PDA

View Full Version : please fix the UI! and other general critiques.



DaRedSovietGyro
06-21-2015, 12:36 PM
This game looks extremely promising and tickles my fancy in just the right ways, but there are some things i just flat out dont agree with.

rule no.1 (THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT RULE)- Dont insult our intelligence, we are not idiots and we dont need everything pointed out to us 24/7
-UI is extremely cluttered and unnessarily in your face. there's just so much on the screen that it completely ruins my immersion.
-Please remove on screen control directions completely and balance game accordingly.
-lock on system seems clumsy. switching from 3rd person to over the shoulder perspective is jarring and causes problems when being attacked by more than 1 enemy.
-please allow more mobility during combat. i feel that being slowed to a walk when locked on to an enemy doesnt really make any sense from a gameplay perspective.
-Please remove automatic finishing moves. in an objective based game this is going to be viewed as just a waste of ti.me, there are more important things than showing off your minor victory. assign them to a button so that a player can trigger them when they feel like doing so.
-why limit the game to 4v4? people want to engage in large scale battles but with only 4 people on each team the scale of the match is going to seem miniscule.
-try to work in a dodge mechanic if you can. ranged secondaries seem to be important and being an unpredictable target can be very important.
-allow us to customize our armor please. i want to be able to play as my favorite faction while wearing armor i feel comfortable with. dont give us locked armor sets to specific classes.
-allow other players to pick up an enemy's weapon, maybe even include a durability mechanic.
-make sure shields dont promote over defensive play or cowardly,easy ways to kill an enemy who has no shield.
-find a way to not let a team be able to spawn camp another team. this is multiplayer 101 and should go without saying.
-please add in a duel mode. 1v1 matches sound super fun.

please share any ideas you might have, or tell me where im wrong.

Solid_Altair
06-22-2015, 12:03 AM
"-why limit the game to 4v4? people want to engage in large scale battles but with only 4 people on each team the scale of the match is going to seem miniscule."
Latency. This isn't a shooter. Lag compensation doesn't work well in melee. And melee suffers more from latency. 8 players sounds bold to me.

-try to work in a dodge mechanic if you can. ranged secondaries seem to be important and being an unpredictable target can be very important.
It's in. The gameplay trailer features a Samurai rolling away. If anything, the dodge seemed overpowered as pure defense. I don't think it's great for counters, though. For now it seems people will spam dodge if the enemies try to gank them... until a friend come by and things even out.

-make sure shields dont promote over defensive play or cowardly,easy ways to kill an enemy who has no shield.
I'm betting shields will be only for extras, not for players.

MisterWillow
06-22-2015, 03:26 AM
-Please remove on screen control directions completely and balance game accordingly.

I agree they could be toned down a bit, but people on other threads have suggested menu toggles to disable certain things and 'hardcore mode' that removes all UI.


-lock on system seems clumsy. switching from 3rd person to over the shoulder perspective is jarring and causes problems when being attacked by more than 1 enemy.

System seems fine to me from watching it, though I do agree that your field of view is a bit narrow if trying to defend against multiple attackers. Again, could easily be fixed within a menu option.


-please allow more mobility during combat. i feel that being slowed to a walk when locked on to an enemy doesnt really make any sense from a gameplay perspective.

Maybe a little, but if you're too mobile you could easily side-step a slash, reducing or negating the need for their blocking mechanic.


-Please remove automatic finishing moves. in an objective based game this is going to be viewed as just a waste of ti.me, there are more important things than showing off your minor victory. assign them to a button so that a player can trigger them when they feel like doing so.

Finishers aren't automatic. If you watch the gameplay, there is a button prompt when you kill an enemy (Square or Triangle on Playstation).
http://i58.tinypic.com/wujgbb.jpg


-why limit the game to 4v4? people want to engage in large scale battles but with only 4 people on each team the scale of the match is going to seem miniscule.

What Solid_Altair said, but even if the latency could be overcome, I explained why I don't think large scale battles would work here (http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/1182270-Minor-adjustments-need-to-be-made?p=10868734&viewfull=1#post10868734). (others on the same thread, and elsewhere, had their own objections/concerns with the prospect, so feel free to read those as well)

Stated a couple places I think 8v8 as a maximum, should they decide to increase player count at all.


