Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Rant: Modern technology is making modern RPG combat unbearable

Joined
Dec 17, 2013
Messages
5,103
RPG combat has always been shitty for the most part, with a few exceptions, but back in the day, it wasn't such a big deal. When you look the graphics of an Ultima V, or a Wizardry 2, or a Betrayal at Krondor, well everything looks like an abstract blob or some squiggly lines or whatever, so what if the combat is kinda simple and dull? We had the glorious future to look forward to.

But these days, the hardware and game engines have gotten to the point where games are beautiful and almost photorealistic, there is physics and detailed sound effects, and complex animations. Together, all these things create a very realistic virtual world, that you just want to get lost in. Until your retard character starts fighting.

Graphics and physics and audio are pretty simple to understand. If your game features corrupted textures, anyone can see that, even a game developer, and realize that something is off. If the character's hand is pulled by gravity up that character's ass, even a Bethesda employee will realize that the physics need to be adjusted.

But combat is a bit trickier. You can't just understand medieval combat (on which fantasy combat is based) by simply breathing. You might actually have to do some research, some reading, some video watching. Which is where we get into trouble with Bethesda/Bioware/CDProjekt employees.

When technology was so primitive in 1992, it didn't matter that Ultima underworld had a simple melee attack system. But when you have fully 3D games with gorgeous graphics and in-depth physics, it is immensely frustrating to see completely unrealistic and illiterate combat design that game devs just seem to pull out of their ass.

Take Witcher 2. Its combat consists of alternately spamming rolls, 1-2 OP signs, and attacks. What kind of an idiot thought that constantly rolling around would work in medieval combat? I am not even talking about the wisdom of rolling on hard ground and in hard armor, with multiple sharp objects on your back which might or might not end up impregnating you, but just use some logic. The person attacking just has to move their hands a little bit to move their entire weapon (sword, spear, whatever) a large distance. Obviously moving your entire body out of the way would take longer. Which is why the principal ways of defending yourself in medieval times were blocking (with shield) and parrying (with weapon), since those can also be done with hand/arm movement and just as quickly as attacks, while also keeping the person upright and able to counter-attack.

Yes, yes, I realize it's fantasy, but the point of fantasy is to introduce the fantastical into the common, not replace common with the idiotic. People in good fantasy works don't walk on their heads or eat with their ass. Logic and physics are still generally followed. I don't recall Bilbo and Brand rolling 30 times around the Smaug. The only reason rolling spam against larger monsters works in some of these shitty RPGs is because of braindead enemy AI.

So I install the Witcher 2 combat rebalance mod. This little gem replaces the brain-dead parrying system, where you could just hold the parry indefinitely and for some magical reason, enemies would still hit into it. Think about that for a sec. You hold a very thin piece of metal above you, and instead of cutting you open by hitting the 99% of space around it, every enemy hits that exact blade to prevent themselves from doing any damage. This is called the Oblivion parry, in honor of the first brilliant RPG that implemented parries like this. The rebalance mod took it out altogether and made parrying automatic. I guess no parry is better than shitty parry. And it lessened the importance of rolling by replacing it in many circumstances with dancing. Now, the witcher just dances around enemies, performing pointless, time-consuming movements that expose his back to attack and waste time. But he has no choice, since the combat system is so badly designed, 1v1 or 1v2 would be like NPC abuse, so the only way to keep things flowing is to have 1v20 fights where you have to play keep-away.

Things have gotten so bad that Dark Souls, which is itself deeply flawed in its combat system, seems like a paragon of light unto the unwashed masses. This is a game where for some reason you can't parry with a 2-handed weapon, but can do so with a bare hand. But hey, compared to Oblivion-Skyrim/Witcher series, it is pretty damn good, as a cabbage soup would be after years of starvation.

If there are any RPG devs reading this, seriously, it's time to do some research. There are millions of videos on youtube right now regarding HEMA combat. This is people who practice medieval european combat, read the medieval manuscripts, play around with weapons and armor, and make videos of it. Sometimes they make videos making fun of shitty RPG medieval combat. They are actually very nice about it, saying it's a game, and all that, but they are only saying that cause they are nice. RPG combat doesn't have to be 100% realistic, but we are now well in the uncanny valley territory, where photorealstic and otherwise well-animated characters are just doing weird shit.

tldr: Writers research their topic before writing about it, otherwise they look pretty stupid. Game designers need to research the stuff they design as well.
 

Aenra

Guest
Don't agree.

You are simplifying, ergo doing the Codex proud, lol
Tech is just tech; it's all about who's using it, and how they're using it. Tech can also be translated to deeper C&C consequences, deeper mechanics, improved/more realistic AI, more verisimilar settings, etc.

