Game News Warhorse's RPG Unveiled as Kingdom Come: Deliverance

[Smejki]

I wanna see Dan in these pants.

 

[Roguey]

Was that because of technology or design decisions? Anyways, even if the tech didn't support smooth real time first person melee combat in 1992, it did by about 1998. So he could have made his game then, it just would have had Thief level graphics.

Definitely technology. UU itself had high system requirements at the time.

I can't recall any great 3D melee combat games until the sixth console generation. 1998 gave us Die by the Sword which looks pretty awful now.

 

[Wirdschowerdn]

I wanna see Dan in these pants.

Maybe in the official sequel....

Kurwa Cum: Oh lawd itz heaven!

 

[tuluse]

Definitely technology. UU itself had high system requirements at the time.

I can't recall any great 3D melee combat games until the sixth console generation. 1998 gave us Die by the Sword which looks pretty awful now.

There were the 3D Zelda games on N64, and there were 3d fighters like Tekken on Playstation.

 

[Roguey]

There were the 3D Zelda games on N64, and there were 3d fighters like Tekken on Playstation.

Oh right. I never liked Tekken but I guess Zelda was all right. Making a RPG like that back then would have been crazy scope-wise, as proven by the likes of Descent to Undermountain.

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

BTW, your statements about focusing on each foot separately in case of realistic combat are actually not true. That's not how it works in real life., at least not to my knowledge. Sure, you can focus on one foot in certain situations, but footwork is all about habit. You don't focus on your legs when doing steps in combat. That is not how brain works/works efficiently in most physical activities; you don't focus on each leg separately in boxing for example, you focus on your STEP or your sidestep. You don't focus on hook, then uppercut and then hook again, you do it as a whole combination, as unified movement (if you're not an idiot). That's the only way how brain can work in case of fast, complex movements... Brain representations of specific movements are certain patterns where certain habit (step, combination etc.) is executed by activation of certain brain pattern.

That's definitely not true. Do you think when people join a boxing gym, the trainer tells them to do a combination right away? They spend time learning the basics first, such as learning how to jab, learning how to uppercut, how to cross, how to do straights. They will throw a LOT of these punches separately at a punching bag, until the action becomes instinctive. Likewise they will work separately on their footwork, using jumping ropes, their shoes tied together, and so on until they can do it in their sleep. Only then will they graduate to more complex stuff, like full combinations and finally sparring. For another example of this, think of Karate Kid, the movie, and how the guy had him do thousands of basic movements first (wax on, wax off, arm up/down) before actually teaching him to put it all together. This is actually based on how martial arts were traditionally taught, with students performing thousands of basic movements in exercises to ingrain the actions deep into their nervous system. Same for fencing/sword fighting, the way knights were taught was the basics first, basic footwork, basic strikes, etc, and of course after a while this kind of stuff became second nature to them, and they moved on to more advanced techniques where all of that was combined. Their brain still controlled every aspect of their body, including each foot and leg and hip, but due to extensive practice, it was done subconsciously and all at the same time. A video game equivalent of this would be having some way to control your avatar's feet for example, and over time, becoming so used to it, you can do subconsciously while at the same time controlling his arms and weapons. For obvious reasons, you can't really do this with current controls (keyboard/mouse, joystick).

And if it's done realistic, then I would think that first person view would suck as an option (flanking etc.). And that's because above mentioned reasons by me and Juggie.

You keep repeating this, that first person view sucks because of flanking, as if it's some kind of gospel truth, despite the bunch of arguments I have made that it doesn't have to suck because of that, so I guess I will summarize them again:

- small number of enemies at a time (because you can't fight lots of enemies in ANY realistic system), which in turn can be kept in front of you with intelligent movement
- as long as enemies have realistic movement speed and smooth animations, there is no reason why you can't follow their movement to the side, unless you make a mistake OR your mouse is jammed with junk food
- using other means to tell the player in first person view they are being flanked, such as audio

And again, before we get into THAT whole argument again, I am not arguing that first person view is as good as real life/third person view at letting you see your surroundings, I am arguing that its relative shortcomings in this area do NOT necessarily lead to it sucking altogether.

New screenshot on the Facebook page. Gorgeous filhty shit-covered medieval town street... and folks
Love the authentic architecture
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?...41826.235874033111522&type=1&relevant_count=1

Thanks for the link. I am loving it too, definitely an improvement over Bethesda's looks.

