Things that bother/disappoint you. | Forums

[Rain-Dragon]

There are 3 main gripes I got with this game.

2. Game is not purely Faction VS Faction.
   No point in discussing this here, as there are plenty of threads about it already.
   -
   
3. Less-armored classes are often tankier.
   While toughness usually comes with stronger physique, armor is just as important. In fact, when someone loves armor, like I do with medieval full plate, it is not just for the looks, but also for the protection they provide. Being in full plate, yet more vulnerable than some half naked guy feels absolutely stupid.
   And while Berserkers wear no armor to keep the "brute" appeal of the Vikings, at least it is consistent within the Viking faction.
   Knight's on the other hand, seem to be tougher, the less armor they wear. Which, in my opinion, is absolutely counter-intuitive and immersion-breaking. Like a stock Toyota Prius out-performing a Bugatti Veyron, despite clearly inferior equipment.
   -
   
4. Only 1 weapon per class.
   My issue with this is, if someone highly favors a certain class, but absolutely dislikes their weapon of choice, there is no real alternative.
   I understand this is highly balancing-dependent and might not be changeable within an acceptable margin of effort.
   -
   
5. Plate armor looks very makeshift.
   As probably everyone knows, and as I have shared in the thread The-Pride-of-the-Knight, medieval plate armor wasn't just a bunch of metal plats scrapped together from a junkyard and slapped on to a guy's leather coat. They were absolute cutting-edge technology of that time period and as historical research progresses, scientists are often surprised how ingenious and effective their designs were.
   I would also like to point out, that it is a misconception that battle-worn armor was rusty. Rust disintegrated the metal and this equipment was the knight's lifeline and far too expensive to just let it rot and fall apart. It had to be cleaned constantly and thus it maintained a certain shine or at least clean look to it.
   Please give us plate armor fans something adequate to look at.
   

[Dez_troi_aR]

Double post, sorry

[Dez_troi_aR]

I feel the urge to ask you why the "3 main gripes" you got with this game are 5 of which the first is just a line without text

Concerning your critique: The Points 3 and 5 are issues concerning the realism of the game. I can only say that this does not interest me at all. I like were they are going with the overall style. Everything looks stylish, gritty, and badass, which is much more important than making the game truly "realistic". I dont want to play a simulation.
I don't mean to offend you or any other history-nerd on the forums but i am really growing tired of people telling me about how historically wrong several aspects of the Game are . These considerations are misplaced here, in my humble opinion. This game is about as historically correct as other pop-cultural interpretations of history (50-99% plain wrong). Its all about reinterpretation of public myth and entertainment. If one wants to discuss medival plate armour (which i think is an awsome thing to do) he should better go to a museum than to a video game chat. Doing that in the ForHonor Forum is about the same thing as discussing archaic greece with someone who just wants to watch a 300 Movie.

Point number 2 is not something that will change because the playable characters are designed around the weapons they carry and the whole mechanic, balancing, movement-animations etc were done with that weapon in mind. Giving the warden another weapon would be equal to creating another character.

I totally agree with you on number 2. Mixed factions has advanteages for team creation etc, i can see that, but in my opinion rivaling factions and commiting to one of them would have been beneficial for the games atmosphere. I hope we will get a specific game mode

[Rain-Dragon]

I feel the urge to ask you why the "3 main gripes" you got with this game are 5 of which the first is just a line without text

Concerning your critique: The Points 3 and 5 are issues concerning the realism of the game. I can only say that this does not interest me at all. I like were they are going with the overall style. Everything looks stylish, gritty, and badass, which is much more important than making the game truly "realistic". I dont want to play a simulation.
I don't mean to offend you or any other history-nerd on the forums but i am really growing tired of people telling me about how historically wrong several aspects of the Game are . These considerations are misplaced here, in my humble opinion. This game is about as historically correct as other pop-cultural interpretations of history (50-99% plain wrong). Its all about reinterpretation of public myth and entertainment. If one wants to discuss medival plate armour (which i think is an awsome thing to do) he should better go to a museum than to a video game chat. Doing that in the ForHonor Forum is about the same thing as discussing archaic greece with someone who just wants to watch a 300 Movie.

Point number 2 is not something that will change because the playable characters are designed around the weapons they carry and the whole mechanic, balancing, movement-animations etc were done with that weapon in mind. Giving the warden another weapon would be equal to creating another character.

