Zero Punctuation: Kingdom Come Deliverance

Aeshi

New member
Dec 22, 2009
2,640
0
0
Has Yahtzee ever really acknowledged the "PC Master Race" meme before this? I think he has, but I can't remember.
 

Neurotic Void Melody

Bound to escape
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
4,954
6
13
Duke Amiel Du H'ardcore has some ripe content for Commentocracy it would seem.

The alpha male bullshit kinda put me off this game, but it's nice to know there are more reasons to ignore it.
 

chaosd1

New member
Jul 16, 2008
27
0
0
Aeshi said:
Has Yahtzee ever really acknowledged the "PC Master Race" meme before this? I think he has, but I can't remember.
Acknowledge the meme? I'm pretty sure he's the reason it IS a meme.
 

Catasros

New member
Dec 9, 2013
27
0
0
Aeshi said:
Has Yahtzee ever really acknowledged the "PC Master Race" meme before this? I think he has, but I can't remember.
Kind of, there was one review, don't remember wich but I think the context was god-awful PC port, where it was mentioned where the master race man was, like here, overweight, glasses and bad sunburn, but as far as I know he's never acknowledged it as his creation on ZP, only in the passing a couple of times when he and Gabriel did Let's Drown Out on his youtube channel
 

Canadamus Prime

Robot in Disguise
Jun 17, 2009
14,334
0
0
Given the general attitude of the "Master Race" Dick Slurp All-Stars would be a much more appropriate name.
Also thank you for finally acknowledging your role in that particular atrocity.

Also I'd like to point out that realism in video games, at least in terms of mechanics, is generally NOT FUN.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
Limited save system? Christ that sounds terrible, I thought that outdated mechanic died after it's overdone use in survival horror games like Obscure, Silent Hill and Resident Evil. I was previously put off this game by the developer making some bigoted and ignorant statements(he's a bit of a GG supporter so I suppose that comes with the territory) but it's good to know I have a real legit reason to not play this game besides "the developers is kind of a dickhead"(that's why I never tried Fez, well that and I suck at puzzles games)

P.S. nice jab at the PS4's lack of backwards compatability, that's one of many things that will eventually bite Sony in the ass(along with stupidly refusing to allow crossplay with PC and Xbox on multiplatform games, being needlessly restrictive with mods, not allowing popular games like PUBG on PSN but being more then happy to allow hot garbage like Life of Black Tiger and Inner Kung Fu on there and also actively promoting them on it's own Youtube channel).
 
Mar 19, 2010
193
0
0
I really do enjoy this game despite the combat and the save system. You can mod the save system out of the game and the awful combat system is not an issue or rather has not been an issue for me because i look at my oponent and if i am attacked by some bandit in rags he will not be a problem but if i see armoured knight who is probably highly trained i perform a tactical retreat. The boss fight situation seems a bit concerning but how hard can it be really?
Dan Vavra is a bit controversial to some people but considering he is czech some of his opinions are to be expected he is probably much more sensible than people i go to work with every day you definitely would not like what they have to say about pretty much everything. Anyway all I know is Vavra once wrote a great article about why Fallout 3 is shit so when it comes to games he is all right.

I forgot to add the Archery is designed as a big FU to players. There is cross hair dot on the screen entire time but when you pull out the bow it disappears and you have to guess what you aiming at and your aim swings like you just drank bottle of hard liquor on empty stomach it is absolutely useless.
 

Darth_Payn

New member
Aug 5, 2009
2,868
0
0
Limited saves? Are you shitting me?! I thought we all agreed that was terrible 3 console generations ago!
chaosd1 said:
Aeshi said:
Has Yahtzee ever really acknowledged the "PC Master Race" meme before this? I think he has, but I can't remember.
Acknowledge the meme? I'm pretty sure he's the reason it IS a meme.
Yep, I'm positive he came up with it WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY back in the day, even before he got the current theme song. Along with "dirty console peasants".
Canadamus Prime said:
Given the general attitude of the "Master Race" Dick Slurp All-Stars would be a much more appropriate name.
Also thank you for finally acknowledging your role in that particular atrocity.

Also I'd like to point out that realism in video games, at least in terms of mechanics, is generally NOT FUN.
Yeah, FUCK realism! That's what we're trying to escape when we play video games!
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
Undomesticated Equine said:
I really do enjoy this game despite the combat and the save system. You can mod the save system out of the game and the awful combat system is not an issue or rather has not been an issue for me because i look at my oponent and if i am attacked by some bandit in rags he will not be a problem but if i see armoured knight who is probably highly trained i perform a tactical retreat. The boss fight situation seems a bit concerning but how hard can it be really?
Dan Vavra is a bit controversial to some people but considering he is czech some of his opinions are to be expected he is probably much more sensible than people i go to work with every day you definitely would not like what they have to say about pretty much everything. Anyway all I know is Vavra once wrote a great article about why Fallout 3 is shit so when it comes to games he is all right.

I forgot to add the Archery is designed as a big FU to players. There is cross hair dot on the screen entire time but when you pull out the bow it disappears and you have to guess what you aiming at and your aim swings like you just drank bottle of hard liquor on empty stomach it is absolutely useless.
Fallout 3 is awesome, now I know Vavra is full of shit and not worth listening to. Don't see anything sensible about whining about "SJWs", that's been done to death and is a great way to make people disregard every single thing you say.
 

Steve the Pocket

New member
Mar 30, 2009
1,649
0
0
Aeshi said:
Has Yahtzee ever really acknowledged the "PC Master Race" meme before this? I think he has, but I can't remember.
It was in his column. Some people had, I guess, been getting on his case about it being problematic because Nazis and all, and he pointed out that he'd meant it as more of a takedown of the "PC games are for smart people" attitude that was prevalent even way back then. He then went on to say he was totally on board with people using it sincerely now because it was pissing off the sort of people who call things "problematic".
 
Jan 27, 2011
3,741
0
0
I feakin' lost it at the "Zoot suit" bit. Seeing his head on a guy in a goofy suit with crossed arms like he's irritated at something REALLY worked at a gag. XD

Also, man...So many of those mechanics sound terrible.

I mean, first you have the limited save system. In an RPG. That's just an inconceivably bad idea on its face.

Then you have combat being so clunky as to scare people off, but not having any good counter-options like arrows or magic or whatever.

THEN, having a battle where you have to rely on a bunch of allies instead, and they're stupid...

THEN, force the player into an arena boss fight when they might not be built for that and treating it as a full blown game over if you fuck up that fight because you didn't spec for direct melee combat.

All put together into one moment? Yeah, no wonder Yatzee rage-quit. That's just an unbelievably bad game design smoothie. :(
 

ewhac

Digital Spellweaver
Legacy
Escapist +
May 12, 2020
575
0
1
San Francisco Peninsula
Country
USA
The first reference I'm aware of to the "Glorious PC Gaming Master Race" is in his review for The Witcher back in 2008: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/22-The-Witcher (seek to about 0:53 in. And yes, he has been doing this for over ten years.)

