Larian Studios Forums Divinity 2 - Ego Draconis (English) Divinity 2 - Ego Draconis News from the front

Sorry: D2:ED is an action/RPG because the combat is not like dragon age, is not like fallout1-2, is not like AoD...(for example);

Point and click controls, or turn based combat, do not an RPG make.


but is based also on our abilities with keyboard-mouse/gamepad(x360)...

Is it? Based on what I have seen so far I certainly fear that may be the case, but I have not seen any conformation.


The term "action" indicates only the combat style...nothing more...

Diablo uses a point and click combat style (not primarily the player's reflexes), and that is the 'gold standard' of action RPGs, which everything else tends to get compared to.

Sorry, I'm not reffered to you in specific...but in general also to the other members that posted before...

with this post you give me reason...
Infact I saying that the combat style does notmake a RPG...;we can have also a good roleplaying game with an action combat ;like D2:ED;...

you are saying that D2:ED is not an action/RPG because is more deep and complex RPG than actionrpg in general like Diablo...
It can be a very good RPG with action combat style...

PS:sorry but my poor english stop me to exspress myself clearer and easier...

No problem I'm so used to non-native English speakers being as good as or better than native speakers (And trust me, you're well on the way - your English is great ) that I tend not to make as much allowance as I should.

I think what games companies usually consider the difference is what is the most important part of the game: in an 'Action-RPG' the main emphasis is on combat over and above anything else whereas in a straight RPG the most important part is the characters and the story.

It's why games like The Witcher and the Baldur's Gate series get classified as straight RPGs despite having a lot of fighting in them. The fighting is not the point of the game. In an 'Action-RPG' it is.

I find myself agreeing with juanpablo87 on this one. EK and Raze I think you're exaggerating and being ridiculously harsh on the action-rpg term.
Ok, so I had to revise my opinion a bit when I realized there actually is a common distinction between "true" and "action" RPG's, (which is just gaming snobbery IMO). Some games don't balance combat with other important elements well and therefore get dumped into the "action" category, and rather arbitrarily, it seems to me.

I want action AND roleplaying in my games. Why must one be exclusive of the other? Plenty of games meet the 'criteria' for RPG: Sacred had a huge open world, Dungeon Siege II had puzzles, character-specific quests that required revisiting areas and exploring new secrets, multiple ways to solve quests, dialogue options for conversations, etc. etc. And even the most shallow of the games in the "action" category still have character development at the least. Yet they are branded with a term that suddenly has a stigma attached to it. Oh no! Not action RPG!

I just mean I don't mind this term applied to ED in the least. I really can't imagine that any substantial amount of people would utterly disregard a game after reading the term "action-RPG."

I think our posting at the same time means we are now at cross-purposes, Flixerflax

Setting aside the 'what is really an RPG and what is not' argument for the moment it still comes down to emphasis.

I speak as a person who owns, plays and has finished (Often several times) Diablo 2, Kult: Heretic Kingdoms, Seal Of Evil, Titan Quest, the original Dungeon Siege... You get the idea. I'm not at all averse to playing the games. Indeed, by now I can honestly say I'm not bad at them.

An 'Action-RPG' as the term suggests is mainly about action and it is action-driven. Everything exists as either an excuse to let you kill vast numbers of things or a way to make you better at killing them.

With an RPG, combat is very much secondary. Evasion is frequently an option because the point of the game is not to fight stuff, it's to accomplish goals. It's character- and story-driven.

So it's not an insult to say something is or is not an 'Action-RPG' - it's a classification

***

As a digression, I object to the term 'Action-RPG' because it's misleading. The entire point of an RPG (As anyone who has played the pen & paper games the computer games are derived from will tell you) is characterisation. It is simply playing a ROLE as the title suggests. That doesn't mean a choice between whether to use an axe or a sword, but how your character will react as a person. It's freeform acting. Maxing out stats is not role playing.

even if I don't dislike AoD for example...
infact I wait it impatiently

Maxing out stats is not role playing.

Ha, well put, Elliot. And of course I realize full well where people are coming from with the (minor) issue of the 'action' prefix. If it retains the depth and characterization of DD, the new game will stand apart from D3 and its combat-centric ilk. Just feeling defensive of some of my (our) favorite games, I guess.

Thanks for the post Lar. I'm glad to see a pause feature in the game.

I love RPG's but I have real trouble with complex action gameplay involving both hands.

"Diablo" style combat I can handle, but standard FPS gameplay with keyboard and mouse is pretty much beyond me. Any feature that slows things down, or gives me more time to react is appreciated.