I totally agree with you on number 2. Mixed factions has advanteages for team creation etc, i can see that, but in my opinion rivaling factions and commiting to one of them would have been beneficial for the games atmosphere. I hope we will get a specific game mode

First of all, sorry but I am unable to correct my post for the same reason uncorrected parts snuck back into the corrected post.
I keep getting a connection error when submitting, previewing or editing posts on Ubisoft forums.


Second, about realism of my point 3: So you would play a racing game where a stock Toyota Prius is faster than a Bugatti Veyron? Cause I wouldn't, and for the same reason I feel bad about being encased in cutting-edge protection and still die faster to blades than some naked guy. You might not care about armor, like some people who play a racing game don't care about the Bugatti Veyron. But it's in the game for a reason and the people who love it will feel betrayed.
Of course this comparison is exaggerated, but perfectly valid to make a point based on the same reasoning.

As for historical accuracy, that is not what I'm after.
All I am saying is that real plate armor looks way better than rusty plates strapped together, and I explained why.

To claim that you don't care about realism at all is short-sighted, because without a certain amount of realism, you wouldn't like the game at all.
You want sharp blades to cut, pointy tips to impale, clashing metal to sound like real clashing metal and people to not float around through the air. That is all realism, and how much exactly you want of it, is personal preference.
I could never play this game if the clash of metal sounded like squashing rubber ducks, but I can play this game without armor being historically accurate based on certain time periods. I just want it to look and feel as awesome as it really is, and rusted chunks attached to my body that don't even do anything is not my idea of an awesome feel and look.

[Rain-Dragon]

This is what the Mount and Blade forums have to say about For Honor, and I can't agree much at all. https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?topic=334431.0
These guys love their simulators, I don't.
I want my knight to feel real, but I don't want to get stuck in the treadmill of real life chores in a game, like actually cleaning my equipment, farming land to afford my equipment or even equipment breaking on me.
These guys do, however, and that's fine. Mount and Blade is a medieval warfare simulator, what I want from For Honor is simulated medieval COMBAT.
And coming from games like JKA, MB2, Chivalry and GunZ I have high expectations but also high hopes, as long as the game keeps the skill ceiling open.
People in MB2 would be able to reach new levels of mastery even after many years of playing, and the results were truly amazing. The kind of warriors tales were written about in real life.

This guys has an approach that's more to my liking.

youtube has been deactivated.
Do you accept the use of cookies to display and allow you to watch the video content?

[Dez_troi_aR]

Hey there,

What you brought forth doesn't really change my point of view and what i've said did not affect yours so i'll just give a short answer concerning your last post and then go on to the Threads main topic "Things that disappoint me".
-As you might have imagined i am going to complain about the racing-game comparison : Driving nice cars is much closer to a real live experience for the average gamer than fighting a viking wearing full armor. The former is something we want to get as close as possible to, (just without beeing stuck in traffic and having to pay for the gas ) . The latter is something we have a power fantasy about.
I think you wrote somewhere that you have real-live-swordfighting experience ? It might be that your trained eye looks at armour differently and makes you question things that most of us perceive diferently, but i guess thats the specialist's curse.

Ok things that bother me:

There are two things i am a little worried about, though i am not shure about the second issue:
- Missing tools for community management: I think most games benefit massivly from mechanics that allow you to build a community aside from just having a friend list. Several Clan mechanics would be a big plus. Obviously its beneficial for team creation but if they could go beyond that and give clans options to work on common goals, like gathering prestige, and reward that, the bonds between players would deepen immensly and the community would grow. Otherwise i fear the player base will be much more anonymous and faceless

- The empathis on Dominion: I am not really concerned about that because it is just a very subjective impression i got from the alpha-footage and i haven't had a chance to play the game yet. What i want to express is my slight dissapointment about the way many alpha players did play the game. The "shooter with swords"-thing became a little bit too real , imo. Everyone was running around hysterically trying to hack'n'slash everyone coming in sight, preferably in gangs with others. Thats not at all what made the game interesting to me. I care much more about the beautiful and skillful 1v1 combat. These duels seem rarly to happen in dominion mode, which is why i focused on the duel/brawl footage after a while. I am aware that there are a lot of factors who might have spoiled my impression, among them that most of the alpha players were total noobs or that the strategies for countering ganging up were not commonly known among them.
But should the game turn out to be that way, with dominion beeing the more chaotic, less skillbased game mode were duels rarly occur, then i will stick to the duel-mode 90% of the time and hope they dont put all their emphasis on dominion in the future.