-allow us to customize our armor please. i want to be able to play as my favorite faction while wearing armor i feel comfortable with. dont give us locked armor sets to specific classes.

There have been a couple of threads concerning character customisation, and the footage we've seen so far seems to indicate at least moderate customisation (helmets, colours, emblems). I suggest looking at those.


-allow other players to pick up an enemy's weapon, maybe even include a durability mechanic.

Not really fond of this idea, honestly. Maybe in hardcore mode? Even then...

The factions seem very distinct in their fighting styles. That is, the knights use their longsword differently than the samurai use their katana (gripping the blade)---and I'm guessing viking weapons will be wielded differently as well---so I'm not sure how well it would go for a knight to suddenly pick up a viking axe (or a viking pick up a katana) and be able to use it properly. Maybe that could be the trade-off? I don't know.


-make sure shields dont promote over defensive play or cowardly,easy ways to kill an enemy who has no shield.

It was stated in an interview that you can parry a strike if you time your block and stagger your opponent that way, and there's a guard break, so I think a skilled player should be able to overcome the defense of a shield.


-find a way to not let a team be able to spawn camp another team. this is multiplayer 101 and should go without saying.

That seems really difficult in a game focused on melee. It's not like a shooter, where a few members of one team can sit behind rocks and camp (or a couple snipers find that one spot on the map that looks into the enemy base).


-please add in a duel mode. 1v1 matches sound super fun.

Agree with this. Even if it's called 'Sparring' or something. Or have a sort of small arena scenario with spectators around a pit.


I'm betting shields will be only for extras, not for players.

Hero characters with shields were in the trailer, so I'm guessing there are shield classes focused on defense. Like I said above, they should be easy to work around, provided you get parrying/guard break down.

Solid_Altair
06-22-2015, 07:46 AM
I agree with everything above, apart from the shield, in which case my hunch is still different from yours. Great post, btw.

How do you see the shield working with the threeway system? The threeway indicates not only defense, but also offense. If I press up, will my character lift his sword manacingly and shield, too? I'm not saying it's impossible to figure a way to put shields in. It just seems unlikely to me. I think they'll remain with the extras, even if the cinematic trailer hinted otherwise.

One way I see them implementing it is having the shield constantly working as a partial parry in the left side (there is a partial parry near the end of the gameplay video), while the player could focus on parrying just his right side and his head. He'd still be able to specifically parrying his let side, with a stance that should indicate some extra bracing. But I'm not a big fan of of this idea. It change sthe threeway system in a qualitative way and might be too dangerous for balance. It would also look a little weird to see a guy with a shield using his sword for most of his defense, what would probably happen. Just remindin' ya, this is deep speculation - just critizing my own odd suggestion.

EDIT:

Still about the viability of balancing the shield... not that I think it'd be necessarily non-viable, but... the guard breaks are not what they sound like. If you use a guard-break, it won't allow you a guaranteed hit, like what happens when you perform a good parry. Upon dissecting the gameplay trailer I realized that guard-brakes are more about the terrain. Your opponent will spend quite a while unable to defend himself, but you'll also be engaged in performing the guard break. By the time you get in reach he is already able to act and has more than enough time to defend. Guard-brakes may allow a guaranteed hit by one of your allies in your poor guard-brake victim. That would be awesome.

I also suspect the well-timed parries aren't what they sound like. But I've seen evidence in more than one way. So... guess I'll not get even more conspiracy-theorist here. Don't wanna try to hijack the thread. :p

Eiddard
06-22-2015, 08:44 AM
rule no.1 (THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT RULE)- Dont insult our intelligence, we are not idiots and we dont need everything pointed out to us 24/7

-UI is extremely cluttered and unnessarily in your face. there's just so much on the screen that it completely ruins my immersion.

-Please remove on screen control directions completely and balance game accordingly.

Well, It was a live demo in E3, people was trying their game for the first time, the game is early dev, It will probably change in the future. But yeah, the UI is a bit too much.


-lock on system seems clumsy. switching from 3rd person to over the shoulder perspective is jarring and causes problems when being attacked by more than 1 enemy.

It seems fine to me, the game is designed to small fights, so yeah, I don't think you will fight more than 3 people at once that many times.



-please allow more mobility during combat. i feel that being slowed to a walk when locked on to an enemy doesnt really make any sense from a gameplay perspective.

