KickStarter Kingdom Come: Deliverance Pre-Release Thread [RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[anvi]

Lol jk

 

[Doctor Sbaitso]

i think mafia is the only non racing/exclusively driving game with manual gear transmission in their cars

It's also probably the only "drive around a city an' shoot dudes" game where you can get a speeding ticket. Loved that. On that note, is it really the only one, or has there been something like this in other games?

In My Summer Car you can get a ticket for speeding and the police start chasing you if you ignore their stop sign.

And I think there is another GTA-like where police start chasing you if you break the speed limit or ignore red lights.

Test Drive Unlimited

 

[HoboForEternity]

Sword fighting is gay.

i prefer scissor fighting

 

[Paul_cz]

I think it was a Codex assumption that this was an RPG. It is clear by now it is something closer to a simulation, like Arma with swords, or at best Stalker with swords.

the fuck? It has choices with consequences, dialogue trees, RPG character progression and open world exploration. It squarely belongs to the same RPG genre that New Vegas belongs to.

 

[dunno lah]

ARPG is still not RPG

 

[Neanderthal]

Most CRPGs are ARPGs now.

 

[agris]

the problem is that they're crappy action rpgs... CRAPGs...

 

[Lyric Suite]

I think it was a Codex assumption that this was an RPG. It is clear by now it is something closer to a simulation, like Arma with swords, or at best Stalker with swords.

the fuck? It has choices with consequences, dialogue trees, RPG character progression and open world exploration. It squarely belongs to the same RPG genre that New Vegas belongs to.

But the focus is on simulation. This game is more like Arma with RPG elements than the other way around, or like i said, Stalker, at least from the looks of it. I remember during the beginning of this thread people complained about the lack of information regarding the story, or the quest design, but once you get what this game is going for it isn't that surprising. Now personally i have no problem with this. I like simulations and the historical medieval setting is a welcome relief from all the high fantasy crap we see everywhere. I imagine this game will be very combat heavy with lot's of attention to details but i'd be surprised if the story or quests are going to be on the level of a Black Isle style game. If they are, hats off to Vavra, but i won't be disappointed if the game is more combat than story oriented because i get what it is they are trying to do.

 

[anvi]

the problem is that they're crappy action rpgs... CRAPGs...

Anyone who thinks there can't be a good aRPG needs to play Dark Messiah, System Shock, etc.

 

[iZerw]

Kingdom Come: Deliverance is the next No Man's Sky.

 

[Outlander]

Sword fighting is gay.

Uh, not really. Sword fighting requires considerable amounts of strength, stamina, dexterity and technique.

 

[Jrpgfan]

Kingdom Come: Deliverance is the next No Man's Sky.

Hardly. As opposed to NMS, everyone knows(or will know) what to expect of the game since the devs are open about it and you can already play it on its current state as soon as you buy the game.

Vavra may have his ideologies on game design and rpg mechanics that conflict with Codex' views on the subject, but he's not the type to sell snake oil AFAIK.

 

[vonAchdorf]

Also Vavra may have a beard, but he's no hipster.

 

[KlauZ]

Sword fighting requires considerable amounts of strength, stamina, dexterity and technique.

This sounds gay.

 

[abnaxus]

 

[Paul_cz]

I think it was a Codex assumption that this was an RPG. It is clear by now it is something closer to a simulation, like Arma with swords, or at best Stalker with swords.

the fuck? It has choices with consequences, dialogue trees, RPG character progression and open world exploration. It squarely belongs to the same RPG genre that New Vegas belongs to.

But the focus is on simulation. This game is more like Arma with RPG elements than the other way around, or like i said, Stalker, at least from the looks of it. I remember during the beginning of this thread people complained about the lack of information regarding the story, or the quest design, but once you get what this game is going for it isn't that surprising. Now personally i have no problem with this. I like simulations and the historical medieval setting is a welcome relief from all the high fantasy crap we see everywhere. I imagine this game will be very combat heavy with lot's of attention to details but i'd be surprised if the story or quests are going to be on the level of a Black Isle style game. If they are, hats off to Vavra, but i won't be disappointed if the game is more combat than story oriented because i get what it is they are trying to do.