(I hope my english was ok, feels a little rustly today)

[MisterWillow]

I think you wrote somewhere that you have real-live-swordfighting experience ? It might be that your trained eye looks at armour differently and makes you question things that most of us perceive diferently, but i guess thats the specialist's curse.

As someone that also has experience in this regard, I agree with this assessment. I could be extraordinarily critical of most aspects of the design decisions the team made---the armour for the Raider especially is far too Conan the Barbarian, the Conqueror has no vambraces or gauntlets to protect their arms, and has a chain wrapped around their forearm, some of the attacks are too flashy and would probably result in your death in real life, etc. etc.---but to do that sort of undermines any sort of enjoyment I get from the game itself.

It also helps that the team has made it very clear that the game isn't trying to be accurate to our world. At best, this is low-fantasy (as in there's no dragons or magic, but it's fantastic in the same way that steampunk is fantastic; it's just medieval fantasy), and as such shouldn't be looked at under a microscope.

- The empathis on Dominion: I am not really concerned about that because it is just a very subjective impression i got from the alpha-footage and i haven't had a chance to play the game yet. What i want to express is my slight dissapointment about the way many alpha players did play the game. The "shooter with swords"-thing became a little bit too real , imo. Everyone was running around hysterically trying to hack'n'slash everyone coming in sight, preferably in gangs with others. Thats not at all what made the game interesting to me. I care much more about the beautiful and skillful 1v1 combat. These duels seem rarly to happen in dominion mode, which is why i focused on the duel/brawl footage after a while. I am aware that there are a lot of factors who might have spoiled my impression, among them that most of the alpha players were total noobs or that the strategies for countering ganging up were not commonly known among them.

While this is true of most Dominion games I've played, a team that is able to play objectives has a much better chance of winning the overall match. I think that once people get to spend a month or more with it, strategy in regard to map control would take precedence over getting kills, especially since I also played plenty of matches where that was the case, and I got a few good duels in, and they were much preferable and more enjoyable than occasionally encountering a roving group of three.

[Dez_troi_aR]

While this is true of most Dominion games I've played, a team that is able to play objectives has a much better chance of winning the overall match. I think that once people get to spend a month or more with it, strategy in regard to map control would take precedence over getting kills, especially since I also played plenty of matches where that was the case, and I got a few good duels in, and they were much preferable and more enjoyable than occasionally encountering a roving group of three.

I know, i've watched your twitchstream. That was the dominion footage i enjoyed most! (Watching someone) Fighting someone in the midst of battle has a special quality that you cannot get out of a duel-mode encounter. I am optimistic that it'll turn out fine.

[MisterWillow]

I know, i've watched your twitchstream. That was the dominion footage i enjoyed most! (Watching someone) Fighting someone in the midst of battle has a special quality that you cannot get out of a duel-mode encounter. I am optimistic that it'll turn out fine.

You mean the one we did in Montreal?

I'm so glad you liked it!

All of us had at least moderate experience from the previous tests, so I think we were in a unique position to show the sort of strategy that makes Dominion tense without being frustrating, along with higher-level strategy in combat itself.

[damon1085]

Dez, I have to say that from what I've read you seem to be the "grumpy old man" of the forums these days. Every time I see your name pop up with a comment you're complaining that people don't see the game your way and that you're getting frustrated with it... Be happy man! It should be a great game. Also to be clear, I am saying this mostly as a jest... not trying to start a fight or anything.

As someone that also has experience in this regard, I agree with this assessment. I could be extraordinarily critical of most aspects of the design decisions the team made---the armour for the Raider especially is far too Conan the Barbarian, the Conqueror has no vambraces or gauntlets to protect their arms, and has a chain wrapped around their forearm, some of the attacks are too flashy and would probably result in your death in real life, etc. etc.---but to do that sort of undermines any sort of enjoyment I get from the game itself.

That pretty much nails it for me. I also have some experience in longsword combat and even with my limited knowledge/experience I could spend hours tearing apart the realism (or lack there of) in this game. But that's not the point. What we get down to is the fact that this is a game, and as such the purpose of making it is to provide good quality entertainment to a target audience. In this case, the devs have said they're not aiming for realism. With that in mind, I think they're doing a pretty darn good job. Art by definition is subjective and heavily influenced by personal preference. As such, there's no way to please everyone.

Last quick comment... the thing that bothers me the most... LACK OF SPLIT-SCREEN!
Ok, I know it's not happening but I couldn't resist throwing that in there... I can always hope!