You have dodges, you can run out of a fight, etc. I think the mobility is fine, in a real fight you wouldnt be running around the guy like crazy because you would be dead easy, so yeah, moving slow when focused in combat is fine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H52rACMIi5Q&feature=youtu.be

Check that gameplay, the mobility is fine for me


-Please remove automatic finishing moves. in an objective based game this is going to be viewed as just a waste of ti.me, there are more important things than showing off your minor victory. assign them to a button so that a player can trigger them when they feel like doing so.

You have to press a button to do a finisher move. You can check the controllers in this article

http://forhonor.ubi.com/game/en-US/news/detail.aspx?c=tcm:152-200069-16&ct=tcm:148-76770-32



-why limit the game to 4v4? people want to engage in large scale battles but with only 4 people on each team the scale of the match is going to seem miniscule.

That is your opinnion, people don't want to do anything, you want to engage in larger fights, I am fine with extremly competitive small fights, like MOBAs or Shooters, I think 4v4 is good and can make the game to have a really good competitive scene.




-try to work in a dodge mechanic if you can. ranged secondaries seem to be important and being an unpredictable target can be very important.

There is, you can check dodges on the link I put before, it is a full gameplay match.



-allow us to customize our armor please. i want to be able to play as my favorite faction while wearing armor i feel comfortable with. dont give us locked armor sets to specific classes.

It is already said that classes are a combination between set of armor and weapon, but they said that they will allow customization and you will be able to change the gameplay of one classes a bit to fit your playstyle.


-allow other players to pick up an enemy's weapon, maybe even include a durability mechanic.

Since classes are a combination between armor +weapon, I think is fine how it is right now. I don't even see a Knight using a Katana, it would be weird.



-make sure shields dont promote over defensive play or cowardly,easy ways to kill an enemy who has no shield.

In the gameplay from the panel in E3, you can see a Viking with shield + sword fighting for a few seconds.

http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/1182932-Vikings-in-the-E3-Live-Demo

He uses quite aggressives moves, and I think I remember a interview where they said that shield would be used as weapon too.



-find a way to not let a team be able to spawn camp another team. this is multiplayer 101 and should go without saying.

If there is enought objectives in the game that you have to attend this would be fixed, but yeah, is hard to find a solution to spawn camp.



-please add in a duel mode. 1v1 matches sound super fun.

If you check all the interviews from the devs it is pretty clear that there will be such a mode.

po10cyUS
06-22-2015, 08:46 AM
War of the roses has a great blocking and attacking UI prompt, something similar would keep the UI clean but still help players, this game should use that.

MisterWillow
06-22-2015, 09:23 AM
How do you see the shield working with the threeway system? The threeway indicates not only defense, but also offense. If I press up, will my character lift his sword manacingly and shield, too? I'm not saying it's impossible to figure a way to put shields in. It just seems unlikely to me. I think they'll remain with the extras, even if the cinematic trailer hinted otherwise.

Shields can and were used offensively. The edge is a very effective bludgeon, in either a swipe or a punch (the swipe would probably be used for the game). Defensively, the shield can be held in front and the blade of your sword resting on the top corner. Top and shield side would be blocked by the shield, sword hand by the sword. In the trailer, there was a knight with a flail, in which case the body would be sideways, the flail held behind, and the arm could be positioned to guard all three angles.

On that note, should the flail actually be in the game, I am curious how it would work mechanically. In real battle, the chain was generally used to get around shields, or wrap around other weapons to disarm an opponent, along with the blunt trauma. If they can't figure out how to get it to work (and this is assuming they haven't already tested it), it could easily be substituted for a mace.


One way I see them implementing it is having the shield constantly working as a partial parry in the left side (there is a partial parry near the end of the gameplay video), while the player could focus on parrying just his right side and his head. He'd still be able to specifically parrying his let side, with a stance that should indicate some extra bracing. But I'm not a big fan of of this idea. It change sthe threeway system in a qualitative way and might be too dangerous for balance. It would also look a little weird to see a guy with a shield using his sword for most of his defense, what would probably happen. Just remindin' ya, this is deep speculation - just critizing my own odd suggestion.

