Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[LoSboccacc]

yeah I find frustrating the lack of complexity and realism in running.

I mean you just press the forward button! it's all too abstract and gamey. it should handle like QWOP.
http://www.foddy.net/Athletics.html
 

[Moddan]

The combat controls are not for realism but for making complex moves.

What complex moves? It has four different moves, four, all of which are simple directional attacks.

In Warband beta, which I took part in, some more subtle mechanics were added to make combat more complex. That's what he meant I guess.

1) Chamberblocking: With executing the mirror attack at the right moment after the opponents does a certain attack, one is able to counter his attack. For example a left-to-right swing can be countered with a well-timed right-to-left swing that way.

2) Weapon sweetspots: Weapon attacks do reduced damage if they connect at the very beginning/end of the animation or if they hit at a bad range.

3) Stun: Heavy weapons can stun people defending with lighter ones, taking away their opportunity of attacking back and allowing a follow-up attack. This is especially true if the initial attack was charged up or had a good (movement) speed bonus.

4) Feinting: Probably started out as a bug in the original M&B, but became the foundation of dueling in Warband. Attacks can be canceled in the beginning of their animation or ready position, allowing to execute a different attack instead. Can be chained, but feint spam usually leads to axe into face for oneself against an avid oponent. There are 2 different kind of feints, early(silent, basicly just changing the ready position) and late(loud feints, shortly after the canceled attack is released). In that context the "unbalanced" tag for some weapons was introduced, that hinders their feint/attack canceling ability.

5) Crush through: Very few weapons, like hammers have the ability to partly crush through a block with a strong attack. This makes fighting with or against them unique.

6) Charged up or chambered attacks: Holding an attack for a short amount of time increases its power (damage or stun if blocked). However the maximum is set about 1 second or so. Holding for longer decreases the power again.

And probably more stuff I forgot. It is by far the most complex fighting system in an FPS-like game that I know of.

[Lysabild]

The combat controls are not for realism but for making complex moves.

What complex moves? It has four different moves, four, all of which are simple directional attacks.

In Warband beta, which I took part in, some more subtle mechanics were added to make combat more complex. That's what he meant I guess.

1) Chamberblocking: With executing the mirror attack at the right moment after the opponents does a certain attack, one is able to counter his attack. For example a left-to-right swing can be countered with a well-timed right-to-left swing that way.

2) Weapon sweetspots: Weapon attacks do reduced damage if they connect at the very beginning/end of the animation or if they hit at a bad range.

3) Stun: Heavy weapons can stun people defending with lighter ones, taking away their opportunity of attacking back and allowing a follow-up attack. This is especially true if the initial attack was charged up or had a good (movement) speed bonus.

4) Feinting: Probably started out as a bug in the original M&B, but became the foundation of dueling in Warband. Attacks can be canceled in the beginning of their animation or ready position, allowing to execute a different attack instead. Can be chained, but feint spam usually leads to axe into face for oneself against an avid oponent. There are 2 different kind of feints, early(silent, basicly just changing the ready position) and late(loud feints, shortly after the canceled attack is released). In that context the "unbalanced" tag for some weapons was introduced, that hinders there feint/attack canceling ability.

5) Crush through: Very few weapons, like hammers have the ability to partly crush through a block with a strong attack. This makes fighting with or against them unique.

6) Charged up or chambered attacks: Holding an attack for a short amount of time increases its power (damage or stun if blocked). However the maximum is set about 1 second or so. Holding for longer decreases the power again.

And probably more stuff I forgot. It is by far the most complex fighting system in an FPS-like game that I know of.

Yeah it's wonderful :3 And I suck at it.

[Sordid]

@Moddan: Yes, it is fairly complex (although some of those elements were in M&B as well and some I would classify as flaws instead), but there's nothing about any of that that would require a control scheme that has both attack direction and mouselook mapped to the same input. I still think a simper control scheme could've been devised that would focus more on the mastery of the game rather than of the mouse and keyboard.

[Virtz]

@Moddan: Yes, it is fairly complex (although some of those elements were in M&B as well and some I would classify as flaws instead), but there's nothing about any of that that would require a control scheme that has both attack direction and mouselook mapped to the same input. I still think a simper control scheme could've been devised that would focus more on the mastery of the game rather than of the mouse and keyboard.

There is no better medieval combat game in existence. If you think you've got a better idea, propose it. Or better yet, point towards a game with a supposedly better control system. Just note that Dynasty Warriors' brawler style or Assassin's Creed's "press button and cool shit happens" style are far worse alternatives for a game where all units are supposed to be treated equally by game mechanics.

[LoSboccacc]

sure, m&b it's the best medieval combat simulator out there, by long and far.

but this is a rpg, where a high willpower means you can shrug off dragon fire and weapon damage should be driven by your stat and not by your skill (and that's the whole point of having skills in a rpg). 

not exactly the same mechanic.

also, fireballs would ruin your wannabe realistic sword simluator.

[3]

but this is a rpg, where a high willpower means you can shrug off dragon fire and weapon damage should be driven by your stat and not by your skill (and that's the whole point of having skills in a rpg).

