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

The next Dragon Age won't kick the Witcher's ass no matter what they do. It's become too trendy to hate Bioware. Trying to ape CDRP (or Bethesda, or whoever else is popular at the moment) will just alienate the few fans tbey have left for no real gain.

Who knows? Maybe they could maybe they could not.

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

Essentially, though, the combat system is what it is because that's the type of game it is. People like that type of game, and they want to play that type of game. It's ok that you don't. But you're proposing a solution without a problem.

Speeding up the pace or gussying up the animations is fine - that doesn't change the core gameplay.


What constitutes an "edge"? Would adding a driving minigame to Bejeweled give it an edge over Tetris?

Changing the gameplay as you propose, and adding active dodging, QTEs, and combo attacks, and the like - all of which you just said you wanted - would make it very much like God of War and very unlike Dragon Age. It would make it difficult or flat out boring for countless players who like it the way it is and don't think it needs any sort of fixing. Not every game needs to be an action game, and not everything needs combo attacks or goddamn QTEs. If you really prefer them, there's no shortage of games that are overflowing them. No need to inflict them on folks who want nothing to do with them.


The only thing that's confusing to me is how you seemingly won't accept that this game falls under a certain genre, with certain gameplay conventions, and that changing things in the way you propose would transform it into a different genre, which would alienate the (many, many, many) fans who don't share your opinion. It's not an unambiguous improvement.

How would you react if I hopped onto the Ubisoft forum and said that I wanted the next big AC game to be a semi-turn based party RPG, because I felt that those games were more fun and rewarding than the current AC design?

What if I hopped onto the Activision forums and made the case that the next Call of Duty installment should be a tower defense game because that sort of gameplay rewards skill and strategy far more than a FPS could?

Hey I'm not convincing anyone to agree with me if they're not that's fine, if they do that's cool too. I'm not even expecting everyone to agree with me, I just said out my own opinion that Dragon Age combat is sub par and I think they could do a better job than that of what they made.

[Eckswhyzed]

Hey I'm not convincing anyone to agree with me if they're not that's fine, if they do that's cool too. I'm not even expecting everyone to agree with me, I just said out my own opinion that Dragon Age combat is sub par and I think they could do a better job than that of what they made.

 

I so badly want a Dragon Age spinoff with action combat. I enjoyed Inquisition well enough, but I'm honestly sick to death of moving like I'm steering a freight truck. Inquisition might be more 'tactical', but it feels far less fluid than DA2 to play.

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

I so badly want a Dragon Age spinoff with action combat. I enjoyed Inquisition well enough, but I'm honestly sick to death of moving like I'm steering a freight truck. Inquisition might be more 'tactical', but it feels far less fluid than DA2 to play.

I know right? I thought I was crazy when I explained that DA combat system sucked and how it can be better. Guess I wasn't.

[MonkeyLungs]

I think they should leave the whole party system alone and make it optional, and I rather have a good combat system that is easy and more awesome. Dragon Age series combat is very weak especially Origins, the gameplay is so poor and cheaply made that I don't know how that game got good reviews. I would suggest that they just have people who is a wizard of animations, combat, and gameplay to make it work.

 

Because the gameplay is amazing not poor. If Bioware ditched the party system they would be ditching a massive part of what makes their games so special.

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

Because the gameplay is amazing not poor. If Bioware ditched the party system they would be ditching a massive part of what makes their games so special.

I didn't say that they should get rid of the party system all together I mean make it optional of wanted have companions to travel with you or travel alone and not strongly focus on a party based game too much. If you like their style of gameplay that's fine, I still think they did a poor job on it though.

[Killroy]

You're conflating "I don't like this" with "This is poorly made." There's a huge difference.

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

You're conflating "I don't like this" with "This is poorly made." There's a huge difference.

Are you stalking me? Because this is getting creepy.....

[KaiserShep]

I didn't say that they should get rid of the party system all together I mean make it optional of wanted have companions to travel with you or travel alone and not strongly focus on a party based game too much. If you like their style of gameplay that's fine, I still think they did a poor job on it though.

 

 

So many other games already have you flying solo already. Why the hell would I want one of the few devs to offer party-based combat to take focus away from it? Seems like it would only make things worse, not better. Bio's primary strength has always been its cast of characters, namely followers. If anything, they should continue to exploit that to the fullest, including in combat gameplay.

[Killroy]

Are you stalking me? Because this is getting creepy.....

 

Are you a child? Because you act just like a child.

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

So many other games already have you flying solo already. Why the hell would I want one of the few devs to offer party-based combat to take focus away from it? Seems like it would only make things worse, not better. Bio's primary strength is its cast of characters. If anything, they should continue to exploit that to the fullest, including in combat gameplay.

Whoa! I'm saying why not have options to choose to have control of what you want to do and don't have to feel forced. It's just my opinion dude.

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

Are you a child? Because you act just like a child.

Why are you still obbessed with me?

[Killroy]

Why are you still obbessed with me?

 

Why are you still 12?

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

Why are you still 12?

I think you're obsessed about me and you obviously have issues that you need to address personally. Cause damn you don't have to follow me everywhere calling me names just because of what I said that you don't agree or expecting me to be like everyone else. And therefore you're a troll! Go bother somebody else with your issues.