EDIT:

Still about the viability of balancing the shield... not that I think it'd be necessarily non-viable, but... the guard breaks are not what they sound like. If you use a guard-break, it won't allow you a guaranteed hit, like what happens when you perform a good parry. Upon dissecting the gameplay trailer I realized that guard-brakes are more about the terrain. Your opponent will spend quite a while unable to defend himself, but you'll also be engaged in performing the guard break. By the time you get in reach he is already able to act and has more than enough time to defend. Guard-brakes may allow a guaranteed hit by one of your allies in your poor guard-brake victim. That would be awesome.

I also suspect the well-timed parries aren't what they sound like. But I've seen evidence in more than one way. So... guess I'll not get even more conspiracy-theorist here. Don't wanna try to hijack the thread. :p

Hmmm. I see what you're saying about the guarding. I think it adds to the strategy of picking a class to use---do you go full offense (like the samurai assassin shown in the gameplay) or full defense (shield and one handed weapon) or a more balanced approach (the standard knight shown).

I'll grant you that something that advantageous could be abused, but that could be said for any heavily armoured 'tank' class in any other multiplayer game. It just means you have to be extra careful against them. On the other hand, automatic blocking on the shield side could not be an aspect of a shield class, and if you don't guard on that side, you're struck on that shoulder, or the side of the head (I haven't seen any tower shields in any media released, and small to mid-sized shields are really only large enough to cover up to the bicep, which is why you kind of have to hunch behind them and physically deflect blows, not just keep them raised).

Also, when facing a shield-bearing opponent, it was common practice to try to hook it and pull away. So-called bearded axes were designed with this purpose, and the inverted sword technique shown in the gameplay executions were used in a similar way, using the cross-guard. When doing a guard-break against a shield-bearing opponent, that could be the animation (though that does leave something out of the samurai repertoire, but they could always kick it away or something). Likewise, if the shield is used offensively, and is parried, the shield could be swept aside by the parrying blow.

Solid_Altair
06-23-2015, 02:07 AM
Defensively, the shield can be held in front and the blade of your sword resting on the top corner. Top and shield side would be blocked by the shield, sword hand by the sword. In the trailer, there was a knight with a flail, in which case the body would be sideways, the flail held behind, and the arm could be positioned to guard all three angles.
That's precisely what sounds like a problem. Shields coul end up guarding all 3 directions. Even 2 would change things too much. And even if they'd guard only one direction, there'd be the problem of looking like they're guarding more. In the E3 live presentation, they have a gameplay without HUD for melee. It's great and I hope it's featured as a mode. Well... try to think of shield in this situation, even if it'd guard only one direction. The stances would probably be too hard to read. Probably.

And very cool info about shields. I didn't know a lot of this stuff.

MisterWillow
06-23-2015, 07:28 AM
That's precisely what sounds like a problem. Shields coul end up guarding all 3 directions. Even 2 would change things too much. And even if they'd guard only one direction, there'd be the problem of looking like they're guarding more. In the E3 live presentation, they have a gameplay without HUD for melee. It's great and I hope it's featured as a mode. Well... try to think of shield in this situation, even if it'd guard only one direction. The stances would probably be too hard to read. Probably.

And very cool info about shields. I didn't know a lot of this stuff.

Sorry, I don't think I was clear enough. The shield would still need to be moved to the right, left, and top.

I can kind of understand what you mean in terms of being hard to distinguish, but there are ways to make it clear. Say, if they guard on their shield side, the arm is bent up toward their ear; if the top, the shield is more centre-mass and hides the face from the eyes down; and if the weapon side, the arm is extended across their body. Because of how the knight's shields are shaped (the classic heater is what I've seen), it's easy to distinguish its position by the direction of the top. The round shield used by vikings would be more difficult to read, but still recognisable if positioned in the way I described.

I think this would be better explained visually, so I did some sketches:
http://oi58.tinypic.com/2j11qad.jpg

Used a viking example, since that would be the most problematic in terms of readability. A knight's shield would have the flat/slightly pointed end (depending on which version of the heater is used) the same direction the arm is oriented. The 'left' position is both prepared to block and strike with the shield edge, the 'top' protects the centre, but leaves the flanks vulnerable, and the 'right' protects the sword arm and chest, but leaves the rest exposed.

No position would be an automatic block, and each would have its own attack---shield strike from the left, overhead swing from the top (the shield would move, of course), and a horizontal swing from the right.

