Mordhau

Mordhau Lacks Emergent Gameplay

Baron 1551 2074
  • 15 May '18
 yourcrippledson

@roshawnmarcellterrell said:

@yourcrippledson said:

@roshawnmarcellterrell said:
Maybe that's a solution to all these problems? Implement a turn cap? We still get the freedom of movement and control we like in Chivalry, but it makes it more difficult to do spins and back swings. I can't instantly turn my back to my opponent anymore.

I admire your outside-the-box thinking here. But I think limiting player control is the worst method of game balance.

Like the way shields used to work, limiting turn cap, all kinds of lockouts, It made the game feel dreadful.

Thank you, for the compliment. :)

I'm not sure if it's limiting player control per se, more so just limiting speed of that control. You still technically have the full freedom movement, you just can't move around as quickly.

I personally always felt that being able to turn your turn cap up really high, and spin in place literally 100+ times in a second was kinda ridiculous. I mean it's not realistic at all. And apparently realism is what people always argue for here. One of the main motto's of Mordhau was that they 'Want fights to look like fights' yet turning instantly and twitching your body instantly doesn't look natural at all.

I kinda think if many of you pc players actually played Chivalry on console, you may have preferred it. The only reason I moved to pc was due to the low skill of most of the players on that platform. I just got bored. The few times I did come across someone better than me though, it was always exciting.

It is a barrier preventing me from feeling like my skull is actually the one looking around in game. If I can't look left and right at the same pace I can in IRL, that is a barrier to immersion. I have posted a comment in the past contrasting realistic animations and movements with the ability to freely react in real time.

And here it is

Realism in one way must be traded for realism in another way in games.
Realism of animations vs realism of instinct.
If you (your character) are performing animations 100% true to real life, you are sacraficing player control.
You are not testing the skill set that you would be if you were really sword fighting. Ie the moves and actions a real sword fighter would use in a given situation. But the skills these skills are based on are tested: Reaction speed/reflexes, judging timing and distance, pattern recognition, reading enemy/situation, keeping calm, planning ahead. Tested better in mordhau mechanics than they would be with cumbersome “realistic” ones. The kind if realistic i like is being able to make new decisions at any time, not just between animations...

While I have a hard-on for realism, sometimes, trade-offs must be made...

1909 961

@yourcrippledson said:

@roshawnmarcellterrell said:

@yourcrippledson said:

@roshawnmarcellterrell said:
Maybe that's a solution to all these problems? Implement a turn cap? We still get the freedom of movement and control we like in Chivalry, but it makes it more difficult to do spins and back swings. I can't instantly turn my back to my opponent anymore.

I admire your outside-the-box thinking here. But I think limiting player control is the worst method of game balance.

Like the way shields used to work, limiting turn cap, all kinds of lockouts, It made the game feel dreadful.

Thank you, for the compliment. :)

I'm not sure if it's limiting player control per se, more so just limiting speed of that control. You still technically have the full freedom movement, you just can't move around as quickly.

I personally always felt that being able to turn your turn cap up really high, and spin in place literally 100+ times in a second was kinda ridiculous. I mean it's not realistic at all. And apparently realism is what people always argue for here. One of the main motto's of Mordhau was that they 'Want fights to look like fights' yet turning instantly and twitching your body instantly doesn't look natural at all.

I kinda think if many of you pc players actually played Chivalry on console, you may have preferred it. The only reason I moved to pc was due to the low skill of most of the players on that platform. I just got bored. The few times I did come across someone better than me though, it was always exciting.

It is a barrier preventing me from feeling like my skull is actually the one looking around in game. If I can't look left and right at the same pace I can in IRL, that is a barrier to immersion. I have posted a comment in the past contrasting realistic animations and movements with the ability to freely react in real time.

And here it is

Realism in one way must be traded for realism in another way in games.
Realism of animations vs realism of instinct.
If you (your character) are performing animations 100% true to real life, you are sacraficing player control.
You are not testing the skill set that you would be if you were really sword fighting. Ie the moves and actions a real sword fighter would use in a given situation. But the skills these skills are based on are tested: Reaction speed/reflexes, judging timing and distance, pattern recognition, reading enemy/situation, keeping calm, planning ahead. Tested better in mordhau mechanics than they would be with cumbersome “realistic” ones. The kind if realistic i like is being able to make new decisions at any time, not just between animations...