Morons (being morons) addressing morons is another, separate thing. They predated modern tech and unless Einstein got it wrong, they will also outlast it.
He was not so sure about the universe :)
 

octavius

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
19,182
Location
Bjørgvin
The mention of "constantly rolling around" in Witcher 2 reminds me of fight scenes in many movies, where they do a pirouette before attacking with a sword. Is it actually useful to leave yourself wide open that way?
 

Naveen

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 23, 2015
Messages
1,115
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Odd examples. I would just have said that hight levels of graphic fidelity pressure developers to struggle in a cinematic/graphics arms race when they should be spending that time and money actually designing the rule system and the game proper.
 

Falksi

Arcane
Joined
Feb 14, 2017
Messages
10,538
Location
Nottingham
Actually really enjoyed the combat in TW2. Flawed definitely, but on Dark Mode it was real fun, with real weight and significance being added to each aspect of it.
I actually wanted more in TW3. I was hoping fir enemies which I had to outsmart. Enemies which I simply couldn't kill without a certain potion, method, preparation or trap. Instead I held a button down to find them and dispatched them all in pretty much the same way.
 

adrix89

Arbiter
Joined
Dec 27, 2014
Messages
700
Location
Why are there so many of my country here?
There are millions of videos on youtube right now regarding HEMA combat. This is people who practice medieval european combat, read the medieval manuscripts, play around with weapons and armor, and make videos of it. Sometimes they make videos making fun of shitty RPG medieval combat.

Impossible. You simply cannot map real combat to game combat. If it were realistic you would monotonously swing a sword and go through the techniques until its baked into your brain as a reaction.
Even in action combat where you have reactions and counters it becomes a slog like in For Honor.

The best we have is Fighting Game mechanics and there is very little realistic about them.
Besides RPG combat should be about strategy not reactions.
 

Sigourn

uooh afficionado
Joined
Feb 6, 2016
Messages
5,623
No. Unimaginative modern designers are making modern RPG combat unbearable.

They don't bother creating new mechanics anymore. By going for realism (and failing at it) there's a whole genre that remains unexplored and stagnates: turn-based combat and real-time with pause combat. Are we supposed to believe the best games in these genres are impossible to evolve into an even better version of them? And when I say "evolve", I mean in it in a "in Wolfenstein 3D you couldn't jump, and now you can" sense, that is, "evolution is for the best".
 

YM2612

Barely Literate
Joined
Mar 19, 2017
Messages
3
Mount and Blade isn't a proper CRPG but after playing its melee system I'm spoiled for anything else real time. Even For Honour just has too many button mashy combo moves for me to really enjoy, and I may never finish TW3 for being too arcadey.
I don't think MB is perfect but it definitely addresses the weaknesses of others games' parry mechanics. I dont like all the special moves and combos in For Honour but if it didnt do that lock on junk and was more seamless like MB it could have had decent blocking/dodging.
Turn based would be best but realtime melee is the thing now so at least it would be a good start for more devs to move past the totally arcadey button mash fights.
On PS1 a hundred years ago Bushido Blade had better melee than realtime RPGs do now, even something like Way of the Samurai has a better melee feel, and it's been said a million times how Dark Messiah's combat could have salvaged Skyrim.
There are some action games with promising melee like Bannerlord and other early access melee sims on Steam but I don't think the AAA or AA RPG devs will take any cues from them for years and years.
Maybe VR input controllers will bring some interesting changes in the meantime but basically I think that melee sims like Bannerlords and others are going to have to pave the way and make a big impression before anybody applies their methods to an RPG (because RPGs that arent making compromises for casual sales are more likely to use turn based from the start or to focus development on quests/writing instead).
Im not sure if its so much a matter of the devs not studying real melee, I think it's more to do with them sticking to what they know from third person action/platformer console games, which most "RPGs" really are.
 

Bohrain

Liturgist
Patron
Joined
Aug 10, 2016
Messages
1,442
Location
norf
My team has the sexiest and deadliest waifus you can recruit.
The mention of "constantly rolling around" in Witcher 2 reminds me of fight scenes in many movies, where they do a pirouette before attacking with a sword. Is it actually useful to leave yourself wide open that way?

Movies also tend to do a lot of those dramatic scenes where people try to wrestle their sabres guard to guard which seems kind of silly to me since you could just back off and try to get a better reach. But I suppose it's more entertaining for a layman if a performance focuses on dramatic, exaggerated movement.
That being said I've only done a bit of sports fencing and some kendo so I'm not exactly an expert when it comes to actual combat with swords.
 
Self-Ejected

vivec

Self-Ejected
Joined
Oct 20, 2014
Messages
1,149
No. Unimaginative modern designers are making modern RPG combat unbearable.

They don't bother creating new mechanics anymore. By going for realism (and failing at it) there's a whole genre that remains unexplored and stagnates: turn-based combat and real-time with pause combat. Are we supposed to believe the best games in these genres are impossible to evolve into an even better version of them? And when I say "evolve", I mean in it in a "in Wolfenstein 3D you couldn't jump, and now you can" sense, that is, "evolution is for the best".
Try Dark Messiah.
 