What quickly becomes obvious is that Witcher is very much a PC-exclusive game, which are typically designed to be as complex and unintuitive as possible so that those Dirty Console-Playing Peasants don't ruin it for the Glorious PC Gaming Master Race.

The first warning sign is that the manual is thick enough to beat goats to death with, and then, once you get into the game, the interface is just a few steps shy of Microsoft Access in terms of friendliness. [ ... ]
 

Zaper

New member
Feb 28, 2018
10
0
0
This really reminds me of the demon souls review as in he went into the game with the wrong mindset missing some crucial mechanics sucked and rage quit be honest did you skip the tutorial ? you are correct about the camera swinging that's why you can lock on to enemies by pressing tab you are correct about you being slow and clunky at combat that is probably becasue you ran straight ahead not realizing you are a fucking blacksmith's boy you are shit at combat if you want to git gud you need to go to captain bernard in rattay and train your ass off did you even know about things like combos and master strikes ? you need to replay this game in a diffrent mindset
 

Redlin5_v1legacy

Better Red than Dead
Aug 5, 2009
48,837
0
0
Yeah, the PC elitists never gave up the master race title you bequeathed them. Only fitting we get to tag the new Yahtzee honors onto them now as a matter of course.
 

Arnoxthe1

New member
Dec 25, 2010
3,374
0
0
Oh shit.

...

It's especially surprising too considering I heard nothing but praise for this game. The two big complaints though seem pretty fair and I'm probably not gonna get it anymore. Limited save system? Wow. And I thought we solved this melee idiocy with the classic Jedi Knight directional-keys-control-swings style. It was a really elegant solution.
 

Squilookle

New member
Nov 6, 2008
3,590
0
0
Well this vid has confirmed two things I've long suspected-

1. The melee combat is awful, because it's in 1st person. From the first dev interview that revealed a forced 1st person perspective I worried it would suck to do melee combat, and here we are. Determined to wait for a 3rd person mod now.

2. I guess Yahtzee really has never experienced Mount and Blade Warband, which has all the good bits of Deliverance and none of the pratfalls listed here. Oh and it also has a 3rd person option in addition to 1st.

 

Zaper

New member
Feb 28, 2018
10
0
0
Squilookle said:
Well this vid has confirmed two things I've long suspected-

1. The melee combat is awful, because it's in 1st person. From the first dev interview that revealed a forced 1st person perspective I worried it would suck to do melee combat, and here we are. Determined to wait for a 3rd person mod now.

nope he just thought this was skyrim so he rushed into combat not learning any special techniques and with shit stats and then was surprised when he had his ass handed to him he also apparently wasn't aware you can lock onto enemies
 

Squilookle

New member
Nov 6, 2008
3,590
0
0
Zaper said:
nope he just thought this was skyrim so he rushed into combat not learning any special techniques and with shit stats and then was surprised when he had his ass handed to him he also apparently wasn't aware you can lock onto enemies
Can you lock onto a 3rd person perspective while you're at it? Because I'm pretty sure that was the gist he was getting at.
 

Zaper

New member
Feb 28, 2018
10
0
0
Squilookle said:
Zaper said:
nope he just thought this was skyrim so he rushed into combat not learning any special techniques and with shit stats and then was surprised when he had his ass handed to him he also apparently wasn't aware you can lock onto enemies
Can you lock onto a 3rd person perspective while you're at it? Because I'm pretty sure that was the gist he was getting at.
nope he was complaining about how the camera swings around during combat a thing that is solved by the lock on system
 

RedRockRun

sneaky sneaky
Jul 23, 2009
618
0
0
Of all the things to criticize in KCD. He could have gone on about the game still needs a lot of patching, the NPC's who have American accents, the lack of variety in NPC faces, the exploitable gameplay mechanics, the dodgy horse controls, and the lack of grand pitched battles. I was waiting for that stuff. Yet he rags on the combat. I'd be keen to take his word for it too if I haven't seen so many people playing the game who don't have any issues.

I never thought I'd have to say this Yahtzee, but git gud.
 

ToastyMozart

New member
Mar 13, 2012
224
0
0
Yeah the problem is that when you try and gun for "realism" in a game it's imperative that you don't then restrict the player from taking realistic courses of action to deal with their problems: IE "that guy's a monstrous badass, lets all rush him at once and dogpile him instead of insisting on fighting him mono-a-mono like some stupid chuuni fuckwit."

Also dear god should limited saves have never been a thing. They're alright as an option for a special super-hardcore difficulty level (it certainly made a second run of TEW2 properly tense and survivally, even if only getting 7 was perhaps a tad overkill), but making it a standard part of gameplay is just insufferable.

Canadamus Prime said:
Also I'd like to point out that realism in video games, at least in terms of mechanics, is generally NOT FUN.
It can be well-applied in certain scenarios (Insurgency's "two shots to the chest and you die" damage model makes for a properly tense and engaging experience, along with fixing a lot of stupid weapon balance issues), but especially when "realism" manifests itself as taking away genre conceits that are there to compensate for things that you can't actually do in a video game does it more often than not turn the whole process into a clunky, frustrating nightmare. For example, a third person view in an action game might not be "realistic," but it's there to compensate for the sort of situational awareness a human has that a 70 degree FOV perspective that's locked to your front just can't deliver.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
Zaper said:
This really reminds me of the demon souls review as in he went into the game with the wrong mindset missing some crucial mechanics sucked and rage quit be honest did you skip the tutorial ? you are correct about the camera swinging that's why you can lock on to enemies by pressing tab you are correct about you being slow and clunky at combat that is probably becasue you ran straight ahead not realizing you are a fucking blacksmith's boy you are shit at combat if you want to git gud you need to go to captain bernard in rattay and train your ass off did you even know about things like combos and master strikes ? you need to replay this game in a diffrent mindset
nah the game sucks ass
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
RedRockRun said:
Of all the things to criticize in KCD. He could have gone on about the game still needs a lot of patching, the NPC's who have American accents, the lack of variety in NPC faces, the exploitable gameplay mechanics, the dodgy horse controls, and the lack of grand pitched battles. I was waiting for that stuff. Yet he rags on the combat. I'd be keen to take his word for it too if I haven't seen so many people playing the game who don't have any issues.

I never thought I'd have to say this Yahtzee, but git gud.
He is "gud", plenty of other people complained about the bullshit "realism" aspects of the game.
 

Blazing Hero

New member
Feb 20, 2015
158
0
0
darkrage6 said:
RedRockRun said:
Of all the things to criticize in KCD. He could have gone on about the game still needs a lot of patching, the NPC's who have American accents, the lack of variety in NPC faces, the exploitable gameplay mechanics, the dodgy horse controls, and the lack of grand pitched battles. I was waiting for that stuff. Yet he rags on the combat. I'd be keen to take his word for it too if I haven't seen so many people playing the game who don't have any issues.