'Action-RPGs' get bashed a lot by 'True RPG' fans, so it's an easy assume

I just wish they'd call them 'Dungeon Crawlers' or something

Juanpablo87;

Yes, most (or at least many) people make a distinction between and 'action RPG' and an RPG with action combat. Larian doesn't seem to, though, as it refers to the game as an action RPG on the Div2 website.

Your English is fine. I was assuming you meant 'action RPG' was the same as 'RPG with action combat', which is arguably the case if you want to get technical. However, in general usage the term has come to mean action combat with only superficial RPG elements (like leveling, classes, fantasy setting, etc).



Flixerflax;

I don't think there is anything wrong with action RPGs, I just find them boring and repetitive (never finished Diablo or Diablo II). For years now there have been games being created to be just like Diablo, only with better graphics or a different setting / mythology base. Unless there is something unique about an action RPG, I don't see myself ever playing it. In I of the Dragon, playing as a dragon was nice, but if I was running around on the ground I never would have bought the game (straight combat, enemy AI was not that great for the most part, etc).

I can see your point that there may be a bit of snobbery in drawing a distinction between action RPG and RPG, but for the most part there is a pretty clear distinction. In general I like RPGs and dislike most action RPGs. I don't think action RPGs are beneath me (or whatever) I just don't enjoy what most of them concentrate on (equipment upgrading and hack and slash).
Recently there has been a move towards more 'true' RPGs and various category games are adding more complex RPG features, so perhaps the difference between action RPG and RPG will lessen.


There are several things I will disregard a game for, without some information or recommendation that it is worth checking out. The term 'action RPG' is one of these; if I've seen many, many games described as action RPGs, and for the most part do not enjoy most of them, then I am not downloading a 1GB demo on the off chance that it may be a good game.

Another big thing that can immediately turn me off a game is perspective. I do not like first person perspective; at best it can be ok, at worst it can cause dizziness or headaches (ie if you need to look in a direction other than where you are moving in order to be able to see enemy, etc). I passed on Wizardry 8 because of the first person perspective, until seeing a topic about it here, which convinced me that it would be worth trying out the demo (FPS actually works ok there with the turn based combat, and I bought the game). I've tried other demos of first person games since then, but found nothing I liked.



Quasimodo;

I also dislike complex action gameplay involving both hands. In theory I am against this as having combat based on the player's skills defeats the purpose of your character having stats. Practically, I am just not very good at twitch based gameplay, and dislike timed keyboard and/or mouse combinations (and I don't like it enough to be able to practice enough to get good at it).

I'm hoping that if there is action style combat, use of a gamepad will at least mitigate some of the problems I'd have using a keyboard.

Ah, I get you, and am definitely in agreement about the first-person perspective. As to the other, just a matter of personal taste I suppose. (But how did I never hear about this other dragon game that I've seen mentioned in the last few days?! )

Recently there has been a move towards more 'true' RPGs and various category games are adding more complex RPG features, so perhaps the difference between action RPG and RPG will lessen.

That's one thing I'm hoping ED might contribute to (if the action-rpg title sticks, that is ).

@Larians: Adding the pause feature is a definite plus in my book. I can't believe it WASN'T going to be there! Oh, and throw us some screenshots of the GUI when it gets presentable so we can do some more speculating.

I don't think I Of The Dragon was very popular, honestly. I played the demo and as near as I could see the entire game was: you are a dragon, fly around flaming stuff.

While it was cool for ten minutes... Well, too repetitive.

I of the Dragon (Wikipedia link) is nearly 4 years old, and I don't think it got much publicity when it came out. I've only seen a few references to it around, and a couple years ago I only found one or two places that still carried it, other than the publisher's webstore.

I think it has been mentioned here a few times recently (and previously in various suggestion topics) because it is one of the few RPG / action RPG games (that I know of) where a character can fly, so serves as a reference for combat or control discussion, etc.

The first area of the demo contains simple opponents with almost no AI. Fly just over treetop level and keep moving, and you will almost never get hit. The second level contains different and stronger opponents, a couple of which have a little better AI. In this area you should be able to level up enough to get access to a better spells, upgrade your existing attacks and possibly learn new ones (the fighter class gets a seeking fireball attack, in addition to a straight fireball and close range breath attack).
Based on the demo I was hoping there would be additional AI advances in each new area. There were new creatures in each area, with some variety, but no significant advances in AI. IMO there were enough changes in environment, etc, and new skills to keep it playable (though just barely at times).