 

[eremita]

That's definitely not true. Do you think when people join a boxing gym, the trainer tells them to do a combination right away? They spend time learning the basics first, such as learning how to jab, learning how to uppercut, how to cross, how to do straights. They will throw a LOT of these punches separately at a punching bag, until the action becomes instinctive. Likewise they will work separately on their footwork, using jumping ropes, their shoes tied together, and so on until they can do it in their sleep. Only then will they graduate to more complex stuff, like full combinations and finally sparring. For another example of this, think of Karate Kid, the movie, and how the guy had him do thousands of basic movements first (wax on, wax off, arm up/down) before actually teaching him to put it all together. This is actually based on how martial arts were traditionally taught, with students performing thousands of basic movements in exercises to ingrain the actions deep into their nervous system. Same for fencing/sword fighting, the way knights were taught was the basics first, basic footwork, basic strikes, etc, and of course after a while this kind of stuff became second nature to them, and they moved on to more advanced techniques where all of that was combined. Their brain still controlled every aspect of their body, including each foot and leg and hip, but due to extensive practice, it was done subconsciously and all at the same time. A video game equivalent of this would be having some way to control your avatar's feet for example, and over time, becoming so used to it, you can do subconsciously while at the same time controlling his arms and weapons. For obvious reasons, you can't really do this with current controls (keyboard/mouse, joystick).

Sorry, I haven't seen Karate Kid. It's not really my jam... Anyway, what you said doesn't contradict with anything in my previous post, you just added stuff that I thought are not important to mention... You're right about specifics; of course you have to learn all of those punches, kicks etc separately. You learn proper technique of your hooks, uppercuts etc. and then you start to make combinations (this separation is rather arbitrary because you usually start with combinations despite the fact that your technique sucks > but unless you are sure of your punches, any combination would be unefficient and that's what I'm talking about - or, of course, you learn your combinations with bad technique...). Those are sloppy and shaky at first, because even though your technique with particular punches might be actually ok, specific patterns in your brain are still nonexistent (combinations). Basically, you don't posses the HABIT. I already said that in previous post (footwork is all about habit, as are any combinations of fast movement). In fact, every effective martial art relies on habits, It's essential. You repeat certain movement so many times, that you don't have to think about it in action (just like you don't have to focus in case of walking). If you have to focus on proper technique when throwing punches, you're not a good martial artist... If I wake you up on midnight and want you to do perfect roundhouse kick, you should be able to do that. The reason why you learn every crucial movement separately is because proper technique, but THAT'S JUST IT. If you want to learn some combination and want it to be really fast, you have to LEARN this specific combination despite the fact that you know/are good at all parts of this combination separately. If your technique is great in case of single punches, but someone would want you to perform combo, which you've never done before, you won't be able to do it as fast yet properly as with your already learned combinations (it's not likely that good martial artist wouldn't already know all of the possible combinations but you know what I mean...). And again, that's because your brain don't "know" the combination yet - you lack specific wiring of this specific representation of complex movement in your head... So again, proper footwork is not something you have to think about and is definetly not something you have to particulary put together in your head right before doing it. Just look at this for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k57pOinSJa0 He threw two punches and one low-kick, all part of single combination. Not informed person would say that he's an asshole for kicking him on the ground, but every expert would know better; when you put whole combination in motion, is almost impossible for you to stop it and that's because brain works as I said. You just finish it... The rest is in my previous post.

You keep repeating this, that first person view sucks because of flanking, as if it's some kind of gospel truth, despite the bunch of arguments I have made that it doesn't have to suck because of that, so I guess I will summarize them again:

- small number of enemies at a time (because you can't fight lots of enemies in ANY realistic system), which in turn can be kept in front of you with intelligent movement
- as long as enemies have realistic movement speed and smooth animations, there is no reason why you can't follow their movement to the side, unless you make a mistake OR your mouse is jammed with junk food
- using other means to tell the player in first person view they are being flanked, such as audio

And again, before we get into THAT whole argument again, I am not arguing that first person view is as good as real life/third person view at letting you see your surroundings, I am arguing that its relative shortcomings in this area do NOT necessarily lead to it sucking altogether.

Fair enough. "Suck" might wrong word. I would say that third person view works better/better simulate real human awarness of his body and his surroundings.