I never thought I'd have to say this Yahtzee, but git gud.
He is "gud", plenty of other people complained about the bullshit "realism" aspects of the game.
Sad to say but the only people I see complaining about the "realism" don't exactly seem like the types who would appreciate history anyway. Also, Yahtzee has admitted to being shit at certain games before. If he was having trouble with the combat then he did need to "git gud" because it becomes quite easy and satisfying once you level up and learn it. The point Yahtzee seemed to miss is that the mechanics of the combat in the beginning of the game are intentionally bad because Henry is someone who doesn't know how to fight.
 

RedRockRun

sneaky sneaky
Jul 23, 2009
618
0
0
darkrage6 said:
He is "gud", plenty of other people complained about the bullshit "realism" aspects of the game.
I never said anything about realism. He says the combat is *FUCKING TERRIBLE* yet I've seen and talked to enough people who say it's not that hard. Yahtzee's the first person I've heard who has had a problem with its technical aspects. Of course this isn't the first time Yahtzee has mistaken his opinions for objective fact, and I doubt it will be the last.

Take his Witcher review: the one in which, "Glorious PC Gaming Master Race," was born where he criticized the game for being overly complicated, citing for one its menu system. When I played Witcher I didn't have a single issue and likewise never heard anyone else complain about it being too complicated nor knock the menus. In reality, there is more complexity (both in terms of menus and gameplay) to TES IV: Oblivion which is regarded by many to be drastically dumbed down from Morrowind.

A large part of me doesn't think he actually had issues with KCD's combat but instead just didn't like it. Only, "I didn't like it," doesn't sound as hard-hitting and edgy as, "The combat is *FUCKING TERRIBLE*." Furthermore, I don't think he really believed Witcher to be complicated yet needed an extra gag to pad his argument.

All this being said, I think anyone would be doing himself a disservice to base his decision to buy a game on a Yahtzee review. This is akin to how people shouldn't watch The Daily Show for news. It's entertainment with bits of truth sprinkled about. Somehow, the fact that it makes you laugh gives the impression of veracity.
 

Arnoxthe1

New member
Dec 25, 2010
3,374
0
0
RedRockRun said:
All this being said, I think anyone would be doing himself a disservice to base his decision to buy a game on a Yahtzee review. This is akin to how people shouldn't watch The Daily Show for news. It's entertainment with bits of truth sprinkled about. Somehow, the fact that it makes you laugh gives the impression of veracity.
Well, the limited saves alone are still a large deal-breaker for me.
 

Jacked Assassin

Nothing On TV
Jun 4, 2010
732
0
0
An Elder Scrolls game without proper Khajiits & Argonians isn't worth buying.

But realism, difficulty, & limited saves are awesome!

1 - Allow me to introduce you to reality! It is free!
2 - I guess I can see how not having a cross hair for range weapons can be difficult. Not sure why you would then want an even weirder version for swinging swords.
3 - Well.... I am kind of nostalgic for the ink ribbons back before Resident Evil 4 ruined everything that made Resident Evil 2 awesome.
 

Jacked Assassin

Nothing On TV
Jun 4, 2010
732
0
0
Noyemi-K said:
Nostalgia for the garbage that was RE2's gameplay is a sign of brain damage.
That was probably meant to be an insult but

1 - Both of my parents are mentally ill.
2 - I had a giant crack in my skull from when I fell out a window back around 1990 because I was trying to pet pigeons like Bert from Sesame Street.

Also calling RE2 garbage doesn't stop RE4 from becoming the generic standard.
 

Callate

New member
Dec 5, 2008
5,118
0
0
Using a sword on a basic level is pretty damn intuitive. A system that makes it as difficult as Yahtzee is describing isn't actually "realistic", it's just... Eugh. Score one more point for the twits who want to make it as difficult as possible to enjoy a game for anyone who doesn't have as much time to waste as they do. Congratulations. In years to come, your skill with badly engineered melee systems will be the stuff of legend, and everyone else will have naught to show for their labors but careers and significant others and children and real-world skills and creative works and stuff.
 

Zaper

New member
Feb 28, 2018
10
0
0
Callate said:
Using a sword on a basic level is pretty damn intuitive. A system that makes it as difficult as Yahtzee is describing isn't actually "realistic", it's just... Eugh. Score one more point for the twits who want to make it as difficult as possible to enjoy a game for anyone who doesn't have as much time to waste as they do. Congratulations. In years to come, your skill with badly engineered melee systems will be the stuff of legend, and everyone else will have naught to show for their labors but careers and significant others and children and real-world skills and creative works and stuff.
you literally just need to put in a hour or two training this isn't eve online
 

Aiddon_v1legacy

New member
Nov 19, 2009
3,672
0
0
Dick Slurp All-Stars is now the official term that will be used. Appropriate really because those calling themselves "Master Race" always inevitably turn out to be the worst parts of whatever group they claim to represent. Seriously, it made sense in RE to have the limited save system because it added to the tension of the game and even then ink ribbons were actually pretty generous if you diligently searched. But that was also twenty years ago and we've moved beyond that because there are better ways to raise tension.
 

C117

New member
Aug 14, 2009
1,331
0
0
Zaper said:
you literally just need to put in a hour or two training this isn't eve online
Could you clarify that, please? When you say 1-2 hours, do you mean you need to go to someone in-game and train for 1-2 hours, or do you mean that it takes 1-2 hours getting used to the controls (I haven't played the game myself so I have no idea)? Because both are a bit fiddly, but the first one is far more understandable.
 

Ectoplasmic Alcohol

New member
Mar 1, 2018
2
0
0
What a trite review.

I could forgive the shallow understanding of game mechanics if you gave a shit about the plot, but it appears you don't. At multiple points you suggest that major events happen "because reasons". Well, yeah. Talking to NPCs about the intricacies of the plot is optional, and I think we see what you chose. Which is frustrating because you seem to place importance these plot points and the details are interesting and worth investigating.

Your complaints about the combat are also frustrating. You provide some ambiguous anecdotes but fail to reference the overwhelming majority of the combat system. What did you think of the perfect parry and masterstrike system? How is it that a series of back and fourth perfect parries looks amazing and feels visceral, but somehow isn't worth mentioning? What do you think of the different weapon types and how they interact with different types of armor? What did you think of the location-based damage effects and the weapon combos that target specific armor weaknesses? What of mounted combat, the surrender system, clinching, fight-club, and the myriad of combat-altering potion effects?

