Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Joined: Sep 2014
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Sep 2014
Originally Posted by Sordak
Mate

I am against more "Immersive" animaitons. Ive seen games like kingdom come deliverance or mordhau.
The combat in those games feels weak, floaty and embarassing.
I prefer systems that feel like dragons dogma, systems that show a grounded world but have an effectfull combat system, even if its not realisitc.

Its one that feels right rather than looks right.
I dont trust you people with understanding the difference between realism and authenticity.
I prefer authenticity (within the bounds of the universe) to realism.


realism is by default authentic.
I think you should work on expanding your vocabulary.

Personally, I hate flashy, fantasy combat. It looks retarded an UN-immersive to me. It FEELS wrong to me. And this is kinda the point. What feels right is what someone got used to or conditioned to. It is way too subjective as a reference. Hollywood got so many things wrong that people now expect them in movies and it feels off to them when someone does it right.

Also, note that KcD and Mordhau are 1st person with direct control over 1 character. Hence there are some limitations to movement/positioning and animations that can make some things look off, and that something like BG3 wouldn't have to deal with.

Quote

But the kind of people that complain about the exact curve of an arrow, are those kind of people that do it exclusiveley to virtue signal to others about how pure their dedication is.
so no.
Realistic animations are not a net positive. To me they are a negative because they directly subtract from my expirience as it gets less satisfying


Arrow curvature? Virtue signaling?
Methinks you had some issues in your past and are now venting/projecting here.

Joined: Mar 2013
S
veteran
Offline
veteran
S
Joined: Mar 2013
and authenticity isnt neccesarily realism.
Which is exactly my point.
get off your high horse.

And no, its not about limitaitons.
Compare for Honor and Mordhau and tell me you prefer Mordhaus combat presentation and feeling.

>issues
Sperg harder.

Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
Duchess of Gorgombert
Online Sleepy
Duchess of Gorgombert
Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
Originally Posted by Ellderon
Arrow curvature? Virtue signaling?
Methinks you had some issues in your past and are now venting/projecting here.

Sordak's our Official Forum Eccentric.

You know how every pub has its old geezer? The one who's always there, who's worldly wise, cantankerous and random? And it wouldn't be the same without him.


J'aime le fromage.
Joined: Jul 2019
member
Offline
member
Joined: Jul 2019
On the topic of addressing animations or effects, I can definitely agree with this. Magical effects are great for magical characters or magical moves, but not so much for a rogue/fighter type of character.

As for the arrow flight path, I hadn't noticed this before, but now that it was brought up it's rather jarring. It appears the character shoots almost linearly at a larger distance (20+m), but when standing next to an enemy the character shoots into the air for the arrow to fall back down. It makes no sense and looks silly.

@vometia That's all well and good, but outright dismissing valid criticisms and feedback with flaming or telling them to not post is not conducive to an appropriate discussion. Just saying.

Joined: Mar 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Mar 2020
Originally Posted by Blade238
On the topic of addressing animations or effects, I can definitely agree with this. Magical effects are great for magical characters or magical moves, but not so much for a rogue/fighter type of character.

As for the arrow flight path, I hadn't noticed this before, but now that it was brought up it's rather jarring. It appears the character shoots almost linearly at a larger distance (20+m), but when standing next to an enemy the character shoots into the air for the arrow to fall back down. It makes no sense and looks silly.

@vometia That's all well and good, but outright dismissing valid criticisms and feedback with flaming or telling them to not post is not conducive to an appropriate discussion. Just saying.


Finally someone with a bit of sense wink

Last edited by Exclusif; 17/03/20 06:00 PM.
Joined: Mar 2013
S
veteran
Offline
veteran
S
Joined: Mar 2013
not any stylized effect is a magical effect.
When theres an impact animation or sparks for a sword strike, thats not magic.
thats just making it look not boring.

Joined: Jan 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jan 2020
Originally Posted by vometia
Originally Posted by etonbears
If anyone is interested in longbow effectiveness, Tod Cutler, a re-enactment enthusiast who makes weapons for a living

Oh, yeah, he lives nearby. He demoed one of his crossbows to me (slight sense of deja vu, so please excuse me if I'm repeating myself, I have an awful memory) which was a big bugger and it took a lot of winding. Very impressive, even though he said it only had about as much impact as a .22! He nearly let me have a go but it was unfinished. I suggested it was probably a terrible idea to hand it to me anyway! Best case I'd just drop it on my foot.


Cool smile

Although, with some of the quarrel heads I've seen, even a .22-level impact could be pretty gruesome !

