ELEX Pre-Release Thread

[T. Reich]

There actually were boars in G2. And they were wolf-tier in terms of difficulty.

Also - there were possibilities of sunlocks in G1-2. But only in VERY specific circumstances, and versus specific mobs. And they all had one thing in common - they involved extremely fast chains of attacks. G2 had field bugs and mantises with their occasional super-fast attack chains and hordes (4+) of skeletons. G1 had that fucking undead orc chieftain with pyrokinesis thing.

In any case, field bugs wouldn't do ininite stunlocks and they were weak as shit, only threat to the weakest chars. And going uprepared melee vs lots of skeletons/snappers just screams "I am dumb".

Regardless of what I wrote - Kem0 is a massive lolcow. Complaining about stunlocks in gothics/risens = being a shit player.

 

[T. Reich]

Risen and Gothic combat were horrible, there was not strategy, there was no complexity, the combat revolved around stun locks and exploits.

Half the games in the series have stun locks, the other half despite not having them still have shit combat.

So you admit being wrong then?

 

[ZagorTeNej]

Risen and Gothic combat were horrible, there was not strategy, there was no complexity, the combat revolved around stun locks and exploits.

Risen and Gothic combat is about timing and positioning/moving (not allowing yourself to get surrounded). It isn't complex (though first Risen added things like counter-parries and power attacks) but that's not a necessity for combat system to be good, especially when the enemy AI is competent and actually gangs up on you (instead of coming at you one at a time). Those games also have a good advancement system, your handling of the weapon visibly improves (your swings are faster and more fluid) as you train the appropriate skill which makes it quite satisfactory.

Of course I'm talking about G1&2 and Risen because there's a clear difference between them and the rest of PB games, Gothic 3 is PB aping Bethesda and R2&3 are PB targeting the casual console market.

 

[Zombra]

Risen and Gothic combat were horrible, there was not strategy, there was no complexity, the combat revolved around stun locks and exploits.

So basically all the games of both series are rolled into one big game in your mind? That's just sad, dude.

I said I'd battle you on it, but really that conversation isn't going to be profitable for either of us.

 

[Kem0sabe]

There actually were boars in G2. And they were wolf-tier in terms of difficulty.

Also - there were possibilities of sunlocks in G1-2. But only in VERY specific circumstances, and versus specific mobs. And they all had one thing in common - they involved extremely fast chains of attacks. G2 had field bugs and mantises with their occasional super-fast attack chains and hordes (4+) of skeletons. G1 had that fucking undead orc chieftain with pyrokinesis thing.

In any case, field bugs wouldn't do ininite stunlocks and they were weak as shit, only threat to the weakest chars. And going uprepared melee vs lots of skeletons/snappers just screams "I am dumb".

Regardless of what I wrote - Kem0 is a massive lolcow. Complaining about stunlocks in gothics/risens = being a shit player.

I was not complaining about stun locks as pertaining to game difficulty, but as a shitty design decision demonstrative of the complete ineptitude of PB in designing anything resembling a good combat system.

 

[Darth Roxor]

 

[VladimirK]

Risen and Gothic combat is about timing and positioning/moving (not allowing yourself to get surrounded). It isn't complex (though first Risen added things like counter-parries and power attacks) but that's not a necessity for combat system to be good, especially when the enemy AI is competent and actually gangs up on you (instead of coming at you one at a time). Those games also have a good advancement system, your handling of the weapon visibly improves (your swings are faster and more fluid) as you train the appropriate skill which makes it quite satisfactory.

Of course I'm talking about G1&2 and Risen because there's a clear difference between them and the rest of PB games, Gothic 3 is PB aping Bethesda and R2&3 are PB targeting the casual console market.

Every time the topic of Gothic combat comes up it feels like I'm in bizarro world. In the 2-3 hours I played of G2:NOTR most of the difficulty was due to every mob being able to evade your attacks with inhuman reflexes and instantly counter-attack while your attack animation is still finishing. This made straight-up attacking a no-go (unlike, say, Dark Souls, where that depends on a lot of things.)

(And no, I didn't quit playing because it was too hard. I quit when I found a strategy that made it retardedly easy to kill anyone 1v1 as long as you were a human metronome.)

Am I crazy or are you guys?