"limited save"? We're REALLY going to call it simply "limited". Did you not take note that you learn how to make the save item in the intro to the game from shit that's just growing everywhere? Even so, if you can't be bothered to harvest the ingredients or even buy the ingredients, the save item itself is sold in those "pawn shops" for a trivial amount of currency. I'm at a loss on what to think your inability to notice the game auto-saves whenever you make significant progress in a main or side quest. What's even more shocking is that you didn't notice it auto-saves when you SLEEP. Ultimately, the limited saves comes down to how much of your carry limit do you want to dedicate to saves. The answer is a minimal amount, leaving spares on your horse and hording the remaining in your personal storage chest.

Had to retry that siege six times, eh? Well, considering the pattern you've shown up until now, I'd bet money that you didn't pay any attention to the previous quest or the strategizing that determined the flow of the battle that is decided by your measure of success in the previous quest. You didn't understand why Henry didn't command his lord's men to disengage from the battle and chase runt? Henry does have a moment of hesitation, but the performance by Tom McKay as Henry in this scene should tell you everything you need to know. Henry is not cold, calculating and scheming (as you would have him), he's overcome with complex emotions that are the result of the plot up until this point.

Nice of you not to mention the controversy surrounding the game too. It seems a number of critics have ideologies that prevent them from being even remotely objective about the game. Something to do with the problematic portrayal of women in-game? Oh hey! You made an offhand joke along those lines. I'm sure it's just a coincidence though.
 

Zaper

New member
Feb 28, 2018
10
0
0
C117 said:
Zaper said:
you literally just need to put in a hour or two training this isn't eve online
Could you clarify that, please? When you say 1-2 hours, do you mean you need to go to someone in-game and train for 1-2 hours, or do you mean that it takes 1-2 hours getting used to the controls (I haven't played the game myself so I have no idea)? Because both are a bit fiddly, but the first one is far more understandable.
1. yes there is a character called captain Bernard you meet about 5 hours in (you dont need to do any substantial combat before that)

2.its not getting used to the controls as much as mastering the games finer mechanics like combos parry's and master strikes as well as leveling up your strength agility and weapon stats (this isn't skyrim this is a real rpg you need to level up your stats) the controls themselves are quite easy to get used to you will probably feel comfortable with them by the end of the first quest
 

springheeljack

Red in Tooth and Claw
May 6, 2010
645
0
0
Wow, honestly that is the first time I've actually laughed at a zero punctuation video in quite a while
I'm glad that he's still got it
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 5, 2020
6,848
581
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Dick Slurp All-Stars

Make this a meme.

Now.
 

Cantehman

New member
Jan 25, 2010
29
0
0
Ectoplasmic Alcohol said:
What a trite review.

I could forgive the shallow understanding of game mechanics if you gave a shit about the plot, but it appears you don't. At multiple points you suggest that major events happen "because reasons". Well, yeah. Talking to NPCs about the intricacies of the plot is optional, and I think we see what you chose. Which is frustrating because you seem to place importance these plot points and the details are interesting and worth investigating.
Signed up just to bash this review of a game you liked eh?

First off, you can use fancy words all you want, it doesn't change the fact the plot's amateurish at best. How about the "but muh sword" thing Yahtzee mentioned? Or how you're railroaded into losing that first fight which makes you lose the sword? For those who don't know, there's a fight in the start of the game that you're just scripted to lose. Enemy kills you in one to two hits, whereas you can hit him a hundred times and he'll not go down.

Ectoplasmic Alcohol said:
Your complaints about the combat are also frustrating. You provide some ambiguous anecdotes but fail to reference the overwhelming majority of the combat system. What did you think of the perfect parry and masterstrike system? How is it that a series of back and fourth perfect parries looks amazing and feels visceral, but somehow isn't worth mentioning? What do you think of the different weapon types and how they interact with different types of armor? What did you think of the location-based damage effects and the weapon combos that target specific armor weaknesses? What of mounted combat, the surrender system, clinching, fight-club, and the myriad of combat-altering potion effects?
Oh boy. You mean the perfect parry and masterstrike system that ultimately takes all skill out of the game? Get a perfect block and you'll have a chance of a free counterattack. That's what the combat boils down to in the late game: triggering that percentage. There's just one block button so it's just about timing. You say it feels visceral, I say it looks silly. And differing weapon types were old news years ago. That last sentence is nothing worth mentioning either tbh.

Ectoplasmic Alcohol said:
"limited save"? We're REALLY going to call it simply "limited". Did you not take note that you learn how to make the save item in the intro to the game from shit that's just growing everywhere? Even so, if you can't be bothered to harvest the ingredients or even buy the ingredients, the save item itself is sold in those "pawn shops" for a trivial amount of currency. I'm at a loss on what to think your inability to notice the game auto-saves whenever you make significant progress in a main or side quest. What's even more shocking is that you didn't notice it auto-saves when you SLEEP. Ultimately, the limited saves comes down to how much of your carry limit do you want to dedicate to saves. The answer is a minimal amount, leaving spares on your horse and hording the remaining in your personal storage chest.
Why are you even defending this? It doesn't matter how easy it is to make new save potions. You still need to put effort into a function that every other game implements with no hassle. And fyi, autosaving only on quest progress and sleeping doesn't cut it when the game is an atrocious mess of bugs.

Ectoplasmic Alcohol said:
Had to retry that siege six times, eh? Well, considering the pattern you've shown up until now, I'd bet money that you didn't pay any attention to the previous quest or the strategizing that determined the flow of the battle that is decided by your measure of success in the previous quest. You didn't understand why Henry didn't command his lord's men to disengage from the battle and chase runt? Henry does have a moment of hesitation, but the performance by Tom McKay as Henry in this scene should tell you everything you need to know. Henry is not cold, calculating and scheming (as you would have him), he's overcome with complex emotions that are the result of the plot up until this point.
The developers can't have their "player freedom" cake and eat it too with shit like this. Deus Ex didn't get away with mandatory boss fights years ago, neither will this game. And good for Tom McKay that you liked his performance. For me, Henry will never have more personality than someone who'd be credited as "Village Buffoon A" in movie credits.

Ectoplasmic Alcohol said:
Nice of you not to mention the controversy surrounding the game too. It seems a number of critics have ideologies that prevent them from being even remotely objective about the game. Something to do with the problematic portrayal of women in-game? Oh hey! You made an offhand joke along those lines. I'm sure it's just a coincidence though.
Not sure what you're on about here, but not to worry. The game doesn't need a controversy to not live up to the hype.
 