Solid_Altair
06-23-2015, 12:03 PM
Thanks for taking the time to explain and even draw it (I'm assuming you did). I suppose having the sword sort of point up in the high guard would help indicating the high attack. A similar logic could be applied to the right attack... the sword could be held a little more horizontally. The idea of attacking with the shield itself from the left stance is the real crafty bit you came up with. Good thinking. I think it would be clear enough. And the this left shield attack could be followed up with a left sword attack in its combo, since the second attack doesn't have to come from stance. This way we wouldn't see the fighter attacking more with his shield than with his sword.

MisterWillow
06-24-2015, 07:51 AM
I suppose having the sword sort of point up in the high guard would help indicating the high attack. A similar logic could be applied to the right attack... the sword could be held a little more horizontally.

An excellent suggestion. I think I was too focused on the shield position when I drew them that I hardly considered the sword placement.

cytovag69
06-24-2015, 10:19 AM
If you think shields would be complicated imagine how duel wielding would work.

Solid_Altair
06-24-2015, 12:22 PM
I actually think Dual Wielding would be easier to read. The side stances could be based on which sword is in the front, whereas the high stance could be about centering the front sword and holding the back sword overhead. The high parries coud actually have parries using both swords at once.

cytovag69
06-24-2015, 07:53 PM
I actually think Dual Wielding would be easier to read. The side stances could be based on which sword is in the front, whereas the high stance could be about centering the front sword and holding the back sword overhead. The high parries coud actually have parries using both swords at once.

Maybe duel wielding and shields could work but I don't see them working well. If you ask me they should concentrate on single sword technics because that seems to work the best

CG_HouseVincent
06-24-2015, 07:55 PM
Maybe duel wielding and shields could work but I don't see them working well. If you ask me they should concentrate on single sword technics because that seems to work the best

Explain how you think it will be hard to see working well? I can see the battle system working quite well with shields and duel wielding.

cytovag69
06-24-2015, 08:08 PM
This game looks extremely promising and tickles my fancy in just the right ways, but there are some things i just flat out dont agree with.

rule no.1 (THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT RULE)- Dont insult our intelligence, we are not idiots and we dont need everything pointed out to us 24/7
-UI is extremely cluttered and unnessarily in your face. there's just so much on the screen that it completely ruins my immersion.
-Please remove on screen control directions completely and balance game accordingly.
-lock on system seems clumsy. switching from 3rd person to over the shoulder perspective is jarring and causes problems when being attacked by more than 1 enemy.
-please allow more mobility during combat. i feel that being slowed to a walk when locked on to an enemy doesnt really make any sense from a gameplay perspective.
-Please remove automatic finishing moves. in an objective based game this is going to be viewed as just a waste of ti.me, there are more important things than showing off your minor victory. assign them to a button so that a player can trigger them when they feel like doing so.
-why limit the game to 4v4? people want to engage in large scale battles but with only 4 people on each team the scale of the match is going to seem miniscule.
-try to work in a dodge mechanic if you can. ranged secondaries seem to be important and being an unpredictable target can be very important.
-allow us to customize our armor please. i want to be able to play as my favorite faction while wearing armor i feel comfortable with. dont give us locked armor sets to specific classes.
-allow other players to pick up an enemy's weapon, maybe even include a durability mechanic.
-make sure shields dont promote over defensive play or cowardly,easy ways to kill an enemy who has no shield.
-find a way to not let a team be able to spawn camp another team. this is multiplayer 101 and should go without saying.
-please add in a duel mode. 1v1 matches sound super fun.

please share any ideas you might have, or tell me where im wrong.

I agree with the ui part like in ac2 there is no indicators but you can still read every opponent 85% of the time. And without the other 15% the game wouldn't have been any fun because it would be too easy. I think if they keep the ui indicators in the final game I think people would always be able to block in time. 1v1 would be super fun. The picking up weapon idea I don't like. If your a samurai and your sword breaks you could be stuck with a longsword. 8v8 would work with very large maps but otherwise it would be a mess.

cytovag69
06-24-2015, 08:20 PM
Explain how you think it will be hard to see working well? I can see the battle system working quite well with shields and duel wielding.

First I would like to say that if they do get those things working that great I would be happy. But the reason I think it won't work is because the idea is that the right stick controls the sword so it stands to reason that controlling 2 weapons won't work as well.

