What sort of combat system you prefer in Dragon Age?

[RK47]

Just curious cause I didn't enjoy NWN combat at all. And the lack of party AI means they really need to tone down on party member reliance for RT combat.

 

[racofer]

Neither. First person adds a whole lot more to immershun.

 

[DemonKing]

After seeing the awesome launch page I would like a combat system that allows me to inflict pain on Bio's PR staff.

 

[racofer]

That would be the Way of the Closed Wallet

 

[Crichton]

Just curious cause I didn't enjoy NWN combat at all. And the lack of party AI means they really need to tone down on party member reliance for RT combat.

Just press the pause button.

 

[Helton]

The options should have been:

1) Red
2) Blue

Blue all the way.

 

[gc051360]

I'm gonna go with real time, first person.

I don't know if you've heard but, we have virtual reality now. Might as well use it. I need my immersion fix.

 

[imanol]

Neither. I would rather see something like ToEE. Troika got combat right in ToEE.

 

[J1M]

Given that combat in Bioware games is always shit I would hope that it would be nothing like the combat in any of their previous games.

 

[Murk]

I find myself, when possible, defaulting to an overhead type of isometric view in battles as it affords a better idea of what's going on and let's me issue commands with less error in "clicking the right thing".

Having said all that, camera view isn't as important to me as is my curiosity on how party based/pc based it is.

I liked one thing about NWN in that it was a mandatory solo mission - yes you had cohorts but that was more of an intelligent support system than an actual party - and i do so love playing solo in rpgs.

 

[MetalCraze]

Not a single time Bioware made a combat that was truly interesting. Except for BG combat. But it was still too twitchy.

Also. Dragon Age: Origins? Smells of yet another "bioware trilogy"
The site is also more like "Look we've changed design by adding EA logo!" instead of really providing any valuable info. Besides the time of trailer airing of course. That will be just a prerendered CGI piece with even less information.

 

[Ismaul]

Neither.

Combat gameplay must either be a tactical or a reflex challenge. And the real-time system of Bioware fails at both, be it in BG/NWN or Jade Empire. Either give me a turn-based tactical squad-based combat, or reflex based combat with little to no control over companions.

But I'm guessing Bioware is going to produce a fail system again. In that case, let's just hope you can run through fights like butter, so we can get on to the meat of the game: silly romances and clichéd plots.

 

[Hümmelgümpf]

Voted for JE. RTwP is an abomination.

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

Voted real time with pause. Shiity action combat is an abomination.

Real time with pause isn't great, I'd take a good (emphasis on good) turn-based system anyday, but real time with pause is hardly as bad as a majority of people love to regurgitate. It beats mediocre turn-based by far.

 

[Mareus]

Isometric RT with pause would be the best choice in my oppinion. Isometric camrea gives you the best overview of the battle while RT with pause offers enough action for action lovers and enough strategy for people who like to use their brain. If not that, then turn based similar to ToEE.

I just hope they don't go NWN2 way or some next gen crap like trying to combine the Witcher's style with BG style.... you never know what some genius might come up with.

 

[sabishii]

I don't think twitch-based JE style gameplay will work for a party-based game, unless they somehow implement extremely good AI. Secondly, my personal preference is to have control over the entire party simply because I want to play that kind of game.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Voted JE combat, because you know it'll be that.

 

[Volourn]

" Secondly, my personal preference is to have control over the entire party simply because I want to play that kind of game. "

Umm.. this is confirmed.

There is a lot confirmed for DA espicially in terms of combat or things that effect. Some include:

Real time with pause.

4 Party Members including created PC.

Full control.

All party members are optional except for one and you can choose to keep him in camp and never have him in your actual party.

etc., etc.

 

[Mareus]

" Secondly, my personal preference is to have control over the entire party simply because I want to play that kind of game. "

Umm.. this is confirmed.

There is a lot confirmed for DA espicially in terms of combat or things that effect. Some include:

Real time with pause.

4 Party Members including created PC.

Full control.