Zaper

New member
Feb 28, 2018
10
0
0
Cantehman said:
Oh boy. You mean the perfect parry and masterstrike system that ultimately takes all skill out of the game? Get a perfect block and you'll have a chance of a free counterattack. That's what the combat boils down to in the late game: triggering that percentage. There's just one block button so it's just about timing. You say it feels visceral, I say it looks silly. And differing weapon types were old news years ago. That last sentence is nothing worth mentioning either tbh.
you played ten hours and stopped didn't you ? becasue unless your fighting untrained bandits 95 precent of the time when you riposte the enemy will simply execute their own perfect block
 

Cantehman

New member
Jan 25, 2010
29
0
0
Zaper said:
Cantehman said:
Oh boy. You mean the perfect parry and masterstrike system that ultimately takes all skill out of the game? Get a perfect block and you'll have a chance of a free counterattack. That's what the combat boils down to in the late game: triggering that percentage. There's just one block button so it's just about timing. You say it feels visceral, I say it looks silly. And differing weapon types were old news years ago. That last sentence is nothing worth mentioning either tbh.
you played ten hours and stopped didn't you ? becasue unless your fighting untrained bandits 95 precent of the time when you riposte the enemy will simply execute their own perfect block
You're*

Enemies doing their own perfect blocks doesn't make the situation any better. On the contrary. Master strikes being unavoidable is just bad design.
 

Zaper

New member
Feb 28, 2018
10
0
0
Cantehman said:
Zaper said:
Cantehman said:
Oh boy. You mean the perfect parry and masterstrike system that ultimately takes all skill out of the game? Get a perfect block and you'll have a chance of a free counterattack. That's what the combat boils down to in the late game: triggering that percentage. There's just one block button so it's just about timing. You say it feels visceral, I say it looks silly. And differing weapon types were old news years ago. That last sentence is nothing worth mentioning either tbh.
you played ten hours and stopped didn't you ? becasue unless your fighting untrained bandits 95 precent of the time when you riposte the enemy will simply execute their own perfect block
You're*

Enemies doing their own perfect blocks doesn't make the situation any better. On the contrary. Master strikes being unavoidable is just bad design.
You're what ? where exactly does that word fit in my sentence ? as to the perfect block it exists because otherwise the player would be too overpowered and you can avoid them by playing defensively
 

Cantehman

New member
Jan 25, 2010
29
0
0
Zaper said:
Cantehman said:
Zaper said:
Cantehman said:
Oh boy. You mean the perfect parry and masterstrike system that ultimately takes all skill out of the game? Get a perfect block and you'll have a chance of a free counterattack. That's what the combat boils down to in the late game: triggering that percentage. There's just one block button so it's just about timing. You say it feels visceral, I say it looks silly. And differing weapon types were old news years ago. That last sentence is nothing worth mentioning either tbh.
you played ten hours and stopped didn't you ? becasue unless your fighting untrained bandits 95 precent of the time when you riposte the enemy will simply execute their own perfect block
You're*

Enemies doing their own perfect blocks doesn't make the situation any better. On the contrary. Master strikes being unavoidable is just bad design.
You're what ? where exactly does that word fit in my sentence ? as to the perfect block it exists because otherwise the player would be too overpowered and you can avoid them by playing defensively
Remind me where the fun is in just circling eachother until someone attacks so you can just masterstrike them. All this realism is fine and dandy, but don't complain when people don't like the game because fun had to take a backseat.
 

Zaper

New member
Feb 28, 2018
10
0
0
Cantehman said:
Zaper said:
Cantehman said:
Zaper said:
Cantehman said:
Oh boy. You mean the perfect parry and masterstrike system that ultimately takes all skill out of the game? Get a perfect block and you'll have a chance of a free counterattack. That's what the combat boils down to in the late game: triggering that percentage. There's just one block button so it's just about timing. You say it feels visceral, I say it looks silly. And differing weapon types were old news years ago. That last sentence is nothing worth mentioning either tbh.
you played ten hours and stopped didn't you ? becasue unless your fighting untrained bandits 95 precent of the time when you riposte the enemy will simply execute their own perfect block
You're*

Enemies doing their own perfect blocks doesn't make the situation any better. On the contrary. Master strikes being unavoidable is just bad design.
You're what ? where exactly does that word fit in my sentence ? as to the perfect block it exists because otherwise the player would be too overpowered and you can avoid them by playing defensively
Remind me where the fun is in just circling eachother until someone attacks so you can just masterstrike them. All this realism is fine and dandy, but don't complain when people don't like the game because fun had to take a backseat.
maybe that's why they made the master strike really hard to pull of and do that much damage also i don't have problem with people disliking the game because of realism i have a problem because Yahtzee complained about the mechanics even though he clearly dosn't understand them he dosn't even appear to be aware you can lock on it annoys me because a lot of people see him as a reviewer and not a comedian/critic and it saddens me that some people who might like the game will miss it out because they think the combat is terrible
 

Cantehman

New member
Jan 25, 2010
29
0
0
Zaper said:
maybe that's why they made the master strike really hard to pull of and do that much damage also i don't have problem with people disliking the game because of realism i have a problem because Yahtzee complained about the mechanics even though he clearly dosn't understand them he dosn't even appear to be aware you can lock on it annoys me because a lot of people see him as a reviewer and not a comedian/critic and it saddens me that some people who might like the game will miss it out because they think the combat is terrible
So because people don't bother to check whether Yahtzee is a critic or a reviewer, he shouldn't be critical? In my opinion, the combat is terrible indeed. Common bandits use advanced fencing techniques and the AI has clear advantages over the player. Mechanics like masterstrikes are there as a bandaid because the combat system has holes when it has to provide for early and late game. Archery's bad because no crosshairs might be realistic, but even a fully leveled Henry still can't look over the arrow to see where it'll go. Realism can only excuse so much.
 

Zaper

New member
Feb 28, 2018
10
0
0
Cantehman said:
Zaper said:
maybe that's why they made the master strike really hard to pull of and do that much damage also i don't have problem with people disliking the game because of realism i have a problem because Yahtzee complained about the mechanics even though he clearly dosn't understand them he dosn't even appear to be aware you can lock on it annoys me because a lot of people see him as a reviewer and not a comedian/critic and it saddens me that some people who might like the game will miss it out because they think the combat is terrible
So because people don't bother to check whether Yahtzee is a critic or a reviewer, he shouldn't be critical? In my opinion, the combat is terrible indeed. Common bandits use advanced fencing techniques and the AI has clear advantages over the player. Mechanics like masterstrikes are there as a bandaid because the combat system has holes when it has to provide for early and late game. Archery's bad because no crosshairs might be realistic, but even a fully leveled Henry still can't look over the arrow to see where it'll go. Realism can only excuse so much.
no it just that a lot of people take his word as gospel this is more to do with the fan base rather then him and about the combat thats your opinion and thats fine but it is a minority opinion as to the archery you can become quite decent at it you just need to learn how to align it properly
 

Ectoplasmic Alcohol

New member
Mar 1, 2018
2
0
0
"Signed up just to bash this review of a game you liked eh?"

Bash? Criticize is more like it. Should I not give my opinion? Is that not allowed?

"First off, you can use fancy words all you want, it doesn't change the fact the plot's amateurish at best"

What does MY choice words have to do with how good the plot is?

"How about the "but muh sword" thing Yahtzee mentioned?"

