View Single Post

Default 

October 12th, 2012, 12:34
Originally Posted by darkling View Post
The combat was hardly the bad part of DA2. It was exactly the same as DA:O except without the overhead view and with way faster and flashier animations.
Well, in DA2 you had to manually doge some attacks - ie no electronic 'dice roll' based on dex, armor or whatever (eg Rock Wraith). This is an action game tenet.

To ensure that you that boss battles were sufficiently "awesome"TM in length, they put an arbitrary cap on the damage your party could do. There were a lot of people who found good CCCs/builds and were surprised that enemy hit points did not go down in the way the mathematics would suggest. The reason for that was that in short, Laidlaw decided to cheat, and hamstrung your party to make it all feel "epic"TM (eg you had to spend a minimum of 12 minutes fighting the Arishok on hard, no matter how much damage you were 'actually' dealing him).

They removed the need for manual positioning, so your rogue could backstab instantly from the other side of a hill by doing a 'Jade Empire on speed' double backflip. And if you wisely positioned your mage at the back of a room (where there was no door), enemies would still insta-kill him by simply spawning where he was. The fact that friendly fire was removed on all but nightmare is also interesting.

Enemies in DA2 all felt the same (hit point meat bags), compared with DA:O enemies using wide range of status effects, class abilities, and damage types. Encounters in DA:O were hand placed with traps and terrain, but were console wave spawns in DA2.

Apart from that, the combat systems were indeed the same.
Gaxkang is offline

Gaxkang

Sentinel

#8

Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 346