SCO

Arcane
In My Safe Space
Joined
Feb 3, 2009
Messages
16,320
Shadorwun: Hong Kong
^
Try [Action game with non-japanese aesthetics/cargo cult]
 

Arthandas

Liturgist
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Messages
1,368
Gameplay > realism

You can't parry with 2h swords in DS because you're sacrificing defense for damage and reach. If you could parry there would be no reason for using 1h weapons.
Imagine realistic DS combat where every weapon type has the same exact moveset including parries. It would be boring as shit.

It's the same for the roll. The roll is a whole mechanic where you create distance, use invulnerability frames, deal with the recovery etc.
Swap it with a quick simple dodge and many of those mechanics would be gone.
Everything DS does is for a reason and complaining about unrealistic game mechanics despite them working perfectly gameplaywise is fucking stupid.

Though I agree that copying DS's moves without backing them up with solid gameplay mechanics (like rolls in the witcher) should be illegal.
 
Joined
Dec 17, 2013
Messages
5,103
Witcher 2 and Dark Souls aren't exactly simulators. Realism isn't be-all and end-all.

Realism brings inherent depth, because there is a reason for how things are done in RL. If you model your combat system on realism to any degree (doesn't have to be 100%), it is guaranteed to be less stupid and more interesting than the crap games typically have. Think about all the combat systems people love in games, pretty much all of them are more realistic than the typical gamey system (e.g. Mount & Blade, Operation: Flashpoint/ARMA, Dark Souls, Rogue Spear, Mafia, Blade of Darkness).

How is the Dark Souls combat system flawed? Its a perfect fit for the concept of the game.

Aside from the stuff I mentioned in OP, it is based on learning the enemy patterns. Which means you will lose to new enemies, until you learn their behavior well. A trully great system would just require you to learn its principles, and then to be able to apply them to any enemy you encounter.

The mention of "constantly rolling around" in Witcher 2 reminds me of fight scenes in many movies, where they do a pirouette before attacking with a sword. Is it actually useful to leave yourself wide open that way?

Hollywood is also fairly guilty of overexxagerating fighting scenes, but doing an unneccesary and dangerous spinning attack in the middle of other more believable combat, or locking blades and having a dialogue is stupid shit that a person can look past. Your entire fighting style consisting of spins and/or rolls, or being able to hold a sword up and magically block everything, that's when people go full retard, and you can't just ignore it.

Impossible. You simply cannot map real combat to game combat. If it were realistic you would monotonously swing a sword and go through the techniques until its baked into your brain as a reaction.
Even in action combat where you have reactions and counters it becomes a slog like in For Honor.

The best we have is Fighting Game mechanics and there is very little realistic about them.
Besides RPG combat should be about strategy not reactions.

How is it impossible when it's already done by some games to some degree (coincidentally the ones with better combat systems)? Mount & Blade, Dark Souls, etc might not be 100% HEMA realistic, but everything good about them IS taken from actual realistic swordfighting.

Gameplay > realism

You can't parry with 2h swords in DS because you're sacrificing defense for damage and reach. If you could parry there would be no reason for using 1h weapons.
Imagine realistic DS combat where every weapon type has the same exact moveset including parries. It would be boring as shit.

It's the same for the roll. The roll is a whole mechanic where you create distance, use invulnerability frames, deal with the recovery etc.
Swap it with a quick simple dodge and many of those mechanics would be gone.
Everything DS does is for a reason and complaining about unrealistic game mechanics despite them working perfectly gameplaywise is fucking stupid.

Though I agree that copying DS's moves without backing them up with solid gameplay mechanics (like rolls in the witcher) should be illegal.

Look for your answers in realistic historical combat. 2H weapons had more reach and "power" in RL, yet most people still used 1H swords/axes. Why? Because then you can use a shield in your other hand, which was great for missile weapons and offered much better protection against weapons than a parry. Also, some 1H weapons actually have better reach than some 2Handers, for example the rapier was very long and because you can extend one hand much farther from the body than both, a rapier had longer reach than a longsword.
 

Shin

Cipher
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
677
please stop this thread and continue once everyone has played Kingdom Come: Deliverance.

didnt they spend a fuckton of time/effort/money to get their first person combat 'realistic'?
 

Maggot

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 31, 2016
Messages
1,243
Codex 2016 - The Age of Grimoire
Would you play something like this?



Kingdom Cummies: Deliverance is like that.

please stop this thread and continue once everyone has played Kingdom Come: Deliverance.

didnt they spend a fuckton of time/effort/money to get their first person combat 'realistic'?

I played it during Alpha and they had a little dueling section and the combat was interesting but the lock on system was a bit annoying and it seems focused entirely on dueling so I'm not sure it will work out very well in the large battles they promised.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom