If something like that ever comes into existence, I would have to get one...realistic melee combat that I actually have to move for sounds so much more interesting than sitting around pushing a button to swing something.fepayton said:
Melee - An Unexplored Genre
- Thread starter Solo508
- Start date
Recommended Videos
There is actually no multiplayer (which is a plus in my book). But, yup, there's really no comparison. For realism and depth in melee combat, without the insane technical complexity of 3D fighting games, M&B is the big winner. Mounted combat, mounted archer, lance charges, commanding your own small armies, recruiting special companions, sieging castles, fighting with axes, swords, spears or even thrown weapons and shields...this is the game a realist is looking for. It's essentially Pirates! set in a fictional middle ages but instead of commanding a ship you're leading a company of soldiers. Pick a side or roam alone, capture towns, join the tourney circuit, or even get involved with trade and caravans.Mr_Powers said:
While the combat is fairly simple, left click to strike and right click to block, the complexity comes in timing and maneuver. You have to be swinging in the right direction or blocking in it and timing your attacks to get through a defense or just hope to beat it down. Of course if you're a cavalry man your effectiveness has more to do with speed and inertia rather than duelling finesse. Rip through footmen with a lance, hew from side to side with a broadsword as you break free of a mob, circle around your enemies with a horsebow. But if you get too far out on your own and dismounted and you will get mobbed.
Nothing else like it yet on the market and I bet someone will rip the concept off soon for a much bigger budget title.
I didn't see anyone mention God of War. It was almost all Melee, except for some magic. Same goes for the Gauntlet games. Maybe if you could clarify what your idea of an ideal melee game is, it would be easier see what your talking about.
Man does any remember Condemned both the first and second were melee based games, with some guns thrown in but their not really the focus. The multiplayer in the second one isn't bad and nothings more satisfying than beating your opponent to death with a pipe.
Rakion is exactly that. Check it out, Softnyx.net
It has some flaws, but I'm sure it'll keep your attention for a while, just don't expect it to be flawless. If you're really into the whole skilled player > noobie, then it's great.
It has some flaws, but I'm sure it'll keep your attention for a while, just don't expect it to be flawless. If you're really into the whole skilled player > noobie, then it's great.
You mean like Streets of Rage, Golden Axe and Sengoku? Or are you thinking more along the likes of Condemned and Manhunt?
...oh wait. =]
...oh wait. =]
You named off games that are almost 20 years old, just now.Phoenix Arrow said:
Then you named off Condemned and Manhunt which are both Single-player games.Phoenix Arrow said:
Soooo..... what are we waiting for?
Basically, the big game developers that could do something like a game you're talking about...won't. Tweaking an existing genre is a lot easier than trying to start from scratch and create a unique experience. Effort must be less than or equal to the value of fiscal profit.
This is why the Wii is happily tearing down Nintendo's classic gamer reputation. They put more casual games out there (which are typically easy to make and have a much smaller development cost than, say, a Zelda game), price them around the same price as a blockbuster hit game (again, Zelda), and laugh as the money rolls in. It's a very pessimistic view, but watching commentary of Miyamoto praising the Wii as "the perfect system" and "just what he wanted it to be", I find myself believing it more and more. Also, Miyamoto has said that "while Zelda is not dead, expect it to head in a different direction". Zelda Party anyone? A mini-game Zelda would break my childhood affections to the Zelda series.
After all, gaming companies design games with a profit in mind. As long as they are getting that, as long as they can muffle the cries of gamers by stuffing wads of cash in their ears, why should they care if someone wants something cool and unique. They're too busy making generic shooter X's sequel which will somehow involve quicktime events and minigames.
And it doesn't help that most unique games fail hardcore, discouraging developers from trying a new mold.
This is why the Wii is happily tearing down Nintendo's classic gamer reputation. They put more casual games out there (which are typically easy to make and have a much smaller development cost than, say, a Zelda game), price them around the same price as a blockbuster hit game (again, Zelda), and laugh as the money rolls in. It's a very pessimistic view, but watching commentary of Miyamoto praising the Wii as "the perfect system" and "just what he wanted it to be", I find myself believing it more and more. Also, Miyamoto has said that "while Zelda is not dead, expect it to head in a different direction". Zelda Party anyone? A mini-game Zelda would break my childhood affections to the Zelda series.
After all, gaming companies design games with a profit in mind. As long as they are getting that, as long as they can muffle the cries of gamers by stuffing wads of cash in their ears, why should they care if someone wants something cool and unique. They're too busy making generic shooter X's sequel which will somehow involve quicktime events and minigames.
And it doesn't help that most unique games fail hardcore, discouraging developers from trying a new mold.
It would be extremely tiring, but I would still play the game alot...having a tired arm is a small sacrifice to actually feeling like I am swinging anything ranging from a sword to a 2x4 with rusty nails at something.axia777 said:
The closest game to this I can think of is the Age of Chivlary [http://www.age-of-chivalry.com/] mod for the HL2 Source engine.axia777 said:
It covers everything you mentioned except multi-player is limited to about 32 players if i remember right and you can't lose limbs.
I played it and enjoyed it.
You can lose your head, happens really often, also its hard to dodge and time attacks, even lighter weapons like daggers have a striketime that requires good timing, blocking happens with the middle mouse button and relies on reflexes.
It may be a con for you that there is an archer class in the game...
It may be a con for you that there is an archer class in the game...
Straight up. Melee games don't work.
However Pirates, Vikings and Knights two is fun for exactly why you would think it be fun since it's a melee based game.
However Pirates, Vikings and Knights two is fun for exactly why you would think it be fun since it's a melee based game.
Oh, dear lord.Phoenix Arrow said:
SNK might know how to make fighting games, but they know fuck all about doing beat 'em ups.
