221 réponses à ce sujet

[Xewaka]

ShrinkingFish wrote...

As a matter of fact. I wasn't even talking about armor. But you're right. Heavy armor would definitely slow you down. I've said as much in other threads.

I was just talking about two handed swords.

Why do people think armor would slow you down to the point of inmobility? A full plate armor weights less than the average modern soldier backpack (I can't quite remember if it was 25 or 35 kg), and full plate is designed to distribute the weight around various holding points, rather than only shoulders and waist. An inmobile target is a dead target, regardless of armor. Full plate allows for a great deal of mobility. Oh, and two-handers became viable thanks to full plate being as effective as shields at absorbing glancing blows.
If people used light armor, it was because of either of these two reasons: A) it was cheaper to produce;  proper armor wasn't invented yet.
I'd expect a person trained in use of heavy armor to lose very little mobility on one. Those things were designed to protect you, not to be steely coffins.

Oh. about the topic. It's not the catapults physics and disregard of newton that annoys me, is the lack of proper gameplay that we were promised. I'm one of those weird people who actually want to know how the game feels when playing it.

Modifié par Xewaka, 29 octobre 2010 - 09:28 .

[ShrinkingFish]

Xewaka wrote...

ShrinkingFish wrote...

As a matter of fact. I wasn't even talking about armor. But you're right. Heavy armor would definitely slow you down. I've said as much in other threads.

I was just talking about two handed swords.

Why do people think armor would slow you down to the point of inmobility? A full plate armor weights less than the average modern soldier backpack (I can't quite remember if it was 25 or 35 kg), and full plate is designed to distribute the weight around various holding points, rather than only shoulders and waist. An inmobile target is a dead target, regardless of armor. Full plate allows for a great deal of mobility. Oh, and two-handers became viable thanks to full plate being as effective as shields at absorbing glancing blows.
If people used light armor, it was because of either of these two reasons: A) it was cheaper to produce;  proper armor wasn't invented yet.
I'd expect a person trained in use of heavy armor to lose very little mobility on one. Those things were designed to protect you, not to be steely coffins.

Oh. about the topic. It's not the catapults physics and disregard of newton that annoys me, is the lack of proper gameplay that we were promised. I'm one of those weird people who actually want to know how the game feels when playing it.

Never said it slows you down to the point of immobility... Never even approached such a conclusion.

Only said that it slows you down... which it does. I also said it drains stamina faster than if you weren't wearing it... which it does.

I also said it acts as an encumbrance for fighting styles dependant on speed and agility... which it does. Thus wearing it is inappropriate for such fighters.

Just saying, heavy armor has advantages and disadvantages. It definitely isn't better in all cases just like it definitely isn't worse in all cases...

But that is for another thread.

[Jestina]

2h swords are slower for game balance...just taking a safe guess. If you could swing them as fast as a longsword...every warrior in the game would be armed with a 2h weapon.



And true, the only people going into battle without armor were the ones who couldn't afford it. Them poor peasants made for good fodder. A trained knight in heavy armor was quite agile too...that's another myth, about them being clumsy and slow.

[ShrinkingFish]

Jestina wrote...

2h swords are slower for game balance...just taking a safe guess. If you could swing them as fast as a longsword...every warrior in the game would be armed with a 2h weapon.

And true, the only people going into battle without armor were the ones who couldn't afford it. Them poor peasants made for good fodder. A trained knight in heavy armor was quite agile too...that's another myth, about them being clumsy and slow.

Anyone ever tell you you're an adept at spotting cultural myths?

After all, we all know that individuals wearing heavy armored plate were avid gymnasts. I mean, thats why they call horses horses after all. Because knights used to do flips and handstands in their full suits in the gym before going out to battle. You know, just to warm up.

[/sarcasm]

Modifié par ShrinkingFish, 29 octobre 2010 - 10:11 .

[Sir JK]

Xewaka wrote...
...Oh, and two-handers became viable thanks to full plate being as effective as shields at absorbing glancing blows...

Actually not quite correct. It is the twohanded sword itself that assumes the shields role, not the armour. Even in plate it is a bad idea to get hit, even just by glancing blows. The majority of twohanded sword techniques (that we know of) are unarmoured techniques, but they aren't changed one bit when the user wears armour.

