am I the only one?

[WastelandAssassin]

well, to tell you the truth, i feel the same way

this is why i never play a warrior character

but then again, i don't remember seeing even one game that had a good melee system, that didn't get boring

 

Ever played Assassin's Creed?

 

actually i have

never got too far in it

and from what i have seen, the combat there was REALLY BAD

then again, it may have been better when you progress more in the game (i found it too boring to bother with it)

[majikmonkee]

The melee combat doesn't bother me, I can't get enough if it. I could be wrong, but it seems to me that if you're looking for a game meant to be the definitive first person melee game, look elsewhere. Oblivion is aimed more at being an RPG than an FPS and the combat isn't as refined as some newer games where all you do is fight.

[SandsOfTime404]

Yeah, the melee combat system is nothing to rave about but it's not like it's terrible. It serves its purpose well. If I played Oblivion for the combat, well... I'd be continually disappointed.

[WastelandAssassin]

Yeah, the melee combat system is nothing to rave about but it's not like it's terrible. It serves its purpose well. If I played Oblivion for the combat, well... I'd be continually disappointed.

 

that is true

this is why Oblivion is such a great game (at least in my opinion)

it is built of many things, some not done all too well, but the end result is so amazing, that you probably won't notice

this and mods, are the only reasons why Oblivion is still alive for me (and probably for most people)

[majikmonkee]

E

Yeah, the melee combat system is nothing to rave about but it's not like it's terrible. It serves its purpose well. If I played Oblivion for the combat, well... I'd be continually disappointed.

 

that is true

this is why Oblivion is such a great game (at least in my opinion)

it is built of many things, some not done all too well, but the end result is so amazing, that you probably won't notice

this and mods, are the only reasons why Oblivion is still alive for me (and probably for most people)

Excellent point. Oblivion may not be the best for melee, and there may be better spell casting games out there, definitely games that handle alchemy and some other aspects better. It aims, though, to give us many different options for what we can do, perhaps not as polished as a lot of other games but far from broken. And think of this - my best friend is a former MMO junkie and loves Oblivion, but she coukdn't play a hardcore action game to save her life. Having a simplified melee combat system has allowed her to fend off enemies without being a master spell caster or expert at hand to hand combat games. That's another part of Oblivion's charm - accessibility.

[SandsOfTime404]

Yeah, it's accessible without being dumbed down. It really is a charming flow. A little bit of everything, done just good enough to make it easy to learn and a little challenging to master. I like being able to be decent at it without needing major action game skills, which I have little competence in. Plus, combat being a rather small slice of the pie to begin with, it's nice being able to do other things. Constantly hacking, slashing, and raining arrows and spells down on enemies gets tedious after a while.

[WizardOfAtlantis]

I would love to see a better combat system. Nothing too advanced, but just more. And I do have ideas on how it could be done, historically speaking.

 

I am a teacher of historical European martial arts, with a background in survivalist and military martial arts of the past and present. The curriculum at my school goes from unarmed combat to dagger, sword, longsword, 2-hander, sticks, sabres, staffs and polearms plus various exotic weapons of the Medieval and Renaissance periods (like the sickle, club, etc.) with the focus on how these things worked as systems of war and how they can work today as systems of personal self-defense. I've done thousands of live, unchoreographed duels in public using accurate reproductions of historical arms and armor, I've worked on the translation of period manuscripts from historical masters, and so on and so forth.

 

And I'll tell you one thing: the Film and Gaming industries don't go past the basic hack and slash because they don't know any better. Period. Even the term hack and slash implies you don't have but the most limited idea of what is being talked about. "I get the sword, I swing the thing". This is valid for everyone, everywhere, unfortunately. I haven't seen a single movie where there is historical swordsmanship of any notable degree, unless you talk about a rapier or something more modern like that. How can we expect a game to go past what the biggest Hollywood blockbusters do? (I expect it, they could even lead the way, but I don't know if it will happen).

 

It is a sad, sad show that movies put on. Edge-on-edge parries as if swords were indestructible lightsabers, etc., etc..

 

i still think that the worst problem here is to make each weapon use it's own set of animations

 

Historically speaking, that's not even necessary for the base set of animations, aside from 1H and 2H weapon categories. All weapons, from a dagger to a two-handed sword use the same basic attack angles. That is why in the old manuals there were diagrams for these things like 8-rayed stars. Basic cutting/impacting attacks followed these lines and it didn't matter if you had a dagger or whatever. Cuts/strikes went obliquely from right to left or left to right, descending and ascending, they went horizontally from right to left or left to right, and they went straight up and straight down. Only the point of impact changed according to height, etc. An oblique cut with a messer (a kind of single-edged one-hand sword) and an oblique cut with a 2H sword at the elbow both follow the same oblique line...the animation would only have to represent the different hand positions upon the weapon. The same swing would work, however, for a dagger or a mace or whatever single-handed weapon, just like it does in Oblivion currently.

 

And there aren't these big differences that people might think between a katana and a longsword. Both are 2H swords that give you the possibility to use them with one hand, and the basic attack angles and cuts/slashes are the same. I've studied both and I know this. They ARE used in the same way...it's only when you get to *special moves* that they differ, and that is not based on culture but rather form.

 

An example. The Japanese ken sword, which is a very old design very similar to Chinese straight-bladed swords, is itself straight-bladed and double-edged, with a pommel. The way of using it has striking similarities to the European single-handed, straight-bladed with a pommel sword. Weapon form, not culture, is the overriding factor. Culture presents its own, but form is overriding.

 

That said, special moves might dictate their own animations, and that is where each weapon could be different. A simultaneous counter-attack with a messer and a longsword are very often identical (except for hand positions, as one is 1H and the other 2H)in principle and substance. However, axes give their own advantages as do flexible weapons, etc.

 

Basic strikes and simultaneous counters would be easier to implement than I think people realize, and it would be historical and take the game to as-of-yet unseen levels.

 

 

Plus, combat being a rather small slice of the pie to begin with, it's nice being able to do other things. Constantly hacking, slashing, and raining arrows and spells down on enemies gets tedious after a while.

I don't think combat is a small part of things at all. I can't go from one city to another by foot without having to kill at least a half-dozen things! I realize it's only a part of the whole, of course, but for some of us, it really is dumbed down. Very much so. That said, I'm glad there is so much more to this wonderful game than fighting.

 

 

Balance and varying opportunities are what makes TES great, in my opinion. However, I think it would take very little to advance the combat and add two or three relatively simple tiers to it. :thumbsup:

Edited December 30, 2010 by WizardOfAtlantis

[SandsOfTime404]

Depends on how you view it, I guess. I say such a small piece of the pie because there's plenty you can do without needing to kill stuff. Mysticism, Illusion, Alchemy, Armorer, Sneak, Athletics, Acrobatics, Speechcraft, Mercantile, Security, etc. Even Destruction can be done without engaging in combat. That's not to say that combat isn't woven throughout the game pretty thoroughly, because it is. It just doesn't have the game in a chokehold, which is something I'm fond of. Yeah, it could be improved, but it's not bad how it is. :P

[Daledge]

Ya, but thats why the melee isn't the best, they have to concentrate on other combat styles like marksman and magic, in Assassins Creed however, they only concentrate on melee and freerunning, thats why the combats better.

[SandsOfTime404]

Yes, but while the melee system is good it lacks in a lot of other aspects. Either way, both games are good. It's hard to compare them, too, since they have dissimilar focuses.