While I have a hard-on for realism, sometimes, trade-offs must be made...

I do agree, being able to move my head as fast as I do in real life, does feel nice.

I just know I'm definitely not capable of turning my entire body literally instantly in any direction.

Baron 1551 2074
  • 15 May '18
 yourcrippledson

@roshawnmarcellterrell said:
I do agree, being able to move my head as fast as I do in real life, does feel nice.

I just know I'm definitely not capable of turning my entire body literally instantly in any direction.

Ya, but how long does it take you? Probably about as long as latency.

1909 961

@yourcrippledson said:

@roshawnmarcellterrell said:
I do agree, being able to move my head as fast as I do in real life, does feel nice.

I just know I'm definitely not capable of turning my entire body literally instantly in any direction.

Ya, but how long does it take you? Probably about as long as latency.

I can do a single turn fairly quickly. But it's significantly harder to do it multiple times in a row.

I guess it's a difference between a game feeling better, versus a games mechanics functioning better.

Edit: Why not just have the devs make multiple test servers? Each one testing different mechanics? It would allow the devs to just 'shoot the shit' and try something new. And you could tell what people like just by looking at the player count. Something like this could allow for far more experimentation and as such, potential for innovation.

Most of the servers aren't even being used. As I pointed out before, literally only two servers have any players in them right now at this moment.

80 201
  • 15 May '18
 Seseau

I maintain what I said: you won't find "emergent gameplay" in the game's current state, simply because we only have duel servers. The parameters are way limited.

And it should stay that way. At the end of the day, combat should be relatively simple, but most of all clean. It needs to be clean, that's all. No missing frames in animations. No unreadable accels. Just dudes stomping on each other where you can read it.

The real emergent gameplay will come from maps, if they design them well. People keep insisting that Chiv-like drags and reverses are emergent gameplay: they are not. They are unintended mechanics which were never fixed. The example of Fortnite is good, and how building became so involved in fighting when it likely wasn't planned. But you'll notice building isn't part of the combat. In fact, it's absolutely not combat. It just happened to turn into a mechanic that then became involved in combat, but you don't deal damage with your buildings. You can't interact directly with your opponent. You can either protect yourself or use building to gain a positional advantage.

THAT is what good emergent gameplay is, in the large majority of cases. Not a direct combat mechanic, but a different mechanic which alters how combat is played in an innovative way. For Mordhau, and I'm spitballing here, but think about something like this: the devs add further destructibility to the game. You can now chip away at wooden gates, posts, etc more realistically. Turns out this also affects trees, and you can now chop trees if you go hard enough at it. Can you imagine the repercussions on a TO game? You can cut trees to have them land on your opponents, instantly killing them. You can cut a tree to have it fall over a river, bypassing the only bridge and giving you an important access point. You can cut off a flank. I could go on.

Obviously that particular example won't happen, but to me that is emergent gameplay. Not "different and funky-looking ways to swipe at your enemy". And let's be real here, killing a guy by chopping a tree on his face is universally fun. Dying to someone slowing down their weapon to a crawl mid-air is not. And again, the large majority of players will buy Mordhau for that reason: medieval shits and giggles.

As a side note, I also can't help but raise an eyebrow when I read people who talk about professional players and pro-play in a game such as this, and go even further by comparing scenes with Fortnite, Dota, etc. Baffles me.

36 70
  • 15 May '18
 Elder

Chivalry had more liberating movement and a more arcadey feel. Mordhau feels like a constant crabwalk.

Knight 154 452
  • 7
  • 15 May '18
 Nautilus

@Seseau said:

The real emergent gameplay will come from maps, if they design them well. People keep insisting that Chiv-like drags and reverses are emergent gameplay: they are not. They are unintended mechanics which were never fixed. The example of Fortnite is good, and how building became so involved in fighting when it likely wasn't planned. But you'll notice building isn't part of the combat. In fact, it's absolutely not combat. It just happened to turn into a mechanic that then became involved in combat, but you don't deal damage with your buildings. You can't interact directly with your opponent. You can either protect yourself or use building to gain a positional advantage.

