Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


Member Since 23 Aug 2001
Offline Last Active Today, 01:40 AM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: witcher 3 combat

Yesterday, 03:12 PM

well my game was less than 200mb back then. if that's a full month of bandwidth's worth then I feel for you :D




you're introducing a concept that goes very opposite into mine (as well as the games I mentioned)...


Norman Barrows, on 24 May 2016 - 11:14 AM, said:


from thinking about it a bit, it would seem that you want to have moves that take time, and therefore give the opponent a small window to start a counter move. but for real time combat, you should be able to start any move at any time.  and if you start a move while still doing another move, the result is sort of a combo of the two. so if you start an overhand slash, and you opponent then starts a gut thrust attack, you can then counter with something like a parry low move. but since you were on an overhand slash, a parry low won't be very effective. you have to move the sword from over your head to deflect a weapon that's coming at your gut. so the parry effectiveness or chance might be reduced 50%.  i think something like this would probably lead to the most varied and realistic melee combat possible.  OTOH, if you think about it, many medieval melees on foot with armor are simply slug fests, with the lucky blow or loss of stamina determining the victor. so maybe we're trying to make combat something it simply isn't.

for me if you start a move while still doing another move, it should either ignore it or try to queue it, but [unless it's a move-cancelling move] should not disrupt the current move.

this can sound a little punishing, but what effectively produces is that the player needs to mind more their actions instead of being careless.

if you're doing a move, you're putting a lot of the weight of your body in order to maximize the impact, committing to a point of no return of sorts (from which you recover when the move is done). if on the other hand you can mix or alter the action in the middle of it, it tells me the character isn't going all the way with it.

from a gameplay perspective, allowing changing actions mid-action can mean that your game could become a twitchy feint click fest (which is how M&B multiplayer felt at times)

or maybe I didn't understand fully what you meant




Norman Barrows, on 24 May 2016 - 11:14 AM, said:

hit location, and the ability to make counter moves? yes. these are the things that make up real melee combat. one might even say they are the prime things in melee.  do you go for shield or visor when tilting? (hit location). and we all know that the veteran hero knight can parry or block any weapon wielded by a mere human lesser than he or she is. the same way the Shao-lin master can fend off the attacks of all lesser opponents effortlessly (with a willow stick no less) , while remaining as placid and calm as the Buddha himself.

in my mind it's not quite the case. the veteran hero or the shaolin master can still fail due to different factors (multi-enemy fights, fatigue, etc). yes they will prevail most times but if it's like Assassin's Creed then it already feels wrong




Norman Barrows, on 24 May 2016 - 11:14 AM, said:

such a system would combine a bit of both.  reflexes so you can counter-move in time, and target specific parts of the body.   knowledge of moves and how they combine (or don't very well) - IE player knowledge of the combat system.  then also RPG stats and dice rolls for attack resolution once its been determined that a hit has occurred (IE character experience / skill / level).

that sounds good. but how do you handle the player input for targetting specific parts of the body?

In Topic: witcher 3 combat

23 May 2016 - 12:54 PM

I like fun and challenging skill-based melee/medieval combat more than the average guy, and I'm always happy to discuss these topics so here I go.


Norman Barrows, on 03 May 2016 - 1:25 PM, said:Norman Barrows, on 03 May 2016 - 1:25 PM, said:Norman Barrows, on 03 May 2016 - 1:25 PM, said:

so does more combat moves = better combat in most peoples minds? IE like mortal combat with lots of attack and defense moves?

not necessarily, but in most cases of games I can think about, yes.

in a lot of the mainstream combat-heavy games, having more attack and defense moves usually means gimmicks that serve no other purpose than adding visual flair in an effort to make the combat feel less repetitive. most of the times it's done in a very unrealistic and cheesy way that IRL would most likely just get you killed (like every other spin attack out there)

also in most games, those additional attack moves are achieved by the player by just smashing the same attack button again, which only creates a huge discrepancy between the character's skill and the player's skill. also means it's very un-creative for the player (as opposed to, say, combining different action buttons like jump+attack, dodge+attack, etc, to produce those additional attacks)



