Poll: REALISTIC medieval combat

[Yopaz]

Realistic medieval combat sounds very boring. So sword fighting is a little interesting, but making games realistic doesn't mean that the games are getting more fun. Really, think about medieval combat and imagine seeing it realistic and you'll see what I mean.

To be honest, realism is largely a gimmick anyway.

It has it's useful applications sure, but there's a reason Call of Duty isn't actually realistic: spending 90% of your time staring at what's left of your leg after a mine blew it away would fucking suck. I should know; It was a level in Depression: The Video Game.

I know this might be too soon, but dude, I love you. You managed to capture exactly why I don't like realism. Realism is the what I want to escape when I play games, not what I want to see in games. A realistic medieval game would probably mean the most dangerous thing was diseases caused by bad hygiene anyway.

 

[A Weakgeek]

Realistic medieval combat sounds very boring. So sword fighting is a little interesting, but making games realistic doesn't mean that the games are getting more fun. Really, think about medieval combat and imagine seeing it realistic and you'll see what I mean.

To be honest, realism is largely a gimmick anyway.

It has it's useful applications sure, but there's a reason Call of Duty isn't actually realistic: spending 90% of your time staring at what's left of your leg after a mine blew it away would fucking suck. I should know; It was a level in Depression: The Video Game.

I know this might be too soon, but dude, I love you. You managed to capture exactly why I don't like realism. Realism is the what I want to escape when I play games, not what I want to see in games. A realistic medieval game would probably mean the most dangerous thing was diseases caused by bad hygiene anyway.

Just a note for you guys, I did not say all medieval games should (I also enjoy fantasy games such as Elderscrolls, DnD, etc.) be like what I described. All I wan't is for one, or a few games to attempt at simulation. This would also be an attempt in something new ( Versatile and fun First person melee combat). Also, please be civil and don't present points like diseases killing you in a warcamp etc. I never did ask for "Life of a medieval soldier, the game", ARMA II doesn't make you patrol the desert for 6 months, its still thought to be a simulation of infantry combat.

Realistic medieval combat sounds very boring. So sword fighting is a little interesting, but making games realistic doesn't mean that the games are getting more fun. Really, think about medieval combat and imagine seeing it realistic and you'll see what I mean.

To be honest, realism is largely a gimmick anyway.

It has it's useful applications sure, but there's a reason Call of Duty isn't actually realistic: spending 90% of your time staring at what's left of your leg after a mine blew it away would fucking suck. I should know; It was a level in Depression: The Video Game.

I know this might be too soon, but dude, I love you. You managed to capture exactly why I don't like realism. Realism is the what I want to escape when I play games, not what I want to see in games. A realistic medieval game would probably mean the most dangerous thing was diseases caused by bad hygiene anyway.

Honestly I think this search for perfect realism is just a misdirected effort. What we really want is "Logical" take for example, mass effect. It's not "Realistic" but it makes some kind of logical sense in the context of the game. "Okay, fictional element bends the rules of physics allowing fantastical feats of technology." You're able to suspend your disbelief because it -SEEMS- at least slightly plausible.

I agree to a certain point, that trying to make a game as realistic as you possibly can isnt very viable right now, but I see no harm in trying to find a balance. There is no reason why you can't have a medieval setting that is actually realistic, and tries to simulate real medieval combat while staying functional. (As long as games are controlled with a keyboard and a mouse or a joypad, you will always have to compensate for the lack of control.)

 

[Dogstile]

Just a small nit pick, WoT does not calculate shit realistically, yes they have a much more complex model then most shooters out there but it is not a simulation.

Anyway it seems that for some reason a whole bunch of people have already gotten on this band wagon and there are about a dozen of these semi realistic melee combat games in the works, so you got your wish.
No doubt I'll try some but simulations are usually boring as all hell.

Honestly, how is WoT even considered realistic? It's a world where gold has the magical penetration properties of fricking diamond. I'm sorry, but "Realistic Tank Warfare" in a world with magical golden bullets? False advertising as far as i'm concerned, though I suppose "Realistic" is just one of those ambiguous words isn't it?

What do you mean by magical golden bullets? The gold ammo is usually Armour Piercing Composite Rounds that actually become really crap at penetrating anything after 100m.

I don't know about HEAT rounds, but they are actual things. You just have to pay more money to use them.

 

[A Weakgeek]

I just have one question about the realism:

<youtube=mjEcj8KpuJw>

Well, you probably wouldnt be chopping off peoples limbs with a one handed sword, while the enemy is wearing chainmail. But if you were swinging a claymore with your enemy wearing leather... Why not?