Joined: Mar 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Mar 2020
Originally Posted by Sordak
not any stylized effect is a magical effect.
When theres an impact animation or sparks for a sword strike, thats not magic.
thats just making it look not boring.


Oh for sure. Personally I want hits to feel impactful, but that can be achieved with the swing/shoot animation, a good sound effect coupled with a reaction animation, and some blood or sparks if it’s a block. If we look at the current rogue sneak attack animation in BG3, it basically looks like a spell. Actually rewatching it again I don’t know what it’s suppose to look like. It’s overly fast with a twinkling orb thingy circling around with no real sense of impact. I really don’t like it. In fact I dislike it almost as much as the bow.

It might seem foreign to some, but things like this can actually determine whether I enjoy a game or not. After all, they’re contributing to the very core feel of the game, and are repeated for hundreds of hours.

Edit: I should add that the impact of a normal dagger attack is quite satisfying. Credit where it’s due.

Last edited by Exclusif; 17/03/20 08:12 PM.
Joined: Aug 2019
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Aug 2019
I agree, especially with the jumping.
The jumping is pathetic! they need to change that =/

Joined: Mar 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
Originally Posted by Blade238
As for the arrow flight path, I hadn't noticed this before, but now that it was brought up it's rather jarring. It appears the character shoots almost linearly at a larger distance (20+m), but when standing next to an enemy the character shoots into the air for the arrow to fall back down. It makes no sense and looks silly.


When standing next to an opponent and firing, I don't see any arrow at all. I'm trying to see it, but I can't. Is there a video that slows the attack down and shows it?

Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
Duchess of Gorgombert
Online Sleepy
Duchess of Gorgombert
Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
Originally Posted by etonbears
Although, with some of the quarrel heads I've seen, even a .22-level impact could be pretty gruesome !

Yeah, I don't really want to dwell too long on the sort of unpleasantness it could cause! And as much as I'm "it's only like a .22", that is something that is absolutely capable of killing, even in relatively untrained hands and even at a distance while pretty much ignoring any mediaeval type body armour it finds on the way. No wonder these things were so feared.


J'aime le fromage.
Joined: Jun 2019
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Jun 2019
Originally Posted by kyrthorsen
What really bothers me about the BG3 demo is that Larian is still using a lot of DOS features like:

I agree that they need to tame many of the DOS features and concentrate on creating features more true to D&D.

Quote
1) marking red field of vision when sneaking (same as DOS - proposing to change this visual),

If they want to keep something like this they should use a D&D Perception check to see how well you can track and estimate what an enemy can and can't see while you are sneaking. It should not be automatic nor 100% accurate.

Quote
2) using fog clouds animations (same as DOS, please remove this visual and make it a PC/NPC status),

There are certainly many spells that create fog effects in D&D. And there could certainly be environmental fog effects. But when fog is used, it should make sense within the D&D system and not be as arbitrary and easy to create through mundane means as it is in DOS.

That said, the 1st level spell "Create and Destroy Water" has an option to "Destroy Water" which allows you to "destroy fog in a 30' cube within range." So D&D does have a low level method of dealing with fog effects. But it shouldn't be a mandatory spell to have because we can't go an hour without dealing with Fog effects.

Quote
3) overusing surfaces interactions (water, grease, blood etd - same as DOS; please enough with DOS features),

I agree. Neat in DOS. Not consistent with D&D unless the spell or environment call for it. They need to tone it, and our interactions with it, way down.

Quote
4) to much items and overly large inventories (same as DOS - BG1and2 had relatively small inventories, I would propose to somehow simplify the item gathering process or even use a mechanic like a courier similar to what they did in Torchlight - it can pick up generic items and sell them with on or two clicks)

Inventory management is always a problem in these kinds of games. But I don't think the core system in DOS is incompatible with D&D. Making it "less realistic" with some kind of auto-sell option isn't a fix.

Quote
5) making the combat not look so similar to DOS (changing/removing the attack path line visual)

The attack line visual (or something very much like it) should stay. It should just relay different information (like whether a target has half, three quarters, or total cover.) It could also be color-coded to indicate whether the attack is going to have Advantage or Disadvantage.

In this case I don't care whether it looks like DOS or not. Just that it's relaying mechanics relevant to D&D.

Quote
6) changing the jumping animation to something a bit more realistic (i think nobody was really impressed when Swen Vicke showcased the feather spell and jumped of the building - that spell is a rip off from Morrowind etc.)

Yes, the mundane Jump action was unrealistic. What we saw was probably what we should be seeing from a Jump Spell. That's fine. There is a jump spell and it looks like they should be able to support it easily. As for Feather Fall... that's an iconic D&D spell. I was happy to see it implemented and happy to see verticality be a bigger part of the game. Not sure what the problem is there.