The same rule applies for plate harnesses (or other types or armour) as modern body armour: It might save your life, but don't count on it.

[Nerevar-as]

Xewaka wrote...

Oh. about the topic. It's not the catapults physics and disregard of newton that annoys me, is the lack of proper gameplay that we were promised. I'm one of those weird people who actually want to know how the game feels when playing it.

We need a demo for that. I can´t see how intense or hard a fight is from a video. Besides, it´s unlikely gameplay footage will be from Nightmare difficulty. Unless all fancy moves are the finishing attacks, it´ll be sad watch enemies get hit and keep on fighting.

What I don´t get is why BW has decided to go this way. A good fight is not about impossible moves in the setting. My favorite movie swordfight ever is still the end duel from Scaramouche, back before wires and such. Intensity has nothing to do with impossible stunts. If those go too far, it´s the other way round. Of course, that "too far" depends on the person.

[Xewaka]

Nerevar-as wrote...

Xewaka wrote...

Oh. about the topic. It's not the catapults physics and disregard of newton that annoys me, is the lack of proper gameplay that we were promised. I'm one of those weird people who actually want to know how the game feels when playing it.

We need a demo for that. I can´t see how intense or hard a fight is from a video. Besides, it´s unlikely gameplay footage will be from Nightmare difficulty. Unless all fancy moves are the finishing attacks, it´ll be sad watch enemies get hit and keep on fighting.

What I don´t get is why BW has decided to go this way. A good fight is not about impossible moves in the setting. My favorite movie swordfight ever is still the end duel from Scaramouche, back before wires and such. Intensity has nothing to do with impossible stunts. If those go too far, it´s the other way round. Of course, that "too far" depends on the person.

Well, I personally would find a small walkthrough "these are the camera options, check this out, see how to configure your hotbar, here are how we reworked the tactis, etc" video very enjoyable and much more informative.

[Nerevar-as]

Xewaka wrote...


Well, I personally would find a small walkthrough "these are the camera options, check this out, see how to configure your hotbar, here are how we reworked the tactis, etc" video very enjoyable and much more informative.

Oh, you meant those. I agree you can get them form a video. I guess that if we see that fights are against 20 enemies all flying around  (please no) we would get a good idea of the feeling of combat too.

[B_Harrison]

As cringeworthy as the entire RTP trailer is (it's short of a major requirement for the Rule of Cool justification - looking cool), I think expecting pseudo-realistic combat, given the game we're discussing, is equally unrealistic in another sense...

But for the sake of discussion-

Fortunately I've never shot someone at point blank range with a crossbow, but I'd expect the person in the video to face-plant rather than fly backwards through the air, given that his lower body was hit (though it's hard to tell with the lake of blood erupting from him). Crossbows recoil forwards, and generally not very much.

Real two-handers aren't nearly as slow as shown in DAO, true, and it's often (inexplicably) overlooked that when compared to one-handed weapons, they're wielded with, err... two hands; a tremendous increase in strength of grip/control/etc. I regularly split wood with an 8lb maul (NOT balanced for combat), and I can swing it around quite comfortably, and strike hard objects, for longer than most fictional combats last. I'm fitter and stronger than most people, but much weaker than someone who'd trained with sword & armour all day every day, and pitifully weak compared to the typical RPG hero. Why anyone would give up their shield is beyond me, though.

Modifié par B_Harrison, 29 octobre 2010 - 11:37 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

ShrinkingFish wrote...
I don't. I only believe the things I see in person.

All else is suspect.

A shotgun will only send you flying backwards if you're already leaning backwards.
Don't you watch Mythbusters or similar shows?

[Lotion Soronarr]

ShrinkingFish wrote...
Just saying, heavy armor has advantages and disadvantages. It definitely isn't better in all cases just like it definitely isn't worse in all cases...

Relisticly, field plate IS superior to lighter armor...which why everyone who could afford one wore it battle. Real World doesn't care about balance.

After all, we all know that individuals wearing heavy armored plate were
avid gymnasts. I mean, thats why they call horses horses after all.
Because knights used to do flips and handstands in their full suits in
the gym before going out to battle. You know, just to warm up.