This is spot on. I've been playing a lot of fortnite, and there is absolutely nothing special about the combat; it's pretty standard arcade shooter fare, you point and shoot. Yet the game leads to so many interesting and emergent plays because the game focuses on all other aspects aside from combat. Most of the time, players aren't even fighting. In fact, you can get away with very little combat. For example, I was in a 50 vs 50 and there were 6 guys on my team left, and only one on the other. You know who won? The enemy. He hid in the storm and spent the entire game gathering campfires, medkits, and bandages. He didn't have to kill a single one of us because when the storm closed on all of us, he was more prepared to heal.

THAT is what good emergent gameplay is, in the large majority of cases. Not a direct combat mechanic, but a different mechanic which alters how combat is played in an innovative way. For Mordhau, and I'm spitballing here, but think about something like this: the devs add further destructibility to the game. You can now chip away at wooden gates, posts, etc more realistically. Turns out this also affects trees, and you can now chop trees if you go hard enough at it. Can you imagine the repercussions on a TO game? You can cut trees to have them land on your opponents, instantly killing them. You can cut a tree to have it fall over a river, bypassing the only bridge and giving you an important access point. You can cut off a flank. I could go on.

"MORDHAU: Competitive Multiplayer Tree Felling Game"

Obviously that particular example won't happen, but to me that is emergent gameplay. Not "different and funky-looking ways to swipe at your enemy". And let's be real here, killing a guy by chopping a tree on his face is universally fun. Dying to someone slowing down their weapon to a crawl mid-air is not. And again, the large majority of players will buy Mordhau for that reason: medieval shits and giggles.

As a side note, I also can't help but raise an eyebrow when I read people who talk about professional players and pro-play in a game such as this, and go even further by comparing scenes with Fortnite, Dota, etc. Baffles me.

Most people just want to have fun, most of them won't care how polished or intricate the combat is. I know chopping trees to kill might not be possible, but things like that are needed; I believe the biggest threat to Mordhau's success is focusing so much on combat. Whenever people see me watch or play Mordhau, they always ask: "Is that Chivalry?" Mordhau will not exceed Chivalry's sales ( 1 million copies in the first 8 months) just on combat merit alone. Chivalry missed out on a huge opportunity by leaving maps and game modes to be made by the community, as most end up being bad with some exceptions, and I feel like the devs of Mordhau will do the same as so many game mode suggestions are relegated to the "would make a good mod" list.

But who knows what will happen? Maybe frontline is really that good and if it is, then it could be enough to make this game a success. The best thing we can do is wait.

Baron 1551 2074
  • 15 May '18
 yourcrippledson

@Seseau said:
let's be real here, killing a guy by chopping a tree on his face is universally fun.

I agree, the maps themselves should be more interesting than Chivalries, which had very fun maps compared to most games.

Duke 5451 12800
  • 15 May '18
 Jax — Community Manager

I mean the map interaction will be great, Grad TDM is just a tiny taste of what's to come. There's going to be a bunch of meme things, and a ton of interesting combinations of players doing stuff that will make each round enjoyable.

Knight 685 1846
  • 16 May '18
 ÐMontyleGueux

@Jax said:
I mean the map interaction will be great, Grad TDM is just a tiny taste of what's to come. There's going to be a bunch of meme things, and a ton of interesting combinations of players doing stuff that will make each round enjoyable.

That's what I was told. Frontline is supposed to be much more interesting than chivalry's TO mode. It's not cool teasing us with that few information, we can't wait !

Knight 712 3041
  • 17 May '18
 Mittsies

I swear controlling that stupid gate on grad TDM is the most fun I've ever had in a medieval video game

392 450
  • 18 May '18
 JasonBourne

@Zexis said:
I'm hoping frontline will make the game more fun. To do so however, it will need to be more than Battlefield with swords. What I liked about Chivalry TO was the variety of objectives: hold a moving point (cart/ram), destroy X (with swords, map tools like ballistas, or torches), hold a static point, destroy multiple X (free the slaves), etc.

yea me too, besides burning libraries.

Baron 1551 2074
  • 1
  • 18 May '18
 yourcrippledson

@JasonBourne said:

@Zexis said:
I'm hoping frontline will make the game more fun. To do so however, it will need to be more than Battlefield with swords. What I liked about Chivalry TO was the variety of objectives: hold a moving point (cart/ram), destroy X (with swords, map tools like ballistas, or torches), hold a static point, destroy multiple X (free the slaves), etc.

yea me too, besides burning libraries.

Burning the libraries xD Just send wave after wave of men into the meat grinder.