| |
Site Navigation
Main
News
Forums
Games
Games Database
Top 100
Release List
Support Files
Features
Reviews
Previews
Interviews
Editorials
Diaries
Misc
Download
Gallery
Music
Screenshots
Videos
Miscellaneous
Staff Members
Privacy Statement
|
|
|
|
Carpathian Bob
Village Dweller
Joined: 03 Jan 2002
Posts: 18
|
If you had a shield then you wouldn't have the hand free for waving around in a daring swashbuckler type way. I know this to be the reason cause everytime I go into combat I drop the torch I am carrying just to keep the left hand free, which is odd considering that the screen I end up looking at the most has a picture of me the 'hero' smacking an Orc with a big sword in one hand and a torch held in the other. |
Sat Jun 28, 2003 1:18 pm |
|
|
Maylander
High Emperor
Joined: 22 Mar 2002
Posts: 1712
Location: Norway |
Balance? There is no balance-problem in G2.. the two-hander is more than fast enough once you reach master, and the extra "range" of the blade makes it better than one-handers when fighting several foes(orcs for instance).
Shields would complicate a lot of things.. you have to remember that the main character in this game can actually DO things, and the "strap-on" shields that you see in many games are fake(real shields had one strap-on, and were held with the left arm). Therefore our great hero would be unable to open gates, wield a crossbow + 1handed weapon(he would be forced to remove the ranged weapon from his back due to the fact that he would hold a shield in his left hand whenever he had a 1H weapon equipped).
I could go on and on about things he wouldn't have been able to do, but I think you get the point.. he would'nt have been able to do any 2H-things because he was holding a shield(for the last time, strap-on shields are fake, remember that). |
|
Sat Jun 28, 2003 6:01 pm |
|
|
Hagen
Counselor of the King
Joined: 18 Jun 2003
Posts: 350
Location: England |
Shields would be a fantastic addition to gothics combat system, tbh, its the only thing missing from it!
_________________
"There are many questions which fools can ask that wise men cannot answer."
--George Polya (1887-1985) |
|
Sat Jun 28, 2003 6:08 pm |
|
|
Maylander
High Emperor
Joined: 22 Mar 2002
Posts: 1712
Location: Norway |
Read what I just wrote.. it would either reduce Gothic to any other RPG where the main character only fights, or a new system where the main character puts down his shield every time he needs to something, would have to be developed. Such a system would take a lot of resources and time to create(to make it work in the Gothic world).
Edit: Regarding the torch-picture - if you take a look at the armour, you'll soon find out that this is a picture from Gothic 1, not 2.
Why, I have no idea, but there is also a picture in Gothic 1(the one where our hero is about to pull out his sword against some snappers), where you can find the Holy Executioner(Paladin 2H sword).. this design on a sword is only used in G2, and not in G1 where the picture is. |
|
Sat Jun 28, 2003 6:13 pm |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor
Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
quote:
Originally posted by Maylander
Balance? There is no balance-problem in G2.. the two-hander is more than fast enough once you reach master, and the extra "range" of the blade makes it better than one-handers when fighting several foes(orcs for instance).
Shields would complicate a lot of things.. you have to remember that the main character in this game can actually DO things, and the "strap-on" shields that you see in many games are fake(real shields had one strap-on, and were held with the left arm). Therefore our great hero would be unable to open gates, wield a crossbow + 1handed weapon(he would be forced to remove the ranged weapon from his back due to the fact that he would hold a shield in his left hand whenever he had a 1H weapon equipped).
I could go on and on about things he wouldn't have been able to do, but I think you get the point.. he would'nt have been able to do any 2H-things because he was holding a shield(for the last time, strap-on shields are fake, remember that).
Errr...
Are you saying that you can dual wield a crossbow and a 1hander in Gothic?
Crossbow strapped on back, wielding shield and weapon at the same time... am I the only one who don't think this sounds too hard to do?
When NOT HAVING the shield equipped, it would rest on his back with the eventual crossbow/bow. You do know that you can carry a shield on your back, right? RIGHT???
Besides, what two handed things are we talking about here? Yes, of COURSE you have to use both hands to open a chest. Maybe if there were ladders in Gothic 2 (why remove ladders? wierdest thing I've seen)...
Holding notes?
_________________
Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
|
Sat Jun 28, 2003 6:58 pm |
|
|
Maylander
High Emperor
Joined: 22 Mar 2002
Posts: 1712
Location: Norway |
That's exactly the problem.. he wouldn't be able to open chests, or do any of the things the NPCs' do(it makes the world feel "alive" that you can dig in the mines, be a smith, and so on).
Yes, I know that you can wear a shield on the back, but to do that, he would have to put down the shield, take the crossbow, put the shield on his back, and THEN fire at the orcs coming your way in 90 miles per hour.. the whole sequens would take A LOT more time than simply putting away your sword and get the crossbow.. so much more time in fact, that running/shooting would be impossible. In real life, a soldier using ranged weapons NEVER used shields.. all bowmen/crossbowmen wielded swords/ranged weapons, but never shields.. the whole idea is simply dumb. |
|
Sat Jun 28, 2003 7:40 pm |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor
Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
He could have his shield on his back when he did the two handed stuff.