All party members are optional except for one and you can choose to keep him in camp and never have him in your actual party.

etc., etc.

I thought they were still considering the option of 6 party memebers. 4 party members just isn't enough for a game that should have isometric battle system. I think that was also 90% confirmed. Even in NWN2 4 characters was not enough. I mean you have to have atleast 2 tanks, 1 healer and 1 thief. But where is the mage than? You gotta have a mage! I sure hope the game will allow atleast to use a cheat command like NWN2 to have more than 4 characters in the party.

 

[Volourn]

First off, there is no 'healer'. Only 3 basic classes (there are prestige classes that open up based on character, quests, race, class later on though). there's Warrior, Mage/Spellcaster, and Rogue/Thief.

And, yeah, for awhile they were debating 4-6 characters; but IIRC Gaider confirmed awhile back they had settled on 4. of course, since there's still time, it can always change.

 

[Korgan]

If COLAR GRABB isn't a spell, feat or ability, I won't buy DA. Give us moar X-TREME!

 

[The Feral Kid]

Neither. I would rather see something like ToEE. Troika got combat right in ToEE.

ToEE got the combat system right but combat itself was tedious and boring. When making a game you need to adapt the gameplay aspects so that it can work on the medium and not simply re-write a D&D module for the PC. If that's what you want invite your friends over for a session and get some Doritos. No reason to bother with the PC.

BG series were successful because Bio realized this is a PC game and not a mere implementation of D&D on a screen. The pause combat system worked and was way more challenging than anything turn-based including Fallout, Arcanum and ToEE. Turn-based doesn't guarantee tactical depth.

 

[Mareus]

Neither. I would rather see something like ToEE. Troika got combat right in ToEE.

ToEE got the combat system right but combat itself was tedious and boring. When making a game you need to adapt the gameplay aspects so that it can work on the medium and not simply re-write a D&D module for the PC. If that's what you want invite your friends over for a session and get some Doritos. No reason to bother with the PC.

BG series were successful because Bio realized this is a PC game and not a mere implementation of D&D on a screen. The pause combat system worked and was way more challenging than anything turn-based including Fallout, Arcanum and ToEE. Turn-based doesn't guarantee tactical depth.

I agree. I still have nightmares from miss/load -> miss/load -> hit for 1 damage/load -> miss/load -> hit for 25 damage! AHA/save. Maybe I just sucked, but that's how I remember ToEE.

 

[RK47]

It gets tedious. But I remember trying very hard just to get one level into the party in the first town. But it's so boring. It picked up past 2-3 levels then when they start throwing a dozen bug bears I eventually got tired of the combat cycle of 'crowd control > hard hitting fighter in > focus fire > win''

 

[imanol]

Neither. I would rather see something like ToEE. Troika got combat right in ToEE.

ToEE got the combat system right but combat itself was tedious and boring. When making a game you need to adapt the gameplay aspects so that it can work on the medium and not simply re-write a D&D module for the PC. If that's what you want invite your friends over for a session and get some Doritos. No reason to bother with the PC.

BG series were successful because Bio realized this is a PC game and not a mere implementation of D&D on a screen. The pause combat system worked and was way more challenging than anything turn-based including Fallout, Arcanum and ToEE. Turn-based doesn't guarantee tactical depth.

I agree. I still have nightmares from miss/load -> miss/load -> hit for 1 damage/load -> miss/load -> hit for 25 damage! AHA/save. Maybe I just sucked, but that's how I remember ToEE.

Yeah same here. It's not the combat system's fault, though, but the faithful implementation of the module which hardly had any plot to speak of. ToEE got tedious because it was one epic low-level combat after another. BG series had an interesting plot. So even if I died and reloaded countless times battling the goddam dragon, it didn't get old too quick.

Also, I read somewhere that ToEE's RNG, for some reason, favored low or high rolls (successive critical hits after a few critical misses). ToEE's engine can be great if it had the story to go along with it. So, yeah.... I still prefer turn-based over RTwP.