The reason why we haven't seen much of story/writing/quests is simply due to them wanting to keep this under wraps. But there will be shitton of quests and writing. Now, it does have simulationy underpinnings in combat mechanics, AI, world interaction. Sure. But that does not preclude actual C&C and decent emphasis on story.

 

[vonAchdorf]

Vavra already said that he wants to tackle several historically important conflicts in the game (Czechs, Germans, Jews), so I think there's enough stuff for interesting C&C and story.

 

[Brancaleone]

Sword fighting is gay.

Uh, not really. Sword fighting requires considerable amounts of strength, stamina, dexterity and technique.

Tell me how a 400 gram spadroon or a 300 gram smallsword require "considerable amounts of strength".
That monocle is really out of place in this post.

 

[Rivmusique]

Indeed. And boxing requires even less strength, don't have to lift anything there but your hands (which we all do without even thinking about it!). Yet they have the nerve to call them "athletes" .

 

[Brancaleone]

Indeed. And boxing requires even less strength, don't have to lift anything there but your hands (which we all do without even thinking about it!). Yet they have the nerve to call them "athletes" .

Guess what, one of the main advantages of swords, together with portability (to the point that it offset the fact that a sword on average required more resources and time to manufacture compared to other weapons), is that (unless it is a specialized thrusting model with no edge) a blow from a sword on an unarmoured body-part requires very little force in order to cause significant damage.

Does the same apply to human fists? No? Well, it must be because examples pulled out of your own ass tend invariably to be shitty ones.

 

[Outlander]

Sword fighting is gay.

Uh, not really. Sword fighting requires considerable amounts of strength, stamina, dexterity and technique.

Tell me how a 400 gram spadroon or a 300 gram smallsword require "considerable amounts of strength".
That monocle is really out of place in this post.

That shit's for fencing, which is extremely gay.

Also lol at 'no need of strength to cut someone down' haha, no shit! But what about armor, shields and parries?

 

[TOUGH GUY]

But what about katanas?

 

[Brancaleone]

Sword fighting is gay.

Uh, not really. Sword fighting requires considerable amounts of strength, stamina, dexterity and technique.

Tell me how a 400 gram spadroon or a 300 gram smallsword require "considerable amounts of strength".
That monocle is really out of place in this post.

That shit's for fencing, which is extremely gay.

Also lol at 'no need of strength to cut someone down' haha, no shit! But what about armor, shields and parries?

You clearly have no idea of what you are talking about: a smallsword was a dedicated dueling weapon, designed to wound and kill your opponent in a 'civilized' manner, that is by means of internal hemorrhage/organ damage, as opposed to carving someone open/having bits and blood flying around, which would have been of course unacceptably barbaric.
And the spadroon was an officer sidesword, you know, for battlefield (and naval warfare) action.

The widespread diffusion of swords as sidearms, in all regions of the world and cultures, is due (together with other factors, such as portability, as I said) to the fact that they require little strength compared to other weapons in order to inflict damage. And since sword have on average their centre of balance close to the hilt, they require even less strength than top-heavy (that is, with the centre of balance close to the 'head') weapons in order to be handled effectively.
Against shields and armour, swords are not particularly effective: no matter how hard you'll slash a plate mail or a ringmail, you have practically zero chances to do anything. Which is why against armour and shields specialized weapons were used (axes, maces, warhammers, polearms), and if all you had was a sword (which is a reserve weapon, not a main weapon) you tried to aim at the gaps in the armour.
A parry doesn't require particular strength: if you do it correctly, you'll be mainly using your forte against your opponent's debole. In other words, it's a matter of leverage, not brute strength.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but videogames and anime are not a good source for spouting what you think are posts. Haha.