You want the world to feel alive, yet don't want people to use shields etc. one of the most basic things for a warrior to have.
Furthermore, what kind of marksman attacks first, then starts fumbling for his bow? You change at a safe distance.
If you really want, see it as one of the penalties for wearing a shield (which gives extra armor) with your one handed weapon, and your bow.
IT MAKES THE WHOLE THING MORE REALISTIC!
_________________
Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
|
Sat Jun 28, 2003 8:04 pm |
|
|
Maylander
High Emperor
Joined: 22 Mar 2002
Posts: 1712
Location: Norway |
You have played too many games my friend.. you mean "Gothic would feel a lot more like other games", not like reality. In real life, only cannon fodder troops used shields. Shields were originally invented to block ranged attacks, and later used in close combat as well.
True swordmasters either used one-handed swords for speed, or two-handed swords for force. Shields are slow, and require a special technique of "block-swing" instead of actual swordfighting.
Note: You have to stop thinking about England when people refer to "medieval times". France, for instance, was the first country to ever have real knights/chivalry.
Also, in Gothic, only the Paladins could use shields(ever heard of a cut-throat or a mage using a shield?), so how to prevent the others from simply buying a shield? Making it a special skill to the Paladin class is the only solution, but spending a lot of time and resources just to have one more skill with the Paladin is simply a great waste. |
|
Sat Jun 28, 2003 8:35 pm |
|
|
Ragnar
High Emperor
Joined: 30 Oct 2001
Posts: 486
Location: NJ USA |
Being a product of a West Pointer, my whole life has been more or less military. In real life, most warriors had their weapons & shields packed on their horses and the ones that did not were foot soldiers (Archers, Pikemen, Swordsmen ect.) specializing in one form of battle. Archers packed their bows and quivers full of arrows (fire arrows were bulky and packed either on horses or carts with the oil). Swordsmen were of two classes, singled handed carrying a single handed sword & shield and (evolving much later in the west) two handed who most likely carried a long broad sword. They did not use a shield relying instead on strength, speed and mastery of technique. Pikemen carried a long stick with a blade at the end (called a Pike) and were used against cavalry and infantry.
Since our hero can be a multi-talented warrior, he would have to make decisions on armor, weapons and shielding and I think (imho) these decisions should be what mold the game. Sure it would take more work but it could be one evolution of the game.
_________________
"That one hurt..."
Sylvio
Last edited by Ragnar on Sat Jun 28, 2003 10:07 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Sat Jun 28, 2003 8:50 pm |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor
Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
Hmmm, I'm a bit perplexed here... did people use or not use shields? Why did KNIGHTS carry shields? Why did gladiators fight with shields?
Any way, IF the hero was to use a shield and if you want it real, then why not just make a new skill and put in A TRAINER in the game?
Why wouldn't a mage or a cut-throat wear a shield? Well, the shield would be too heavy to carry around, BUT WE WON'T HAVE to worry about that in Gothic, now do we? If a mage or a cut-throat wanted a shield, then why shouldn't they be able to have it? IF THEY FOUND A TRAINER?
Ever heard of bucklers?
_________________
Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
|
Sat Jun 28, 2003 9:44 pm |
|
|
Dez
King of the Realms
Joined: 08 Jan 2003
Posts: 455
Location: Fortress of Tell Halaf |
are you joking right?
Why NOT to include shields?think about when someone aims you with a bow i would love to have a strong shield with me.there just isn't anyother way besides dodging to counter arrows&bolts..
in my system 2 handed weapons work like now, but with 1-handed weapons you could have a choise..Lets say that if you equip a shielf it would slow down your movements a bit,but you could block arrows/bolts as well normal weapons!To balance this your 1 handed skill should be something like 50% to allow using a shield at the same time..with out shielf you would block same as now, but with shield you would block with it and thus allowing you a chance to strike parrying attack faster, because you would not need to use your sword for defending.Then ofcourse 2 handed weapons allow heavier attacks and they do more damage..Perhaps using a shield should regure somenumber of dex as well as most weapons require strenght? what do you think?like better shielf, more dex it would require.And the best shielf would be able to block some of the magic bolts as well.but those kind of shield would be hard to find..lets say you would got that kind of shield only at the last chapter or something.
An other great addition would be throwing knives and other long range weapons similar to those...as well as different arrows&bolt.
I know lots of ideas, but i have put lots of thought onto this.
_________________
The focused mind can pierce through stone |
|
Sat Jun 28, 2003 10:22 pm |
|
|
Ragnar
High Emperor
Joined: 30 Oct 2001
Posts: 486
Location: NJ USA |
Sure warriors used shield, but it largely depended on what type of warrior you were. Did you belong to an army or were you a Merc? If you were conscripted to an army you were given a role to play in that army…just as today. Men with a good eye and a steady hand became Archers and did not carry shields relying on others for protection. All Knights (elite Swordsmen) used shields in battle and it served a dual purpose. The main purpose, obviously, was protection but the other purpose was for identification.