 

[vonAchdorf]

ELEX (PB) live on stage (German language only):




Not many new tidbits of information:

• console ports will be done in-house
• group / companions (party?) mentioned
• "we want our monsters and NPCs to be dangerous for the player" (described with their signature "auf's Maul")
• their three major features are:
  • story and setting
  • believable world simulation
  • Bjorn forgot to mention the third (he mentioned vertical exploration as one of their main features in a different interview)
• 1.5 years in the works
• joining a factions is (probably) mandatory
• jetpack available early on / from the beginning
• most features are already implemented and working
• "distance is important: unlike in one of our previous title you cannot just click the LMB 6 meters from an enemy than autoharp there and attack him"
• groups of enemies will all attack at once, not one by one

Q&A session not on youtube (yet?).

 

[DefJam101]

ITT people operate under the assumption that Gothic games would be improved by the presence of a "good combat system"

 

[Excidium II]

Gothic games already have a "good combat system" considering the standards set by the genre

 

[made]

• "we want our monsters and NPCs to be dangerous for the player" (described with their signature "auf's Maul")

Cyberboars confirmed!

 

[vonAchdorf]

Damn, it's "aufs Maul", of course.

 

[adddeed]

Risen and Gothic combat were horrible, there was not strategy, there was no complexity, the combat revolved around stun locks and exploits.

What a clown. Chumps like you should stick to Skyrim.

 

[Kem0sabe]

What a clown. Chumps like you should stick to Skyrim.

Do enlighten me on what good combat elements the Gothic and risen games combat system brought to the rpg genre...

 

[Jaesun]

You should just stick to you GD Kem0sabe

 

[Darth Roxor]

Do enlighten me on what good combat elements the Gothic and risen games combat system brought to the rpg genre...

They gave us scrublords like you to laugh at in public.

 

[ZagorTeNej]

Do enlighten me on what good combat elements the Gothic and risen games combat system brought to the rpg genre...

Innovation is not the only measure of quality (I find it overrated to be honest). Those games (G1,2 and Risen 1) had a functioning combat system that achieved its goals of finding a nice balance of player skill vs character skill (especially given that your char's progression isn't limited to increasing your damage but also improves your handling of the weapon) and making the gameplay challenging (especially when faced with multiple foes) which suits the rough world environment/setting.

 

[deuxhero]

Yeah, Gothic's combat was never amazing, but it worked well for the game.

 

[Prime Junta]

Gothic 2 is amazing and anyone who disagrees is a burnout or edgelord.

 

[Leitz]

Do enlighten me on what good combat elements the Gothic and risen games combat system brought to the rpg genre...

In the Gothics you get a feeling of mechanical progress. You learn to swing faster and more accurately over time, instead of just hitting with more force like usual action RPGs do it. I've never played Risen though.

 

[Kem0sabe]

They gave us scrublords like you to laugh at in public.

The only person here who might actually live in a scrub is probably you roxor...

 

[Eirikur]

• ELEX users lose their emotions and become more rational and cold
  • Which means their moral system isn't based on good vs. evil, but "human / emotional" vs. "machine-like / cold"

I'm hoping they'll make this at least a little bit sophisticated, as opposed to the alignment system in R3. IIRC it was basically a slider between "boy scout" and "puppy kicker".

I like the concept of gaining/losing humanity (as in "VtM: Redemption"), but don't want the pinnacle of humanity to be a hyperemotional character who makes irresponsible feel-good decisions.

Hopefully characters who display emotions such as wrath and pride, and a general 'will to power', won't end up losing humanity. Emotions are emotions, and ambition is human.

Ultimately I don't want to see characters lose humanity because they're wise enough to make a hard decision for the greater good.

Spoiler

TL;DR Hitler was a champion of humanity

 

[vonAchdorf]

I like the concept of gaining/losing humanity (as in "VtM: Redemption"), but don't want the pinnacle of humanity to be a hyperemotional character who makes irresponsible feel-good decisions.
Hopefully characters who display emotions such as wrath and pride, and a general 'will to power', won't end up losing humanity. Emotions are emotions, and ambition is human.

They explicitly said that also "bad" emotions (wrath) are emotions and therefore on the "humanity" scale.

 

[vonAchdorf]

From their Q&A:

• most probably no underwater exploration (swimming is in though)
• no multiplayer
• team size 27 people (buyswork is outsourced)
• focus lock (?) in combat
• bow against a mech is a bad idea, unless you bring some ELEX lined magical arrows and spells
• will there be a Jack the Lighthouse Keeper? Maybe.
• Berzerks mana shrine converts ELEX into mana

 

[Siveon]

Can't wait to hear the voice actors stumble through each mutter of the word ELEX.