CG_HouseVincent
06-24-2015, 08:20 PM
This game looks extremely promising and tickles my fancy in just the right ways, but there are some things i just flat out dont agree with.

rule no.1 (THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT RULE)- Dont insult our intelligence, we are not idiots and we dont need everything pointed out to us 24/7
-UI is extremely cluttered and unnessarily in your face. there's just so much on the screen that it completely ruins my immersion.
-Please remove on screen control directions completely and balance game accordingly.
-lock on system seems clumsy. switching from 3rd person to over the shoulder perspective is jarring and causes problems when being attacked by more than 1 enemy.
-please allow more mobility during combat. i feel that being slowed to a walk when locked on to an enemy doesnt really make any sense from a gameplay perspective.
-Please remove automatic finishing moves. in an objective based game this is going to be viewed as just a waste of ti.me, there are more important things than showing off your minor victory. assign them to a button so that a player can trigger them when they feel like doing so.
-why limit the game to 4v4? people want to engage in large scale battles but with only 4 people on each team the scale of the match is going to seem miniscule.
-try to work in a dodge mechanic if you can. ranged secondaries seem to be important and being an unpredictable target can be very important.
-allow us to customize our armor please. i want to be able to play as my favorite faction while wearing armor i feel comfortable with. dont give us locked armor sets to specific classes.
-allow other players to pick up an enemy's weapon, maybe even include a durability mechanic.
-make sure shields dont promote over defensive play or cowardly,easy ways to kill an enemy who has no shield.
-find a way to not let a team be able to spawn camp another team. this is multiplayer 101 and should go without saying.
-please add in a duel mode. 1v1 matches sound super fun.

please share any ideas you might have, or tell me where im wrong.

Most of what you have to say is either opinion based or because you do not understand the game as well as you may think. For example, the executions in the dominion game mode are completely justified. They give you points to eventually win and break your opponents. That should not be discouraged. The game play and the fighting in this game are the most important part. The developers do not want to take away from that.

The opinion you have on the UI is completely your own. No one can tell you what you like or should like from this game and this can easily be customized through the options menu when the game comes out; or at least I think should be.

The reason the game is a 4v4 battle mode is because if there are too many people on the battlefield it no longer feels like a dueling game. It becomes a cheap shot, kill whoever you see, very rushed game. I know I do not like this type of game play; however, you may.

All of the things you said do come down to game play preference and opinion.

CG_HouseVincent
06-24-2015, 08:22 PM
First I would like to say that if they do get those things working that great I would be happy. But the reason I think it won't work is because the idea is that the right stick controls the sword so it stands to reason that controlling 2 weapons won't work as well.

I see your concern. I think the right stick will be controlling where you attack and where you defend. For instance, when you put your guard up on the right side your shield will be present on the right, but you can still swing your sword on that side for an attack as well. It can be worked out quite easily imo.

cytovag69
06-24-2015, 08:35 PM
I see your concern. I think the right stick will be controlling where you attack and where you defend. For instance, when you put your guard up on the right side your shield will be present on the right, but you can still swing your sword on that side for an attack as well. It can be worked out quite easily imo.

I see what your saying shield dudes fight the same way as normals just with a shield as defense. But I still think duel wielding could be problematic.

CG_HouseVincent
06-24-2015, 08:37 PM
I see what your saying shield dudes fight the same way as normals just with a shield as defense. But I still think duel wielding could be problematic.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I think a little faith in game design will do you some good.

RakeVillain
06-24-2015, 09:16 PM
-allow other players to pick up an enemy's weapon, maybe even include a durability mechanic.


I don't like this one.

CG_HouseVincent
06-24-2015, 10:13 PM
I don't like this one.

I agree. Sword breaks mid duel and you are not gonna survive more than 3 seconds. That, to me, seems less about skill and more about luck. These annoyances do not need to be present in the game. It also doesn't seem realistic. Focus on the game play of For Honor and do not adapt it to make it become like FPS genres. For Honor is creating a new genre on its own.

cytovag69
06-24-2015, 11:17 PM
You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I think a little faith in game design will do you some good.

Your right its clear the devs know more about sword fighting than I do after all I could have never thought of such a genius system so I'm sure the either thought of an equally good system for duel wielding or they won't include duel wielding. I'm just concerned because I'm so excited for this game more than I've ever been for any other game. So its just that I want everything out perfectly.