I think the important question is, do you want to rely on player skill or not?

both with and without relying on player skill can be valid methods that result on fun gameplay (I'm personally just very biased towards the player skill approach)


some mentions of games that try to do combat with some depth:

- Mount & Blade: (1st and 3rd person, mostly played in 3rd person) offers freedom to choose 4 mouse-directional attacks and relies heavily on timing and action-reaction. it can be a bit twitchy at times (esp. in MP)

- Chivalry: (1st and 3rd person, mostly played in 1st person, 3rd person disabled server-side in a lot of servers) comes with 3 directional attacks + 3 variations (mapped to 3 mouse buttons), relies heavily on timing and action-reaction but also on aiming, positioning can play a big rold, and it's slightly slower and slightly more strategic than Mount & Blade


some other games that I didn't play for long, mostly because the combat didn't 'click' for me

- War of the Roses: (3rd person) similar style to Mount & Blade or Chivalry, but to me felt too slow and had some mechanics that I found boring (coupe de grace / reviving)

- Batman Arkham Asylum and anything after that: (topdown / 3rd perso) its combat system is praised but for me it felt too easy and "guided" (unlike the others, it's a topdown/3rdPerson and enemies show an indicator when they are about to attack you)



additionally I can recommend my own game! (which I offered you Norman, to try 2 years ago, but you didnt reply -_- )

for Elium: Prison Escape I have 4 mouse-directional attacks like Mount & Blade but I have a wider array of moves (offhand attacks, push, weapon hit, etc). relies heavily on timing and action-reaction but also aiming and positioning, stamina plays a big role which leads to a lot of attack interchanges (as opposed to attack spamming)

In Topic: Designing a good feel ARPG melee combat system

08 October 2014 - 02:47 PM

I'm not sure what to do to remedy the fact that enemies run towards you. Maybe they should get close, then do something like boxers do when they circle. Adding a random time delay to their hits might also help to make it more interesting (although some games have extremely predictable enemies yet stay quite entertaining),

I thought Skyrim is your main reference? play it again, but check out how the enemies behave. you might as well watch some (real) swordfighting videos to understand movement a little bit better, although they might be too static for your liking. circling around would be a good addition IMO.

adding a random time delay would be a good first step as well. it all depends on how deep you want to go for programming your AI, which should translate to how smart or varied you want your enemies to be.

and all of this depends on what you expect your game flow to be like. do you expect the player to kill lots of enemies with little AI (Diablo, Serious Sam, or your best known modern zombie shooter) or is it more about having fewer but more interesting and challenging encounters?



On physics and biomechanics, I didn't think about things like that because of the great Realism vs. Fun argument. I am way more into fun than realism on this project, as opposed to your game, which seems to try to accurately portray swordfighting. I will still add some more physicality though.


And yes, I am aiming more for the 'A' part of ARPG. This is more casual FPS-style.

I don't see why Realism vs. Fun should be an argument, you can have both, or none, and it's also a matter of what's fun for every person. To me it's more fun to play the more realistic combat of Chivalry vs. the less realistic combat mechanics of Minecraft. Many years ago Counterstrike came out and it attempted a more realistic approach of a shooter vs. the more arcadey shooters from back then, and it was much more fun for many people. and if my game's combat wasn't fun (for me at least) I would've changed it long ago.

you also have a different form of realism: you can die. Minecraft's combat was fun because it was realistically dangerous


realism/fun aside, the fact of the matter is that you need to define a limit for the player's actions to an extent, and you already have the most basic example: there's a (small) cooldown between the player's attacks as opposed to allowing every click as a valid attack. it's the same for the guns in a shooter (at the very least there's a minimum fire interval).

from there on you can build up on it, by designing different limitations and actions. for example crouching in an FPS makes you smaller (harder to be aimed) but it also makes you move slower.

it's up to you to design how and where you would want to limit the player's actions, and how to make these interact with eachother (rock-paper-scissors)




Also, I ask that you guys talking about Chosker's game start a new thread or PM each other.