Well I don't mind the therm action RPG. To me it refers more to the combat system (eg: not turn based). The term action RPG has lost the "clone of diablo" thing. Some people call the witcher an action rpg.

I describe the difference between action and story-based RPGs in much the same way as Elliot_Kane did earlier. In an action-RPG, the focus is the action/combat, with minimal interest in roleplaying (acting a character with a very particular personality), dialogue, and story. Action RPGs, to me, usually refer to the loot and level grinding games which I love, like the Diablos, Titan Quest, Dungeon Siege and the like, where the combat can be fast-paced and not necessarily relying on player skill over character skill. I put story-based RPGs on a separate branch. These are the games like Planescape: Torment, the Baldur's Gate series, etc. Some developers like calling their games action-RPGs where I would not.

For instance, Mass Effect was described as an action-RPG. However, the fact that I can put the game on the easiest difficulty and make combat insubstantial in the game, while focusing on story, dialogue, and characters (of which there was plenty of each), means that it may have had action-RPG elements but the focus wasn't the combat/action. There were huge stretches of the game where I had no combat whatsoever. Compare that to the Diablos; could you go for 30 minutes of actual gameplay (not including selling/trading items) without combat action? Of course not.

I expect that the use of the term "action-RPG" as it applies to Div2 is supposed to suggest that combat is an integral part of the game (i.e. that there's plenty of it) but that it isn't necessarily the focus, just as in Mass Effect. It's unlikely to be too twitchy, like an FPS game relying on player keyboard/mouse skills instead of character-based abilities. For the latter, I'm grateful. I don't care for twitch-based combat at all.

Thanks for all the info, nice seeing what is going on.

Will the game support a usb gaming controller?
As for the pause, I was looking forward to the new action. I know Chrono Trigger (turn based battle rpg for Super Nintendo) had 2 options, active battles (monsters will attack if your not ready) or everyone takes turns so you can take longer to decide on what to do. Would it be too hard to implement that? Be awesome if it could be implemented.

As for the game possibly looking any better... I just got over the rehab from the drooling problem I developed from the first :Div:. Well... at least I got the Doctor's phone number on speed dial now.

Thanks again for going out of your way to update us

After reading the four pages and seeing it turn into hairsplitting over the moniker the game will wear I'll just toss something out - and then run for cover.

If the game were a cross between the original Divine Divinity and Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion I would be a happy camper. I love both games. The flavor and style of the original with greatly increased (but quality) voice acting and real-time combat, a large free roaming world (but not level-scaled), good character development, NPCs with distinct personalities, a good mix of spoken and text dialog, a hero who speaks with a voice, fantastic music, a choice of first or third person perspective, beautiful graphics, intuitive interface, lots of NPCs and items to interact with, books to read - these are all things I love in a game. Neither DD or Oblivion was perfect in that regard, but I can always dream DD 2 will be. I know that many of these things may have already been decided, it just my rambling laundry list of favorites.

Yes, at least for now. Posted earlier, in another topic:


Sektor followed this up with a wikipedia link detailing the requirements for the MS 'Games for Windows' program. Deciding not to go for this program doesn't necessarily mean dropping controller support, so hopefully it will remain in regardless.

About the whole 'action-rpg' discussion:

Personally, I'm not one who puts things under well-defined and mutually exclusive labels. This whole discussion about naming the thing seems kind of silly to me (pardon me saying so; I don't mean to offend anyone :whistle: ).

Does it really matter whether the combat in a game is more prone to hand-eye coordination or calculated stats? Or whether this sort of stuff falls under the term 'action' or not? The important thing is that we enjoy what we play, and respect other people for their likes and dislikes. And every now and then, try something new to see if it fits and be honest to yourself about whether you like it or not.

As a table-top RPG player (and GM), I know where the term roleplaying actually comes from and what it really means (to play the role of a different kind of person -- like in theater), but I also know that there are millions and millions of different sorts of players; one sort for each. Some players prefer more hack-and-slash combat, while other players prefer to participate in a story. Others just play because they want to be in some company of like-minded friends, and again others play to see their characters accumulate cool powers. In the end, we're all a mixture of these kinds of players and we all have our own preferences. It's something you can't easily define under labels. Everyone plays for their own reasons, and everyone's reasons are as valid as the next.

However, I can assure you (**warning** advertising mode **warning** ): as a table-top roleplayer who likes to actually roleplay and participate in deep story, but also do some kick-ass combat to level up with awesome new powers, I really get my fill with Divinity 2. And it's not even finished yet, so it will only get better!

Alright, enough with the preaching . I'm going to shut up now