 

[Dogstile]

Just a small nit pick, WoT does not calculate shit realistically, yes they have a much more complex model then most shooters out there but it is not a simulation.

Anyway it seems that for some reason a whole bunch of people have already gotten on this band wagon and there are about a dozen of these semi realistic melee combat games in the works, so you got your wish.
No doubt I'll try some but simulations are usually boring as all hell.

Honestly, how is WoT even considered realistic? It's a world where gold has the magical penetration properties of fricking diamond. I'm sorry, but "Realistic Tank Warfare" in a world with magical golden bullets? False advertising as far as i'm concerned, though I suppose "Realistic" is just one of those ambiguous words isn't it?

What do you mean by magical golden bullets? The gold ammo is usually Armour Piercing Composite Rounds that actually become really crap at penetrating anything after 100m.

I don't know about HEAT rounds, but they are actual things. You just have to pay more money to use them.

If memory serves, in the beta at least the gold ammunition were literal golden shells.

A lot has changed then, it seems. Would be wise to check it out again if you want to talk about it

 

[Dogstile]

Just a small nit pick, WoT does not calculate shit realistically, yes they have a much more complex model then most shooters out there but it is not a simulation.

Anyway it seems that for some reason a whole bunch of people have already gotten on this band wagon and there are about a dozen of these semi realistic melee combat games in the works, so you got your wish.
No doubt I'll try some but simulations are usually boring as all hell.

Honestly, how is WoT even considered realistic? It's a world where gold has the magical penetration properties of fricking diamond. I'm sorry, but "Realistic Tank Warfare" in a world with magical golden bullets? False advertising as far as i'm concerned, though I suppose "Realistic" is just one of those ambiguous words isn't it?

What do you mean by magical golden bullets? The gold ammo is usually Armour Piercing Composite Rounds that actually become really crap at penetrating anything after 100m.

I don't know about HEAT rounds, but they are actual things. You just have to pay more money to use them.

If memory serves, in the beta at least the gold ammunition were literal golden shells.

A lot has changed then, it seems. Would be wise to check it out again if you want to talk about it

Ehh, bad memories. I seem to recall the difference in power between two tiers of tanks was way too high. Still the case?

Really does depend on the tank. They are however, in the middle of a huge re balance where they plan on making it so your tank will only go up against tiers one level above or below you. Interesting times in the tank world.

 

[Yopaz]

Realistic medieval combat sounds very boring. So sword fighting is a little interesting, but making games realistic doesn't mean that the games are getting more fun. Really, think about medieval combat and imagine seeing it realistic and you'll see what I mean.

To be honest, realism is largely a gimmick anyway.

It has it's useful applications sure, but there's a reason Call of Duty isn't actually realistic: spending 90% of your time staring at what's left of your leg after a mine blew it away would fucking suck. I should know; It was a level in Depression: The Video Game.

I know this might be too soon, but dude, I love you. You managed to capture exactly why I don't like realism. Realism is the what I want to escape when I play games, not what I want to see in games. A realistic medieval game would probably mean the most dangerous thing was diseases caused by bad hygiene anyway.

Just a note for you guys, I did not say all medieval games should (I also enjoy fantasy games such as Elderscrolls, DnD, etc.) be like what I described. All I wan't is for one, or a few games to attempt at simulation. This would also be an attempt in something new ( Versatile and fun First person melee combat). Also, please be civil and don't present points like diseases killing you in a warcamp etc. I never did ask for "Life of a medieval soldier, the game", ARMA II doesn't make you patrol the desert for 6 months, its still thought to be a simulation of infantry combat.

All I am trying to say is that realism isn't as fun as some people make it out to be and even games considered realistic aren't really realistic compared to actual reality. There are games with realistic features. Realistic weapons, realistic stories, realistic properties of both structures and effects of weapons. However realism is something we rarely get to see.

You ask me to be civil and not to mention diseases. I ask you to be realistic and consider that the black plague alone wiped out almost a third of Europe's population (I might not remember this part correctly). That is realism. Not being able to move after someone stabbed you in the leg is realistic. Slipping in mud is realistic. Not having proper equipment to survive long on the battlefield is realistic.

Realism isn't fun and you don't really want a realistic medieval game. You want a medieval game with some realistic features cause realism sucks.

 

[A Weakgeek]

DAMN YOU WOT FOR DERAILING THIS THREAD!!!

