|
Post by Cosmoline on May 10, 2015 3:25:47 GMT
I haven't found any video game that replicates sword sparring very well. Mount and Blade is pretty good but as a large scale combat simulator it's not really very detailed. I do like that the little guys will adopt vom tag or ochs stances and do their little movements. The biggest problem with video games is that they tend to emphasize big sweeping movements of the body and weapon and have no real sense of how sword fighting actually works. There was an attempt to create a realistic sword fighting game a few years ago but it ended up being too expensive to develop.
|
|
|
Post by Adrian Jordan on May 10, 2015 3:58:56 GMT
The first Kengo game for PS2 was awesome. Lots of cool training and great sword fighting in it.
|
|
|
Post by Krelian on May 10, 2015 7:06:45 GMT
None of the three that come to my mind were really great because of the quality of the sword fighting, they were just great games in general. Soul Edge / Soul Blade (Arcade 1995 / PSone 1996) Bushido Blade (PSone 1997) Mazan: Flash of the Blade (Arcade 2002)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2015 12:09:39 GMT
'Game of Thrones' LOL! (rofl)
|
|
|
Post by mindfulloffire on May 10, 2015 13:17:47 GMT
i can't believe we don't have a realistic sword fighting / fencing virtual game yet. bushido blade was one of my favorite games of all time, would love a game like that where you get to use your body. how come they didnt figure this out yet?
|
|
|
Post by MOK on May 10, 2015 15:34:47 GMT
Bushido Blade and the original 2D Prince of Persia are the ones that most immediately come to my mind as feeling the most life-like.
Mount & Blade, all the 3D Legend of Zelda games, Dark Souls and Barbarian on the C64 are some others that are good in that they're fun, but don't feel particularly real.
I think, overall, the greatest failure in almost all video games trying to model fencing is the near complete lack of interaction between the fighters. Most of the time, the only thing you can do to the other guy is hit him with your stick. Where's all the binding, shoving, grappling, kicking, wrestling, pressing, winding and all that other fun stuff that's a vital and fundamental part of any real fight?
|
|
|
Post by Krelian on May 10, 2015 15:36:51 GMT
Look up Mazan: Flash of the Blade mindfulloffire It's pretty damn far from accurate or realistic, but surprisingly fun! Mazan is the only game they could've put on the Nintendo Wii to make me buy it. (And I would've bought it in an INSTANT! I couldn't tell you how much money I spent at Dave & Busters playing that game when I was younger...)
|
|
|
Post by Rifleman Lizard on May 10, 2015 15:38:36 GMT
I liked War of the Roses when it was active. Very rock, paper, scissors but what isn't in sword games? Armour, visibility, mobility, blade types were all big parts of the game. Jousting with a frog helm on made you a tank, providing you could even see anything. Finishing people off in melee was good fun too. Shame the arrows in all games travel at 40fps...
|
|
|
Post by MOK on May 11, 2015 23:16:49 GMT
Oh, here's one I forgot - Nidhogg!
|
|
|
Post by Maynar on May 14, 2015 2:34:59 GMT
Heretic 2 for PC. Ancient by today's standards, but I played that thing for maybe 15 years, give or take.
3rd person, and the bladestaff functioned almost as well as a sword. Very close, actually. Great variety of moves, and a variety of body moves like jump kicks, binds, somersault/back rolls etc.
We also had a great community, more enduring than any game community I'd seen. Alas, now regulated to a Facebook group. But boy, we had us some fun 'round the turn of the century, y'all.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent Dolan on May 14, 2015 5:21:57 GMT
I think, overall, the greatest failure in almost all video games trying to model fencing is the near complete lack of interaction between the fighters. Most of the time, the only thing you can do to the other guy is hit him with your stick. Where's all the binding, shoving, grappling, kicking, wrestling, pressing, winding and all that other fun stuff that's a vital and fundamental part of any real fight? Not enough buttons. Most recent game I played with sword combat was Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor and each button had a dedicated purpose; thanks to its emphasis on rhythmic combat (the style pioneered and/or made popular by Batman: Arkham Asylum, where combat slows down the higher your combo multiplier gets, giving you more chance to react, access to more powerful attacks, etc.), you could theoretically get away with only using two buttons in a fight: Square/X (Attack) and Triangle/Y (Counter). However, there's also Circle/B (Stun), which is basically a punch to the face that can knock enemies off balance, so it's insanely useful, especially for the enemies that counter a lot or have high defensive capabilities. There's R1/RB (Grab/Hold) that you can use to take an enemy hostage, where you can easily kill them or stab 'em repeatedly for information or just use 'em as a human shield, so it's also useful. X/A (Roll/Run) is only mildly useful in combat, but it can help you get around behind an enemy. L2/LT (Ranged) can throw daggers, so that's useful when the orcs start getting a little too numerous for comfort; it really only slows 'em down just enough to let you deal with your current handful, but still pretty useful, though it can also be used as part of a combo. Using R2/RT (Stealth) can also be pretty useful if timed right, since it changes your weapon and attacks. Oh, and once you get the Brand skill, using the Up and Down buttons on the D-pad are insanely useful, as the former will cause branded orcs to fight for you, while the latter will kill all branded orcs nearby. Once you get down to it, there's just not enough buttons for all the commands that are needed inside combat and out. That said, however, I think a way around it could be by potentially having a secondary combat control scheme that kicks in once the fighting starts. Say your main scheme just lets you interact with the world, i.e., picking things up, examining them, climbing, jumping, running, speaking, etc. and your secondary scheme gives you a finer control of combat, i.e., the face buttons (Square/X, Triangle/Y, Circle/B, X/A) are basic attacks such as oberhau (Triangle/Y), mittlehau (Square/X), thrust (Circle/B) and unterhau (X/A), while your bumpers/triggers could offer you more variety, such as a button for punching with the off hand (or with the pommel), a button for kicking, grappling, and a button for winding combined with movement of the joysticks; you could also implement at least four of the master cuts by combining buttons (say, Triangle/Y + Circle/B for zornhau, for example), perhaps more, though they'd be difficult to pull off thanks to how the buttons are set up. I think the D-pad would work for determining which side a cut came from, as well. Of course, you'd have to have either a very finely tuned sensor to indicate just when combat is joined so the players don't get run through because they're still operating on civilian schematic or, more simply, make pressing say, L1/LB + R1/RB (or L2/LT + R1/RT) a sort of "out swords" command that draws whatever weapon the character has equipped (since it doesn't necessarily have to be a sword; it could be a spear or halberd) and switches over to the combat command scheme.
|
|
|
Post by MOK on May 15, 2015 11:59:13 GMT
"Not enough buttons" is nothing but a poor excuse for not putting enough creative thought into interface design. Commodore 64 had ONE button - ONE! - and International Karate was still frigging great. As it happens, we just had a thread over on RPG.net about Exanima, a game currently in early access built around a physics-based fighting model that might well become a candidate for this thread, and my posts there (I use the same avatar) cover pretty much everything I'd like to say on the subject of controls, here, so if you're interested in my ramblings click the link 'cause I'm not gonna type all that again.
|
|