If you played the game enough to understand the plot, then you would know that it's not simply about a hunk of sharp metal that needs to be delivered. Is it so hard to believe that a person could form an irrational attachment to one of the few things that remain of his life with his parents, friends, and neighbors?

"Or how you're railroaded into losing that first fight which makes you lose the sword?"

Yes. A layabout who had his first and only swordfighting lesson yesterday should be able to have a chance against one of the most dangerous cut-throats in the region.

"Oh boy. You mean the perfect parry and masterstrike system that ultimately takes all skill out of the game?"

You're kidding right? Reacting within the first fractions of a moment as an enemy attack animation goes off while matching the enemy swing direction to perform a masterstrike constitutes something that takes no skill whatsoever?

"Get a perfect block and you'll have a chance of a free counterattack. That's what the combat boils down to in the late game: triggering that percentage."

What? Perfect blocks don't trigger free counterattacks. Percentage? God I hope you're not talking about masterstrikes. What do you mean that's what combat comes down to in late game? Late game combat is about feinting into combos more than it's about defense.

"There's just one block button so it's just about timing."

Timing, directionality, and momentum. Did you not even pay attention to the tutorial?

"You say it feels visceral, I say it looks silly."
Okay? Guess we'll agree to disagree.

"And differing weapon types were old news years ago."

Ah, your reading comprehension has failed you here. See where I said "and how they interact with different types of armor" That's to indicate that the point being made isn't simply "hey look there's a buncha weapons" but rather there's a reason to carry multiple types of weapons as different weapons have different effectiveness in different situations. This also means that the outcome of many fights are strongly influenced by preparation.

"That last sentence is nothing worth mentioning either tbh."

Yeah, I understand why you'd say that. They're all easily overlooked if you've already made up your mind and aren't interested.

"Why are you even defending this? It doesn't matter how easy it is..."

Oh, I see. Taking issue with the usage of the term "limited" is, to you, a full endorsement.

"The developers can't have their "player freedom" cake and eat it too with shit like this. Deus Ex didn't get away with mandatory boss fights years ago, neither will this game. And good for Tom McKay that you liked his performance."

Not even going to touch on how much of the battle is decided by player agency? Figures. Calling anything a "boss fight" in this game is hilarious and shows a pretty stark misunderstanding of the mechanics. The enemies, bosses included, have access to the same skills, mechanics, and combos that the player has.

"For me, Henry will never have more personality than someone who'd be credited as "Village Buffoon A" in movie credits."

Tom McKay as Henry did an outstanding job and the fact that you're just dismissing his work out of hand is pathetic.
 

Gethsemani_v1legacy

New member
Oct 1, 2009
2,552
0
0
Blazing Hero said:
Sad to say but the only people I see complaining about the "realism" don't exactly seem like the types who would appreciate history anyway. Also, Yahtzee has admitted to being shit at certain games before. If he was having trouble with the combat then he did need to "git gud" because it becomes quite easy and satisfying once you level up and learn it. The point Yahtzee seemed to miss is that the mechanics of the combat in the beginning of the game are intentionally bad because Henry is someone who doesn't know how to fight.
I appreciate history a whole lot, to the point that most of my recreational reading are variations on history books (though lately that's mostly been limited to scholarly discourse on WW2). The problem with the "realism" in KC:D is that it is unevenly applied and not always for obvious reasons. For example, you need to bring food with you and eat at regular intervalls, because real people need to eat obviously. This is a chore from the get go, because finding food is not hard and you only need to eat to stave off negative effects. In a similar vein, the debuff from not sleeping is more of a chore then a serious gameplay consideration. Then on the flip side, you can teleport stuff from your own inventory to your horse and back with no delay. I am absolutely grateful that I don't need to run to my horse fifty times to sell off the stuff I scavenged, but in a game that's all about realism and simulation it feels off, especially when you have to repair your clothes after every battle where you took a hit (and where your clothes get dirty just from walking beside the road).

For a game that's all about "historical accuracy" the omission of the crossbow as a weapon is baffling. As is the entire set-up, where your dad is some master smith that's friendly with nobles, yet you don't know how to read (master craftsmen invariably knew how to read, since that was one of the few ways to share trade secrets within your guild with the other masters). Guess your dad really hated the idea that his son could pick up important life skills, huh? Let's also talk about how a lot of wooden buildings in this game have the textures of sun-dried wood, which is how they look now a days but not how they would have looked in the middle ages, when they would have been oiled, tarred or painted to prevent the wood from drying out and rotting. Oh, and then there's the entire Alchemy skill, which let's you do Geralt of Rivia-type potions (nightvision, really?) in a game that's supposedly all about being realistic and not offering concessions to fantasy.

And while I sympathize with the idea that Henry is a worthless fighter initially, the way the game shows that is by making one of its' core mechanics a chore. Bethesda, for all their shortcomings, learned this lesson 1,5 decade ago after Morrowind: You don't gimp the entire system and make it a drag to use until the player character gets good, you maintain the flow of the system but make it either harder or make it clear you are restricting options for now. KC:D makes it harder but also makes it sluggish and unresponsive and has a lot of feature hidden in the first 10 hours, which means the entire system feels like shit. Now that I'm 10 hours in and Henry has some skills, I am actually starting to see the flow, but that's as much down to me learning as Henry no longer taking a minute to wind up a basic slash. Keeping the flow even if Henry is unskilled, but making the AI parry or dodge more early on would have given the same effect, but with much less player frustration. You would still feel outmatched, but you'd do so because you'd feel your opponents are better, not because the fighting mechanic feels like trying to move through jello while drunk and concussed.
 
Mar 19, 2010
193
0
0
So i just came here from watching the post ZP stream and I want to say i hate vieventar or whatever his name is. He literally just takes whatever stance yatzee took and repeats and between that he just tries to proove everybody how super smart he is. Relly the streams would be better if you just dropped him.
 

DropkickCleary

New member
Mar 1, 2018
1
0
0
I'm not going to argue with the save system problem, but PC Master Race to the rescue, we have a wonderful mod to fix that already on the Nexus.

I will, however, vehemently defend the combat. It's fantastic once you learn it. I mean, that really is the crux of this game; learning stuff. You begin as an idiot who knows nothing. If you don't work on the combat, you don't get better. It really does require time and practice. That's why I love it.

I haven't reached the bandit camp in question, but I'm disappointed to hear it's a boss fight thingy. Didn't expect that considering there don't seem to be other situations like that in the game. That said, I heard from another reviewer they were having a lot of trouble with that fight before someone provided them with a better tactical approach and then they won.
 

Cantehman

New member
Jan 25, 2010
29
0
0
Ectoplasmic Alcohol said:
Bash? Criticize is more like it. Should I not give my opinion? Is that not allowed?
Ye gods, the quoting system is not that hard to use.

Sure it's allowed. Starting it off with "trite" and the lengths to which you're defending some stuff beggars belief though.