 I agree and that's why I initially said I didn't mean to advertise. however even if mine or Thaumaturge's game aren't Skyrim, I would've thought you to be interested in knowing how they work

In Topic: Designing a good feel ARPG melee combat system

08 October 2014 - 12:21 PM

I checked the stream (StarMire: just forward to 21:30). I agree with the comments from Thaumaturge

also I see a complete lack of sense of physics and biomechanics. you can spam the attack and get maybe 3 attacks in one second. there's no cooldown, no inertia, no penalty for missing an attack, no way for the enemies to block your attacks, or any other interesting factors beside attacking. the fact that the enemies run towards you like zombies doesn't help either


for some games having a sword attack is enough to call it a 'melee fighting system'. it usually boils down to something like "I was hit 8 times but I hit the enemy 15 times, so I won". Skyrim goes just a little bit beyond this (with blocking, stamina and staggers) but the "I can pause to drink potions" feature ruins all of this (plus aiming and body movement / distance is meaningless)

personally I have to say that a sword attack is only the beginning, and the real fun starts when attacks can be blocked causing a flow of back-and-forth attack attempts and blocks, making all combat decisions much more meaningful.



StarMire, on 08 Oct 2014 - 07:29 AM, said:

Great references those! +1


The danger, of course, with such freedom can be disorientation.  You have to be careful with camera, and making the controls manageable.



indeed, but at this point I'm assuming the audience target (within the RPG world) is more the people familiar with FPS's rather than jRPG's - and from makuto's video I think it's safe to say he's aiming for something like this too






StarMire, on 08 Oct 2014 - 07:29 AM, said:


Chosker, on 07 Oct 2014 - 11:56 PM, said:

I myself am making a game of this swordfighting genre. here's a [ link ] to a 6 months old video, despite it lacks quite some new features and better combat flow it does give a good sense of what it is like. I'm not meaning to advertise, it's just that if you're interested I could invite you to my testers group so you can try it for yourself (on the condition that feedback is provided smile.png )

It looks awesome.  Is that an open invitation? biggrin.png Is there somewhere I can read more about your project?  I didn't see much on the site.


it's not an open invitation, but we could arrange it smile.png

also yes my website is just placeholder but [my blog] has much more info about it.



Thaumaturge, on 08 Oct 2014 - 5:19 PM, said:


That looks rather cool! If I may ask, how does the player control attacks in your game? I'm doing something similar myself, and am curious about your approach. (The download in the first post is old; the latest posted here should be in my last post in that thread (at time of writing).)

I know you're doing something similar, I was the first guy to reply to your thread biggrin.png

in my game the player controls how to attack like in Mount&Blade - you move your mouse up, down, left or right, and then click with the mouse.

I also added an optional alternative where instead the player needs to click and hold the mouse button, then move the mouse up/down/left/right, and then let go of the mouse button. my testers' opinions are divided between the two methods

on top of that there's some buttons that don't need mouse movement, like blocking or kicking, which are just regular keypresses.

In Topic: Designing a good feel ARPG melee combat system

07 October 2014 - 03:56 PM

I agree, we should have a video smile.png


have you tried some of the medieval swordfighting games out there? it's kind of a genre of its own and offers much more depth than Skyrim (which I love as a game overall, but the combat is shallow and dull). I'm talking about games like Mount&Blade, Chivalry: Medieval Warfare or War of the Roses.

Unlike Skyrim these offer freedom to choose different attack directions (either by mouse movement or by different buttons), and unlike the 'Souls games they rely on focusing the camera view on the enemy and aiming (first-person WASD movement and mouselook) and having more realistic limitations for movement (no rolling around)


I myself am making a game of this swordfighting genre. here's a [ link ] to a 6 months old video, despite it lacks quite some new features and better combat flow it does give a good sense of what it is like. I'm not meaning to advertise, it's just that if you're interested I could invite you to my testers group so you can try it for yourself (on the condition that feedback is provided smile.png )