Nice thinking outside of the box there... I don't suppose you consider the RPG genre to have advanced in the last ten years or so, then?

[Lysabild]

sure, m&b it's the best medieval combat simulator out there, by long and far.

but this is a rpg, where a high willpower means you can shrug off dragon fire and weapon damage should be driven by your stat and not by your skill (and that's the whole point of having skills in a rpg). 

not exactly the same mechanic.

also, fireballs would ruin your wannabe realistic sword simluator.

I disagree with this in so many ways I don't know where to start. Mount and Blade is also an RPG and my favourite in amount of hours played though it did lack some of my favourite stuff from Baldurs Gate 2 and Oblivion.

And skill vs stats I prefer skills augmented by stats, not stats letting you faceroll.

Magic has been modded quite well into M&B, didn't ruin it.

Why is it I keep getting told realistic fantasy rpgs are a no no or "lol magic is not realistic"? Of course it isn't, but magic is one thing, then theres the rest of the world, and then theres things as High Fantasy and Low Fantasy, don't cut all over one swirl, I personally found Fantasy striving for some sort of realism for the immersion to be far superior.

[Duke 2.0]

 Yeah, saying ingame stats should replace player skill is kinda stupid. You need player skill to keep the game fun.

 Although I'm not really feeling the M&B system for Skyrim. It could be fun yes, but the combat doesn't need to be realistic to be fun. I can live with a simpler system just fine. Skyrim will either be a good or bad game in the accumulation of all its gameplay mechanics, a decent combat system doesn't matter as much to me in the grand scheme of things.

[Lysabild]

Yeah, saying ingame stats should replace player skill is kinda stupid. You need player skill to keep the game fun.

 Although I'm not really feeling the M&B system for Skyrim. It could be fun yes, but the combat doesn't need to be realistic to be fun. I can live with a simpler system just fine. Skyrim will either be a good or bad game in the accumulation of all its gameplay mechanics, a decent combat system doesn't matter as much to me in the grand scheme of things.

I'm also way more interested in actual rp possibilites, but if I could have the best of both worlds why'd I say no?! Probably not getting it though :<

[Virtz]

Yeah, saying ingame stats should replace player skill is kinda stupid. You need player skill to keep the game fun.

That'd depend on the RPG type. I like both the pure RPGs like Fallout 1 or Darklands where character skills matter above all and the action-RPG hybrids like Gothic or M&B where player skill dominates. Trying to do something in between the two ends badly in my opinion.

[LoSboccacc]

Yeah, saying ingame stats should replace player skill is kinda stupid. You need player skill to keep the game fun.

That'd depend on the RPG type. I like both the pure RPGs like Fallout 1 or Darklands where character skills matter above all and the action-RPG hybrids like Gothic or M&B where player skill dominates. Trying to do something in between the two ends badly in my opinion.

exactly. you have game where the player skill at test is hand eye coordination, and games where the player skill at test is problem solving, capacity planning and diplomacy.

yeah it would be great to have both in the same game. but you have to focus on something, or you'll end up with half-assed attempts at both.

[Duke 2.0]

 Frankly, the Morrowind and Oblivion systems are halfassed at the reflex system with no real hint at a management and problem solving system. Management is more in the meta level of growing the character, not the fights between those decisions. Making the combat more complex would not bring the problems of halfassing it as it's already hafassed.

[Sordid]

There is no better medieval combat game in existence.

That's because it's the only medieval combat game in existence.

Or better yet, point towards a game with a supposedly better control system.

Define "better". Does it mean "allows for more complex moves"? In that case, Die by the Sword. Does it mean "captures the essential role of positioning, distance, and timing in combat"? In that case, Severance: Blade of Darkness. Does it mean "easier to control"? In that case, pretty much any other combat game ever made.

Just note that Dynasty Warriors' brawler style or Assassin's Creed's "press button and cool shit happens" style are far worse alternatives for a game where all units are supposed to be treated equally by game mechanics.

That's true, but I don't see why you even bring that up, given that in neither of those are all units supposed to be treated equally.


Edit: Going back to the discussion about the shape of dragons, here's what dragons should look like in Skyrim: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_r0VjcmWDs

[Lysabild]

There is no better medieval combat game in existence.

That's because it's the only medieval combat game in existence.

Or better yet, point towards a game with a supposedly better control system.

Define "better". Does it mean "allows for more complex moves"? In that case, Die by the Sword. Does it mean "captures the essential role of positioning, distance, and timing in combat"? In that case, Severance: Blade of Darkness. Does it mean "easier to control"? In that case, pretty much any other combat game ever made.

Just note that Dynasty Warriors' brawler style or Assassin's Creed's "press button and cool shit happens" style are far worse alternatives for a game where all units are supposed to be treated equally by game mechanics.

That's true, but I don't see why you even bring that up, given that in neither of those are all units supposed to be treated equally.


Edit: Going back to the discussion about the shape of dragons, here's what dragons should look like in Skyrim: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_r0VjcmWDs

I am glad you are not a game designer, I'd be bored to death :<