I have actaully seen a guy doing gymnastics in full palte. You - rolls, hand stands and stuff.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 29 octobre 2010 - 11:49 .

[Karlojey]

OP what's so bad about a little exaggeration? It's a FANTASY game so why can't we have some fantasy physics? It's not so bad that it kills immersion you know. Hell, even in the finishing moves in DA:O had the Warden jumping up in full plate mail to stab an Ogre. Was it realistic? Hell no. Did it look cool? Booyah!

For all we know Isabela might've had Daggers with Runes of Badassery that made enemies fly when you hit them, hence the exaggerated scene in the trailer

[Lumikki]

Karlojey wrote...

OP what's so bad about a little exaggeration?

Not OP, but answer is very easy, some people like it, some doesn't. Little same kind than when people get older they taste to different stuff change.

[Maconbar]

I think that the game needs more physics not less.

[Xewaka]

Maconbar wrote...

I think that the game needs more physics not less.

You know, more physics could mean horses in game.
Shame they'd be spheric and frictionless.
[/nerdjoke]

[Lotion Soronarr]

Karlojey wrote...

OP what's so bad about a little exaggeration? It's a FANTASY game so why can't we have some fantasy physics? It's not so bad that it kills immersion you know. Hell, even in the finishing moves in DA:O had the Warden jumping up in full plate mail to stab an Ogre. Was it realistic? Hell no. Did it look cool? Booyah!

You can jump in plate atmor FYI.
But how much is too much varries. There are some people that wouldn't mind at all if Hawke thre galaxies around.
I'm in the opposite camp. I want it to feel realistic. I want Hawk to be a regular, if very skileld guy. I don't want to feel like Superman. My ego doens't need no futher boosting.

[SXOSXO]

Laidlaw already stated he likes the new exaggerated look, therefore no matter how much we complain, nothing will change.

Modifié par SXOSXO, 29 octobre 2010 - 03:37 .

[slimgrin]

*looks at rouge gameplay video*

Rouge is um...acrobatic. And theres the rofl spinning copter attack. Very sneaky.

Modifié par slimgrin, 29 octobre 2010 - 03:08 .

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

http://en.wikipedia..../Spandau_Ballet

most probably it came from an expression used among U.S. soldiers in World War II to describe the "dance" that was performed by anyone struck by the high rate of fire produced by the German MG 42 machine gun, called the Spandau after the Berlin suburb where it was made

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

slimgrin wrote...

*looks at rouge gameplay video*

Rouge is um...acrobatic. And theres the rofl spinning copter attack. Very sneaky.

No, rouge is make up.

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

SXOSXO wrote...

Gaider already stated he likes the new exaggerated look, therefore no matter how much we complain, nothing will change.

Gaider isn't the art director, so his opinion, while holding much more weight than ours, is still just an opinion.

I suspect it isnt going to change because whoever is in charge likes it.

[Dave of Canada]

slimgrin wrote...

And theres the rofl spinning copter attack.

Just like Origins.

[SXOSXO]

Shinian2 wrote...

SXOSXO wrote...

Gaider already stated he likes the new exaggerated look, therefore no matter how much we complain, nothing will change.

Gaider isn't the art director, so his opinion, while holding much more weight than ours, is still just an opinion.

I suspect it isnt going to change because whoever is in charge likes it.

I'm sorry, I meant Laidlaw, not Gaider.

[slimgrin]

Shinian2 wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

*looks at rouge gameplay video*

Rouge is um...acrobatic. And theres the rofl spinning copter attack. Very sneaky.

No, rouge is make up.

Lol...whoops. Damn spelling.

[AlanC9]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

ShrinkingFish wrote...
Just saying, heavy armor has advantages and disadvantages. It definitely isn't better in all cases just like it definitely isn't worse in all cases...

Relisticly, field plate IS superior to lighter armor...which why everyone who could afford one wore it battle. Real World doesn't care about balance.

But plate armor did go away even while melee fighting was still relatively common. Even into the rifle era there were still bayonet charges. Should the Union have issued field plate to its infantry? I know Stonewall Jackson ordered pikes, but that's a different issue.