 

[Outlander]

Sword fighting is gay.

Uh, not really. Sword fighting requires considerable amounts of strength, stamina, dexterity and technique.

Tell me how a 400 gram spadroon or a 300 gram smallsword require "considerable amounts of strength".
That monocle is really out of place in this post.

That shit's for fencing, which is extremely gay.

Also lol at 'no need of strength to cut someone down' haha, no shit! But what about armor, shields and parries?

You clearly have no idea of what you are talking about: a smallsword was a dedicated dueling weapon, designed to wound and kill your opponent in a 'civilized' manner, that is by means of internal hemorrhage/organ damage, as opposed to carving someone open/having bits and blood flying around, which would have been of course unacceptably barbaric.
And the spadroon was an officer sidesword, you know, for battlefield (and naval warfare) action.

Neither of which apply to Kingdom Come: Deliverance.

The widespread diffusion of swords as sidearms, in all regions of the world and cultures, is due (together with other factors, such as portability, as I said) to the fact that they require little strength compared to other weapons in order to inflict damage. And since on average have their centre of balance close to the hilt, they require even less strength than top-heavy (that is, with the centre of balance close to the 'head') weapons in order to be handled.

ITT, we learn that less strength required compared to heavier weapons means no strength at all.

Against shields and armour, swords are not particularly effective: no matter how hard you'll slash a plate mail or a ringmail, you have practically zero chances to do anything. Which is why against armour and shields specialized weapons were used (axes, maces, warhammers, polearms), and if all you had was a sword (which is a reserve weapon, not a main weapon) you tried to aim at the gaps in the armour.

Yes.

A parry doesn't require particular strength: if you do it correctly, you'll be mainly using your forte against your opponent's debole. In other words, it's a matter of leverage, not brute strength.

Well, that would depend on the angle of attack and any strength and weight differences between you and your opponent. Again, not talking about wimpy fencing.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but videogames and anime are not a good source for spouting what you think are posts. Haha.

 

[mikaelis]

I think it was a Codex assumption that this was an RPG. It is clear by now it is something closer to a simulation, like Arma with swords, or at best Stalker with swords.

the fuck? It has choices with consequences, dialogue trees, RPG character progression and open world exploration. It squarely belongs to the same RPG genre that New Vegas belongs to.

But the focus is on simulation. This game is more like Arma with RPG elements than the other way around, or like i said, Stalker, at least from the looks of it. I remember during the beginning of this thread people complained about the lack of information regarding the story, or the quest design, but once you get what this game is going for it isn't that surprising. Now personally i have no problem with this. I like simulations and the historical medieval setting is a welcome relief from all the high fantasy crap we see everywhere. I imagine this game will be very combat heavy with lot's of attention to details but i'd be surprised if the story or quests are going to be on the level of a Black Isle style game. If they are, hats off to Vavra, but i won't be disappointed if the game is more combat than story oriented because i get what it is they are trying to do.

No. At least it is not what they were saying.

1) combat is indeed planned to be "simulation" (yeah right)...

2) ... but, according to Vavra, you can almost entirely ignore it if you go for stealth option (which may be horrible - I have no idea how it will play in the real game and I doubt it will be Thief level - I simply state that it is a valid approach according to devs).

3) story is supposed to be a major factor in the game, at least for those who appreciate historical settings (accurate historical settings even more so) - so storyfag cRPG fans should rejoice. I am afraid though, that what they meant is the general arc of the story, and the personal story of the protagonist may be shit (some peasant affair if I recall correctly - sends strong vibes of Arkania: Gothic 4). It can of course be stellar, but that we will not know until the release.

4) character customisation is in (not AoD level, but not only clothing as far as I can see):

C&C I honestly don't know. Maybe someone more versed in the topic can shed some light. But I don't think there was any substantial info to that matter released.