New screenshot on the Facebook page. Gorgeous filhty shit-covered medieval town street... and folks
Love the authentic architecture
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?...41826.235874033111522&type=1&relevant_count=1

Thanks for the link. I am loving it too, definitely an improvement over Bethesda's looks.[/quote]

 

[ERYFKRAD]

Reckoning : The Awakening. Alliance: The Omen. Challenge : The Rising.

Am I the only one to be tired of these sorts of titles?

Humanity: The Rising!
Anyway, game looks interesting. We'll see what happens.

 

[asper]

Great and original setting for a game...! Very excited about this one!

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

Great and original setting for a game...! Very excited about this one!

Yep. I was reading about The Witcher 3 on the other thread and in some previews/videos, and although I like some things about it, such as the huge world and everything else they got going on, the whole fantasy aspect of it (fighting flying creatures, using spells in combat, etc) looks really childish in some way, especially compared to the historic setting here. I used to like fantasy, but as I get older, historical and low fantasy settings (like George Martin's stuff) are definitely becoming much more appealing.

 

[Metro]

PorkyThePaladin = Warhorse plant?

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

Oh, noes, I've been found out! And what kind of plant are you?

 

[IDtenT]

Oh, noes, I've been found out! And what kind of plant are you?

Beggars aren't plants, they're people!

 

[Gragt]

 

[Daniel.Vavra]

Happy new year everyone Little surprise for you...

 

[felipepepe]

Andyman Messiah won the war.

 

[Roguey]

Now everyone's going to think you're making a comedy.

 

[Infinitron]

I hope you all noticed it's also a reference to the studio's name.

 

[felipepepe]

I hope you all noticed it's also a reference to the studio's name.

You lie, clearly is a homage to Steve Spielberg's movie:

 

[LESS T_T]

2014 is the year of the Horse in Chinese Zodiac, therefore video implies that they signed with Chinese F2P MMO publisher.

 

[cherry blossom]

stuff

stuff

You both have points but "learning combinations" is a irrelevantly modern way to look at the concept. A "combination" implies that pulling the combination itself is the goal, as if you must deplete the opponent's Hit Points. If you read any fencing manuscripts, you will see that the emphasis is almost always on getting the job done in as few moves as possible: "You Shall Strike This Way To Kill". THEN it continues: "IF you are countered, THEN..." and goes on like that, with the emphasis on developing the decision making ability to know what you will do next if your first strike fails. And there is quite a call of judgement and thinking between every action to decide on the next.

There is even a term exclusively used for this instant decision making process in in German school of medieval fencing, called "indes" (English: "meanwhile") and it is a central part of learning fencing. There is a great deal of psychological conflict around this decision-making process. Tiniest movements of the body give subtle hints of intentions, popularly called "telegraphing", making combatants in either side to dynamically change and reevaluate what they are about to do faster than they can blink.

The opponent countered your strike? You must weigh the situation in that instant, try to predict how your opponent will respond and decide whether to, say, push the sword up or pull it down to escape the bind quickly to strike or thrust and to what part of the opponent's body or you wind the sword inside or outside to get a thrusting angle on the opponent and decide what part of the opponent's body to thrust to or pull a half-swording maneuver to stab, to club, to disarm, to kick or to trip down the opponent. All involve instant decision making ability where the situation and the possibilities are weighed split-second.

It sure does add up to a combination from the first strike to the last and I'm sure certain moves and counter-moves were favoured above the others and taught more widely but it still involves a lot of thinking, adaptation and dynamism. Otherwise, I think it would be a catastrophic trade to teach armies how to fight in "combinations" since that would basically diminish their ability to respond dynamically to diverse attacks and make it easier for others to kill them.

A video game equivalent of this would be having some way to control your avatar's feet for example, and over time, becoming so used to it, you can do subconsciously while at the same time controlling his arms and weapons. For obvious reasons, you can't really do this with current controls (keyboard/mouse, joystick).

This is a ridiculous way to contemplate game controls. In any given context, actions that are considered fundamental motor-skills and inseparable part of a trade are taken for granted and ruled out of explicit controls because anything further usually simply bloats a game and is beyond the point of gaming.