I like the idea of being able to use a shield in the game and I like the idea of having to train to use one. But I think the whole warrior thing should be revamped. In the beginning it really doesn’t matter, but as the game evolves you decision in training determines what path you take and what armor, weapons and shields you can use. I also think that if you choose to be a jack-of-all-trades, you cannot be a master of any. Let’s say you chose to be a Mage. You could master magic but would be restricted from mastering any weapons and using a shield…you could learn to handle different weapons but not master them. If you chose to be a hunter you would be allowed to master ranged weapons only and not allowed to use a shield. A soldier could master one & two handed weapons plus shields but would not be allowed to master ranged weapons or magic (or put a very high price on it) and be restricted to only a few hunting skills.
_________________
"That one hurt..."
Sylvio |
|
Sat Jun 28, 2003 11:06 pm |
|
|
Shmaugus
High Emperor
Joined: 20 May 2003
Posts: 493
|
hexy i was thinking the same thing, who's the idiot that says strap-on shields dont exist, thats what bucklers we're for so you could have both hands free but still have the benefits of a shield |
|
Sun Jun 29, 2003 2:50 am |
|
|
Maylander
High Emperor
Joined: 22 Mar 2002
Posts: 1712
Location: Norway |
Like I said, the strap-on shields are fake.. if not, than you could just strap on one shield on each arm, and still use a two-handed sword.. why restrict shields to 1H weapons when you can just strap it on and still have both arms free? If, however, you mean to say that you want bucklers in the game(not shields), it makes the whole situation weird. Having both would require two different fighting styles, and a LOT more work for PB.
Why mercs and mages shouldn't wear shields? Because your only argument is to make the game more REALISTIC. Mages and cut-throats don't use shields.. they're not soldiers.
Regarding the gladiators.. they fought with everything. Maces, pikes, two-handed swords, axes and so on. Some of them even dual-wielded. If you are to put everything a gladiator used in to a game it would take 20 years to make the game because of all the different ways of fighting.
Also, the whole consept behind Gothic is that the RPG part is supposed to be as free as possible.. you're supposed to be able to be a swordmaster and a mage, but it's very difficult. The whole idea is that the class shouldn't determine how you play, but instead limit each path a bit.
If you put in class-limitations, shields, horses, make it an online game and so on, you'd end up with one of the 10.000 games out there already. Go buy Morrowind folks, you seem to like it a lot more than Gothic.
Unless you've taken the point already, I'll write it once more:
The combat system of Gothic is simple, yet brilliant, and changing something which you think of as "small" would take several months to do. The entire balance of the combat system would have to be tested all over again, and new ways of fighting would have to be developed. The combat system is Gothic 2, is the same as in Gothic 1, and that's a good thing.. if they were to change if every time they made a game, it would either take another year to make, or the game itself would lack something different(like a good story, which most RPGs lack). In Morrowind for instance, the fighting itself is boring, and the combat system is bad compared to Gothic.
I don't want to "fix" things which aren't broken.. that's what 3DO did with the Might and Magic series, and that's what Bioware did when they created Neverwinter Nights(seriously, Baldur's Gate 2 is a lot better in most ways). I feel PB should focus on making the voice acting a bit better, and let the rest remain the same for now.. |
|
Sun Jun 29, 2003 9:42 am |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor
Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
Errr... why wouldn't a mage want the extra protection a shield offers? Or a cut-throat? Because we all know that mages exist in reality, right? Because a thief can't use a shield simply because he is a thief?
Why would shield instantly be a class limitation? If you find a trainer, you can use the shield. It's just the same as for a mage to use a two hander as using a shield. It also add to realism. You want to be able to use a shield since it gives you extra protection.
Are bucklers fake? Funny, I seem to recall to have seen quite a few in reality. Bucklers are small and don't offer as good as protection as big shields. Why don't you see people running around with tower shields strapped on their arms? BECAUSE it would be TOO HEAVY, but SINCE Gothic is such an unrealistic game, you WOULDN'T have too worry about that. Then, of course, the devs simply will have to design the game so you can only wear small bucklers on your arms, or use A towershield with one of your arms.
The combat system is ANYTHING BUT simple and brilliant. It requires the use of constant key combos, that you get stuck in a circle running while having an enemy targeted. It gives you unnecesary features like attacking from the sides or whatever. Then, at times, the main character pauses, and you can't continue your little fighting-dance. Combat in Morrowind is extremely well made, specially with the "always use best attack" feature. Unlike in Gothic, combat doesn't become a workpass and a pain. You simply strike at your foe and parry with your shield whenever possible.
Only argument? It would also introduce some complexity in the otherwise disgustingly simplistic combat system (but, oh, I forgot, you people don't want a more advanced system since it could damage the completely worthless story). You either fight with your two hander or with your one hander. It gives you several ways to go about in being a warrior.
You talk about freedom, yet refuse the use of shields, brilliant...
_________________
Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
|
Sun Jun 29, 2003 10:04 am |
|
|
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Wed Apr 10, 2019 10:43 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