Realistic medieval combat sounds very boring. So sword fighting is a little interesting, but making games realistic doesn't mean that the games are getting more fun. Really, think about medieval combat and imagine seeing it realistic and you'll see what I mean.

To be honest, realism is largely a gimmick anyway.

It has it's useful applications sure, but there's a reason Call of Duty isn't actually realistic: spending 90% of your time staring at what's left of your leg after a mine blew it away would fucking suck. I should know; It was a level in Depression: The Video Game.

I know this might be too soon, but dude, I love you. You managed to capture exactly why I don't like realism. Realism is the what I want to escape when I play games, not what I want to see in games. A realistic medieval game would probably mean the most dangerous thing was diseases caused by bad hygiene anyway.

Just a note for you guys, I did not say all medieval games should (I also enjoy fantasy games such as Elderscrolls, DnD, etc.) be like what I described. All I wan't is for one, or a few games to attempt at simulation. This would also be an attempt in something new ( Versatile and fun First person melee combat). Also, please be civil and don't present points like diseases killing you in a warcamp etc. I never did ask for "Life of a medieval soldier, the game", ARMA II doesn't make you patrol the desert for 6 months, its still thought to be a simulation of infantry combat.

You ask me to be civil and not to mention diseases. I ask you to be realistic and consider that the black plague alone wiped out almost a third of Europe's population (I might not remember this part correctly). That is realism. Not being able to move after someone stabbed you in the leg is realistic. Slipping in mud is realistic. Not having proper equipment to survive long on the battlefield is realistic.

And again! I'm asking for "realistic medieval combat", the combat can be realistic even if not every one has a plague and wears nothing but cloth and a hoe in his hand. If I was asking "absolutely realistic medieval warfare", then yes, things like the plague etc. should be taken into account.

Incase you read my OP fully, you know I suggested a tourney style arena game. You could make a simulation for that, and not include plague, or difficult terrain where you would slip all over (Though that would make an interesting feature, I'd actually like to try that.) and the combatants could all be knights or nobles, who could realistically own expensive weapons and armor.

 

[A Weakgeek]

All of this falls on it's face when you consider that a single bitted axe with a spike on the rear end is pretty much suitable for all situations.

Heavy plate armour? Use the spike.

Chainmail? Use the spike.

Everything else? Hack the bone!

Also a buckler.

Spoiler: ***** please, I won wars

Well first of all, the reach could be a problem. Second, if the game would use a loadout system with a certain "money" you can spend for example, the multitasking weapons would be more expensive. If it was an action RPG type of thing, those weapons could be more expensive in general, and more rare.

Responding to your EDIT of the post i just replied to: It could be both, I used the tourney idea because it would be easier to execute. Real combat like sieges or armies clashing on a open field would ofcourse be more fun, but would be much harder to make. (Also a system with alot of hitboxes for each invidual would be pretty taxing with a large amount of players.)

My real problem with war of the roses lies in the trailer, which shows the very same "slashing at a breastplate" and having your screen filled by the blood pouring through the plate from your enemys torso.

 

[demoman_chaos]

-snip-

Few issues lad. Mail was very hard to pierce, which is why it was used from 300 bc to even now in the form of shark protection. If mail was easy to pierce, it wouldn't have been the go to armor for centuries.
Full plate armor weighs only 60-80 lbs, with the armor on the arms and legs thinner and the entire suit designed to fit the individual. With a bit of time to get used to it, the armor all but disappears on you (I know from experience with my chainmail). The helmet is all that restricts your breathing a bit (plus your vision and hearing).

 

[el derpenburgo]

Realistic medieval combat looks really interesting but its tough to imagine how well it could be worked into a videogame. There's definitely a lot of promise in a game that would let me literally crush someone to death. Hope that doesn't sound too psycho-ey

I really hope a game comes out that does for medieval combat games what skate did for skating games. In the sense that just killing a single enemy armed like yourself is, I imagine, a pretty challenging task. I've played through too many games where you can roll through armoured knights like they were wearing wet toilet paper.

 

[A Weakgeek]

-snip-

Few issues lad. Mail was very hard to pierce, which is why it was used from 300 bc to even now in the form of shark protection. If mail was easy to pierce, it wouldn't have been the go to armor for centuries.
Full plate armor weighs only 60-80 lbs, with the armor on the arms and legs thinner and the entire suit designed to fit the individual. With a bit of time to get used to it, the armor all but disappears on you (I know from experience with my chainmail). The helmet is all that restricts your breathing a bit (plus your vision and hearing).

Umm.. Not entirely which post of mine you are referring to. Could you help me out a little bit?