Did you lament the lack of individual step controls between right and left foot for a "proper simulation of sneaking" in Thief games? You didn't, I imagine. And yet, a case could be made that precise control over body in tandem with complete environmental awareness, down to choosing where to step and how to do it are fundamental parts of sneaking "realistically". In Thief games, we don't even see Garret's own steps and the precise location they land on, not giving us the visual and sensory feedback to see just where he will step on while walking at the edge of a moss or carpet on a hard surface. Did that take anything away from the game? Would it be a more realistic and a better game experience if Thief did those things? I'd say not.

You don't need self-aware controls for all motor functions in games. You only take what you think matter the most and find a way to abstract the rest sensibly into the overall design. Giving too much bloats and breaks and taking too much away dumbs it down.

If you are mentally unable to prioritize tasks and end up thinking that footwork must be implemented down to how you control both feet individually, well, I pity you. You might find more satisfaction in joining one of the guilds that aim to reconstruct and teach historically accurate fencing than fantasizing about unfeasably complicated computer games and die of old age while waiting for The Matrix prototype for gaming.

 

[cherry blossom]

Happy new year everyone

Are you looking to support modding?

 

[Daniel.Vavra]

I would love to, Cryengine is ideal for that, but cant promise anything now.

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

You both have points but "learning combinations" is a irrelevantly modern way to look at the concept.

We were talking about boxing at first, that's why we used the term combinations, but the general point is the same. The idea is that regardless of the sport/combat, people have to learn the simple stuff first, then graduate on to more complicated stuff. In order to dynamically string together various strikes and defenses, the fencer first has to comfortable enough with the basic strikes and movements to perform them almost subconsiously, and for that, I'd imagine they first just practice the basic stuff, cutting away at melons or stuffed bags or air.

This is a ridiculous way to contemplate game controls. In any given context, actions that are considered fundamental motor-skills and inseparable part of a trade are taken for granted and ruled out of explicit controls because anything further usually simply bloats a game and is beyond the point of gaming.

Did you lament the lack of individual step controls between right and left foot for a "proper simulation of sneaking" in Thief games? You didn't, I imagine. And yet, a case could be made that precise control over body in tandem with complete environmental awareness, down to choosing where to step and how to do it are fundamental parts of sneaking "realistically". In Thief games, we don't even see Garret's own steps and the precise location they land on, not giving us the visual and sensory feedback to see just where he will step on while walking at the edge of a moss or carpet on a hard surface. Did that take anything away from the game? Would it be a more realistic and a better game experience if Thief did those things? I'd say not.

You don't need self-aware controls for all motor functions in games. You only take what you think matter the most and find a way to abstract the rest sensibly into the overall design. Giving too much bloats and breaks and taking too much away dumbs it down.

If you are mentally unable to prioritize tasks and end up thinking that footwork must be implemented down to how you control both feet individually, well, I pity you. You might find more satisfaction in joining one of the guilds that aim to reconstruct and teach historically accurate fencing than fantasizing about unfeasably complicated computer games and die of old age while waiting for The Matrix prototype for gaming.

Video games do abstract a lot of things out, but when you do that, you have to first see if abstracting something out will lead to good or bad gameplay. In the case of Thief games, the absensce of high precision controls over footwork has no negative impact on the gameplay. In order to sneak around, you just move your feet in some direction, or stop, or move slower. Precise control of your feet has no effect on any of these, as you would still do the exact same thing as they do now, put one foot in front of the other, and so on.

In melee combat, on the other hand, precise footwork has a huge impact. We are not just talking about moving your feet in some direction, but footwork in that context refers to how your feet are individually positioned, how your weight is distributed, how you move each one for any particular strike or defense, and so on. If you don't have that kind of precision in your controls, and abstract it out to just general keyboard/mouse movements in some direction, that takes all the interesting things out of footwork. What you are left with is exactly what most melee combat games have right now, which is the player just runs around like a headless chicken, strafing around the other guy, or moving at high speeds forward and back, to land a blow and then run out of the other guy's range. To me, this is not fun at all, so my point was, if you are not gonna do interesting footwork, don't do it at all (or do it in a very limited way), and just concentrate on the other aspects of melee combat (strikes, parries, etc) which you can actually implement in a more interesting and fun way.

 

[cherry blossom]

I would love to, Cryengine is ideal for that, but cant promise anything now.

Here's hoping, then. There ain't no Skyrim-killing without modding support.