Quote
Just my two cents, what DOS gimmicks/features from DOS would you NOT like to see in BG3?

Default abilities like "Pin Down" on bows and "Bleeding Attack" on slash weapons isn't a D&D thing. D&D has a weapon effects system. Use it, not the DOS weapon system.


I know it must kind of hurt to not use so many of the "nifty" DOS mechanics in this D&D game... but they do need to live with the fact that they *are* building a D&D game.

Last edited by Full Bleed; 18/03/20 03:33 AM.
Joined: Mar 2013
S
veteran
Offline
veteran
S
Joined: Mar 2013
dnd doesnt have weapon effect systems....

Joined: Jun 2019
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Jun 2019
Originally Posted by Sordak
dnd doesnt have weapon effect systems....

It most certainly does.

And it starts with not having weird abilities like the ability to pin and cause bleeding with mundane weapons.

Most notable and foundational parts of the 5e weapon system include:

1) Core Properties that define usability (for example): Finesse, Heavy, Light, Reach, Two-Handed, Thrown, Versatile, Special
2) Type: Slashing, Piercing, Bludgeoning
3) Material options: Wood, Steel/Iron, Silvered (Adamantine and Mithral only apply to armor in 5e)
4) Creator or intended user options (chart)
5) History details options (chart)
6) Minor properties options (chart)
7) Quirks options (chart)
8) Enhancement bonus (limited to +1, +2, or +3 in 5e)
9) And a plethora of historically "iconic" magic features that are often applied to certain types of weapons, but are (in practice) seen on other weapons in various adventures. Abilities like slaying (general), beserker, venom, dancing, defender, dragon slayer, flaming tongue, frost brand, giant slayer, lighting, thunderbolts, holy avenger, luck, disruption, smiting, terror, life stealer, speed, sharpness, vengeance, vorpal, wounding, and vicious. All of which are detailed in the Core DMG.

Further, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention two prominent *sub-systems*:

10) Sentience
11) Artifacts


Frankly, it's not a very complicated system and there is certainly enough in core for Larian to use to create a very recognizable D&D game over applying strange weapon effects/abilities/mechanics from DOS to D&D. I can be a DOS fan and still acknowledge that it's using a very different weapon system than the one that D&D uses.

Joined: Mar 2013
S
veteran
Offline
veteran
S
Joined: Mar 2013
you realize thats a completley different system to the one were talking about right?
that doesnt give you any more combat options at all

Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
I am completely astonished that in a D&D game, people are actually calling for getting rid of surface interaction. That's ridiculous.

Joined: Mar 2013
S
veteran
Offline
veteran
S
Joined: Mar 2013
Yeah right?
this entire thread makes my head spin.
When have you ever heard of someone wanting to GET RID of features.

If someone decided to model accurate water physics into Turok 2 i definitly wouldnt bloody mind, sure theyll probably be compleltey pointless, but if Acclaim still had them lying around, why would i object to that?

Joined: Mar 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Mar 2020
Originally Posted by Sordak
Yeah right?
this entire thread makes my head spin.
When have you ever heard of someone wanting to GET RID of features.

If someone decided to model accurate water physics into Turok 2 i definitly wouldnt bloody mind, sure theyll probably be compleltey pointless, but if Acclaim still had them lying around, why would i object to that?


Well this is a thread specifically about removing DOS gimmicks/features, so if it makes your head spin I would suggest you take your leave.

Personally I don’t mind surface interactions as long as the game isn’t built too much around them. If there’re just there for people to use if they wish, it’s fine. There are more pressing concerns pointed out in this thread.

Joined: Mar 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
Originally Posted by Exclusif
Well this is a thread specifically about removing DOS gimmicks/features


Yes, but if taken too far, it just becomes another way of saying "make it look and play more like BG2." IF someone is arguing to get rid of surface interaction (did someone?), that would be too far (it is one of the features that made Larian's games stand out). Too prevalent in DOS games? Sure. Get rid of it? No way.

Joined: Mar 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Mar 2020
Originally Posted by Emrikol
Originally Posted by Exclusif
Well this is a thread specifically about removing DOS gimmicks/features


Yes, but if taken too far, it just becomes another way of saying "make it look and play more like BG2." IF someone is arguing to get rid of surface interaction (did someone?), that would be too far (it is one of the features that made Larian's games stand out). Too prevalent in DOS games? Sure. Get rid of it? No way.


The whole point is to make it feel more like a BG game and less like a DOS game. They won’t be removing surface interactions altogether though so I wouldn’t worry about that.

Page 3 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5