Ectoplasmic Alcohol said:
What does MY choice words have to do with how good the plot is?
It doesn't. But more eloquence went into your championing of the game's plot then the game's plot.

Ectoplasmic Alcohol said:
If you played the game enough to understand the plot, then you would know that it's not simply about a hunk of sharp metal that needs to be delivered. Is it so hard to believe that a person could form an irrational attachment to one of the few things that remain of his life with his parents, friends, and neighbors?
Possible, but after playing the game's tutorial for 5-8 hours you'd probably want some indication that this is the case considering it's the plot line that starts off Henry's journey. Instead, you get the lord just saying "I don't care about that sword" and Henry going "but I must". No indication of anything you say at a point where such a motivation would be critical.

Ectoplasmic Alcohol said:
Yes. A layabout who had his first and only swordfighting lesson yesterday should be able to have a chance against one of the most dangerous cut-throats in the region.
Unlikely indeed. But the developers don't get to flaunt "player freedom" and then pull this stunt. If you're going to railroad, do it in a cutscene. Don't pretend like you've got freedom and then just disable it. Same for the second fight against Runt. You need to abuse game glitches just to be able to loot the body of someone you can kill. Some freedom.

Ectoplasmic Alcohol said:
You're kidding right? Reacting within the first fractions of a moment as an enemy attack animation goes off while matching the enemy swing direction to perform a masterstrike constitutes something that takes no skill whatsoever?
Plenty of people are upset with the masterstrike system. Just check Steam discussions for instance. Beating a fully plated and armed knight in your undies with a stick just by standing there and masterstriking is very possible in game. It doesn't really vibe with that whole realism thing people are lauding though.

Ectoplasmic Alcohol said:
What? Perfect blocks don't trigger free counterattacks. Percentage? God I hope you're not talking about masterstrikes. What do you mean that's what combat comes down to in late game? Late game combat is about feinting into combos more than it's about defense.
My bad, I meant masterstrikes. And percentages came from initial uncertainty as to how to trigger masterstrikes. However, it being unblockable is still utter nonsense, especially since late game enemies hardly let you do a full combo anyway. And when Mount & Blade's sytem is years old by now but can achieve things as impressive with a much more simple system, stuff like masterstrikes is just baffling.

Ectoplasmic Alcohol said:
Timing, directionality, and momentum. Did you not even pay attention to the tutorial?
Getting perfect blocks hardly requires that much dedication. Or just go full plate and lose less stamina by just eating hits.

Ectoplasmic Alcohol said:
Ah, your reading comprehension has failed you here. See where I said "and how they interact with different types of armor" That's to indicate that the point being made isn't simply "hey look there's a buncha weapons" but rather there's a reason to carry multiple types of weapons as different weapons have different effectiveness in different situations. This also means that the outcome of many fights are strongly influenced by preparation.
Curb the smarminess, sir knight. Weapon types interacting with different kinds of armour isn't innovative by any means either.

Ectoplasmic Alcohol said:
Yeah, I understand why you'd say that. They're all easily overlooked if you've already made up your mind and aren't interested.
Mounted combat, the surrender system, clinching, fight-club, and the myriad of combat-altering potion effects. Notice how even Skyrim does all of those except clinching? Hardly something you'd put on the back of the box for advertising.

Ectoplasmic Alcohol said:
Oh, I see. Taking issue with the usage of the term "limited" is, to you, a full endorsement.
Call it "limited" or "restricted freedom" or what have you, it's a terrible system. Unless you're going for the Dark Souls experience, no game in 2018 should penalize you for wanting to save progress. Again, plenty of bugs, imagine losing hours of progress because the game crashes when turning in a quest and has no proper autosave function. In fact, you don't even need to imagine it, it's happening.

Ectoplasmic Alcohol said:
Not even going to touch on how much of the battle is decided by player agency? Figures. Calling anything a "boss fight" in this game is hilarious and shows a pretty stark misunderstanding of the mechanics. The enemies, bosses included, have access to the same skills, mechanics, and combos that the player has.
Wait. Wait wait wait. You're telling me Kingdom Come: Deliverance has a mechanic where you can influence a battle before it happens?! Ye gods, the rapture is upon us indeed!

And you get dropped into a cage fight with an important storyline villain so you can fight him mano y mano despite all your allies. How much more boss fight-ish can it get? Would it take a health bar on the top of your screen to convince you? On that note, it's amazing how they designed that fight so all the damage from the previous big battles carries over, with no opportunity of bandaging because you can't bandage during fights. That's bad design 101.

Also, you're telling me you can't have boss fights in D&D because the villains technically use the same skills and mechanics that the player has? Using the same system means nothing.

Ectoplasmic Alcohol said:
Tom McKay as Henry did an outstanding job and the fact that you're just dismissing his work out of hand is pathetic.
If by out of hand you mean my impression after hours on hours of his work, then yes. In fact, you mentioned something about Henry's attachment to that hunk of metal because it's all that remains. Funny how Henry barely ascends Oblivion NPC's in terms of emotion when you talk to that noblewoman about the whole "my village got sacked" thing. And then he just goes adventuring and partying with his noble friend with nary an indication of personal drama. Tom McKay might be an outstanding professional, but he'd surely be wasted on this role then.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
RedRockRun said:
darkrage6 said:
He is "gud", plenty of other people complained about the bullshit "realism" aspects of the game.
I never said anything about realism. He says the combat is *FUCKING TERRIBLE* yet I've seen and talked to enough people who say it's not that hard. Yahtzee's the first person I've heard who has had a problem with its technical aspects. Of course this isn't the first time Yahtzee has mistaken his opinions for objective fact, and I doubt it will be the last.

Take his Witcher review: the one in which, "Glorious PC Gaming Master Race," was born where he criticized the game for being overly complicated, citing for one its menu system. When I played Witcher I didn't have a single issue and likewise never heard anyone else complain about it being too complicated nor knock the menus. In reality, there is more complexity (both in terms of menus and gameplay) to TES IV: Oblivion which is regarded by many to be drastically dumbed down from Morrowind.

A large part of me doesn't think he actually had issues with KCD's combat but instead just didn't like it. Only, "I didn't like it," doesn't sound as hard-hitting and edgy as, "The combat is *FUCKING TERRIBLE*." Furthermore, I don't think he really believed Witcher to be complicated yet needed an extra gag to pad his argument.

All this being said, I think anyone would be doing himself a disservice to base his decision to buy a game on a Yahtzee review. This is akin to how people shouldn't watch The Daily Show for news. It's entertainment with bits of truth sprinkled about. Somehow, the fact that it makes you laugh gives the impression of veracity.
I was never going to play this game anyways because the creator is an asshole and because i'm not big on fantasy RPGs.
 