CG_HouseVincent
06-24-2015, 11:39 PM
Your right its clear the devs know more about sword fighting than I do after all I could have never thought of such a genius system so I'm sure the either thought of an equally good system for duel wielding or they won't include duel wielding. I'm just concerned because I'm so excited for this game more than I've ever been for any other game. So its just that I want everything out perfectly.

I totally understand. Duel wielding will be implemented. It is fairly obvious this is going to happen because of the CGI trailer, wallpapers, and developer interviews. I am sure through extensive beta testing that the system will be polished and refined to deal with any problems that arise.

Solid_Altair
06-24-2015, 11:46 PM
Amen, brother. And as much as I'm impressed and optimistic about the game, I keep in mind the possibility of people coming up with a bad design for something, even if the same people figured out something genius in another area. Games with gret qualities can also have great flaws. I think the The Witcher 3 is a big example of this. So, I suppose our role as a community is to constantly keep things check, because we might just happen to figure something out before they do. That's what feedback is for. And if end up being wrong and they have been right all along about something, "no harm, no foul."

Their sire has been updated and includes info on shields. So, my bets about 'no shield' were wrong and I'm happy about it. That's the spirit. We're picky because we love it.

cytovag69
06-25-2015, 12:01 AM
Amen, brother. And as much as I'm impressed and optimistic about the game, I keep in mind the possibility of people coming up with a bad design for something, even if the same people figured out something genius in another area. Games with gret qualities can also have great flaws. I think the The Witcher 3 is a big example of this. So, I suppose our role as a community is to constantly keep things check, because we might just happen to figure something out before they do. That's what feedback is for. And if end up being wrong and they have been right all along about something, "no harm, no foul."

Their sire has been updated and includes info on shields. So, my bets about 'no shield' were wrong and I'm happy about it. That's the spirit. We're picky because we love it.

Exactly. A game as original as this one is bound to run into problems because they have nothing to consult because there are no games quite like this. But I feel confident that they will solve or have solved these problems.

cytovag69
06-25-2015, 01:20 AM
A saw a naginata(spear), a duel wielder, and a shield dude play major roles in the trailer. Are these confirmed?

CG_HouseVincent
06-25-2015, 02:34 AM
A saw a naginata(spear), a duel wielder, and a shield dude play major roles in the trailer. Are these confirmed?

These are not confirmed classes, however, these will most likely be the classes that are presented in the game. The reason I say this is because of the wallpapers present on the official site and the classes imagined in the trailer.

cytovag69
06-25-2015, 02:47 AM
These are not confirmed classes, however, these will most likely be the classes that are presented in the game. The reason I say this is because of the wallpapers present on the official site and the classes imagined in the trailer.

Ya its hard to believe that they would put something in the trailer but not in the actual game.

CG_HouseVincent
06-25-2015, 03:49 AM
Ya its hard to believe that they would put something in the trailer but not in the actual game.

I'm not sure if this is sarcastic or not, but I am going to take it as it isn't supposed to be. Many companies now do not try to deceive their customers within trailers; at least, not like they used to. This is because of many laws and lawsuits that have surrounded this sort of advertisement. It is called false advertisement and can lead to many complicated issues for a company. I believe that every combination of weapon we see in the trailer will be available in the game. The armor I am not sure of.

cytovag69
06-25-2015, 04:13 AM
I'm not sure if this is sarcastic or not, but I am going to take it as it isn't supposed to be. Many companies now do not try to deceive their customers within trailers; at least, not like they used to. This is because of many laws and lawsuits that have surrounded this sort of advertisement. It is called false advertisement and can lead to many complicated issues for a company. I believe that every combination of weapon we see in the trailer will be available in the game. The armor I am not sure of.

No sarcasm intended. Anyways even if it was just overblown trailer nonsense the concept art has the knight with a shield and a Viking duel wielding so those are practically certain

cytovag69
06-25-2015, 04:57 AM
I'm not sure if this is sarcastic or not, but I am going to take it as it isn't supposed to be. Many companies now do not try to deceive their customers within trailers; at least, not like they used to. This is because of many laws and lawsuits that have surrounded this sort of advertisement. It is called false advertisement and can lead to many complicated issues for a company. I believe that every combination of weapon we see in the trailer will be available in the game. The armor I am not sure of.

BTW if you think trailers aren't sometimes BS(no insult intended) watch the ESO trailer and then play ESO. Ya, not quite the same. All the same I do trust these guys and their trailer.

Warphorntek
06-26-2015, 09:24 PM
Well would be cool to make something like king of the hill (1v1 with ladder (limited numbers maybe 8 players dueling over and over) of players trying to defeat last duel winner) Lags no lags i would thing about scaling battle sizes. would be epic with more players.

CG_HouseVincent
06-27-2015, 12:07 AM
Well would be cool to make something like king of the hill (1v1 with ladder (limited numbers maybe 8 players dueling over and over) of players trying to defeat last duel winner) Lags no lags i would thing about scaling battle sizes. would be epic with more players.

They have no released details surrounding other game modes, but I think this would be a wonderful idea as well. The developers will showcase more modes as time passes. I am absolutely sure they will have a free for all match up type.

AvarusTyrannus
06-20-2016, 06:55 PM
Nice drawing there Willow

MisterWillow
06-21-2016, 05:01 AM
Nice drawing there Willow

Meh... like I told Altair, I could have accounted for the weapon position as well as the shield (I noticed a sword and shield Viking in the campaign mission and like how he held the sword hand directly behind---and slightly above---the shield hand to brace any impact, and was really pleased with that).

It was also something I did in five minutes tops to get my point across.

I'd like to draw is my ideal collector's edition statue... stay tuned (maybe). ;):p

Casp3r42
06-21-2016, 05:40 AM
guys who are curious about shields, check as much viking mission footage on youtube as you can, multiple vids show the viking shield wielder in action(AI controlled) near the final boss and the early parts of the mission have a couple AI enemies with shields. You will see them go into a turtle stance where they block all directions but continuously drain stamina, and can still be guard broken.


This game looks extremely promising and tickles my fancy in just the right ways, but there are some things i just flat out dont agree with.

rule no.1 (THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT RULE)- Dont insult our intelligence, we are not idiots and we dont need everything pointed out to us 24/7
-UI is extremely cluttered and unnessarily in your face. there's just so much on the screen that it completely ruins my immersion.
-Please remove on screen control directions completely and balance game accordingly.

No. Nonononononono. Lets just say when the alpha started i had that same opinion and now i am VERY in favor of keeping the indicators.


-lock on system seems clumsy. switching from 3rd person to over the shoulder perspective is jarring and causes problems when being attacked by more than 1 enemy.

Man reading through this while under NDA is soooo hard! I can only imagine how the devs feel -_-


-please allow more mobility during combat. i feel that being slowed to a walk when locked on to an enemy doesnt really make any sense from a gameplay perspective.

Comparing the e3 2015 dodging to the 2016 footage i would say the dodge seems faster and more responsive.


-Please remove automatic finishing moves. in an objective based game this is going to be viewed as just a waste of ti.me, there are more important things than showing off your minor victory. assign them to a button so that a player can trigger them when they feel like doing so.

They are optional and give a minor healing effect when completed


-why limit the game to 4v4? people want to engage in large scale battles but with only 4 people on each team the scale of the match is going to seem miniscule.

Perception of scale is relative. Small #'s work fine on small maps. As others have said, it's likely due to technical reasons that they want to keep it 4v4.


-try to work in a dodge mechanic if you can. ranged secondaries seem to be important and being an unpredictable target can be very important.

Dodging is in the game. As far as ranged weapons go, do throwing knives count? :D https://youtu.be/9x_lceIxBCM?t=50


-allow us to customize our armor please. i want to be able to play as my favorite faction while wearing armor i feel comfortable with. dont give us locked armor sets to specific classes.

I believe the devs have mentioned some kind of visual customization.


-allow other players to pick up an enemy's weapon, maybe even include a durability mechanic.

That introduces a number of technical and design problems that the game can really do without.


-make sure shields dont promote over defensive play or cowardly,easy ways to kill an enemy who has no shield.

From what we know of shields, they block normally but (as i mentioned above) they can turtle into an all direction block but they drain stamina and can still be guard broken, they also can't attack from that stance.


-find a way to not let a team be able to spawn camp another team. this is multiplayer 101 and should go without saying.

https://youtu.be/H52rACMIi5Q?t=111 here you can see a knight dropping out of an elevated area from his spawn ;)


-please add in a duel mode. 1v1 matches sound super fun.

Yes! Please!