Jeralt2100

New member
Jun 9, 2010
164
0
0
-Unlikely indeed. But the developers don't get to flaunt "player freedom" and then pull this stunt. If you're going to railroad, do it in a cutscene. Don't pretend like you've got freedom and then just disable it. Same for the second fight against Runt. You need to abuse game glitches just to be able to loot the body of someone you can kill. Some freedom.-

Have a question about this one. Did you not know you could return after the battle? I went back to the site of the battle after it was over and looted pretty much everything. I cleared over 7500 selling all that equipment left on the soldiers, and you can climb back up and loot Runt's body as well.
 

Cantehman

New member
Jan 25, 2010
29
0
0
Jeralt2100 said:
-Unlikely indeed. But the developers don't get to flaunt "player freedom" and then pull this stunt. If you're going to railroad, do it in a cutscene. Don't pretend like you've got freedom and then just disable it. Same for the second fight against Runt. You need to abuse game glitches just to be able to loot the body of someone you can kill. Some freedom.-

Have a question about this one. Did you not know you could return after the battle? I went back to the site of the battle after it was over and looted pretty much everything. I cleared over 7500 selling all that equipment left on the soldiers, and you can climb back up and loot Runt's body as well.
To be fair I've not gotten to that point myself, but when there's threads on Steam like:

http://steamcommunity.com/app/379430/discussions/0/1693788384145406406/

Yeah. Not to mention the many threads where fun stuff pops up. Like killing the boss too fast makes the game glitch out. Also, found this gem:

http://steamcommunity.com/app/379430/discussions/0/1696040635906427023/

That quest that allows you to influence the big bandit camp battle? It's scripted, so you'll have bandit spawning in the fight regardless of what you do.
 

gyrobot_v1legacy

New member
Apr 30, 2009
768
0
0
Cantehman said:
Zaper said:
maybe that's why they made the master strike really hard to pull of and do that much damage also i don't have problem with people disliking the game because of realism i have a problem because Yahtzee complained about the mechanics even though he clearly dosn't understand them he dosn't even appear to be aware you can lock on it annoys me because a lot of people see him as a reviewer and not a comedian/critic and it saddens me that some people who might like the game will miss it out because they think the combat is terrible
So because people don't bother to check whether Yahtzee is a critic or a reviewer, he shouldn't be critical? In my opinion, the combat is terrible indeed. Common bandits use advanced fencing techniques and the AI has clear advantages over the player. Mechanics like masterstrikes are there as a bandaid because the combat system has holes when it has to provide for early and late game. Archery's bad because no crosshairs might be realistic, but even a fully leveled Henry still can't look over the arrow to see where it'll go. Realism can only excuse so much.
The Archery Tutorial gives me a hint, aim above the target and watch as it go in a pendulum swing and loose the arrow when you feel your inner "middle of the swing". A reticule trivialize the archery mechanic that I was able to put several arrows into the Elite Cumans before dealing with the bastards with the shields
 

Cantehman

New member
Jan 25, 2010
29
0
0
gyrobot said:
Cantehman said:
Zaper said:
maybe that's why they made the master strike really hard to pull of and do that much damage also i don't have problem with people disliking the game because of realism i have a problem because Yahtzee complained about the mechanics even though he clearly dosn't understand them he dosn't even appear to be aware you can lock on it annoys me because a lot of people see him as a reviewer and not a comedian/critic and it saddens me that some people who might like the game will miss it out because they think the combat is terrible
So because people don't bother to check whether Yahtzee is a critic or a reviewer, he shouldn't be critical? In my opinion, the combat is terrible indeed. Common bandits use advanced fencing techniques and the AI has clear advantages over the player. Mechanics like masterstrikes are there as a bandaid because the combat system has holes when it has to provide for early and late game. Archery's bad because no crosshairs might be realistic, but even a fully leveled Henry still can't look over the arrow to see where it'll go. Realism can only excuse so much.
The Archery Tutorial gives me a hint, aim above the target and watch as it go in a pendulum swing and loose the arrow when you feel your inner "middle of the swing". A reticule trivialize the archery mechanic that I was able to put several arrows into the Elite Cumans before dealing with the bastards with the shields
Yeah, it's just padded difficulty really. Not to mention Henry the humble blacksmith boy having no problems with horse archery besides the archery aspect.
 

Saelune

Trump put kids in cages!
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
8,413
15
23
I...I think Yahtzee has actually influenced my decision to not get this game. Limited saves plus unfair combat!? No thanks.
 

Jeralt2100

New member
Jun 9, 2010
164
0
0
Cantehman said:
Jeralt2100 said:
-Unlikely indeed. But the developers don't get to flaunt "player freedom" and then pull this stunt. If you're going to railroad, do it in a cutscene. Don't pretend like you've got freedom and then just disable it. Same for the second fight against Runt. You need to abuse game glitches just to be able to loot the body of someone you can kill. Some freedom.-

Have a question about this one. Did you not know you could return after the battle? I went back to the site of the battle after it was over and looted pretty much everything. I cleared over 7500 selling all that equipment left on the soldiers, and you can climb back up and loot Runt's body as well.
To be fair I've not gotten to that point myself, but when there's threads on Steam like:

http://steamcommunity.com/app/379430/discussions/0/1693788384145406406/

Yeah. Not to mention the many threads where fun stuff pops up. Like killing the boss too fast makes the game glitch out. Also, found this gem:

http://steamcommunity.com/app/379430/discussions/0/1696040635906427023/

That quest that allows you to influence the big bandit camp battle? It's scripted, so you'll have bandit spawning in the fight regardless of what you do.

You don't need to do anything strange to loot Runt, that much is certain. Unless his corpse glitches out which didn't happen to me. I simply returned to the battlefield after it was over and loaded up on stuff. His body is exactly where it falls and you can climb up the same way you did during the initial battle. If you have a horse by that point with decent carry capacity you can rack up just selling all the equipment from the fallen soldiers. Numerous chests to open as well.

It was also mentioned that 'Damage from the battle carries over into your fight with Runt, with no opportunity to heal up.' That's also inaccurate. If you have Marigold decoction you can drink it and stand at the bottom of the ladders until it's had its full effect. You can also bandage up any bleeding. Yes, the game makes it clear you're heading to a showdown with Runt, but it doesn't 'railroad' you there with no opportunity to prepare. Granted, there's no quick healing in the game, but you can drink any potions you have and stop your bleeding before starting the fight.

I'm not going to say the game is great, it is buggy and some of the decisions were baffling, but after hitting level 7 with my sword skill I started noticing the game felt much more responsive. Doesn't make it good design to make it feel clunky from the start, as that's frustrating, but I'm 40 hours in now and one on one fights are a joke. Takes a group of 3 or 4 to get me concerned. I think this is one the mod community will have a field day with. I remember the broken mess Vampire Bloodlines and KOTOR 2 were on launch and how much I enjoy playing them still today with the unofficial patches. I think this game has got that kind of potential to it, but to each their own.
 

Blazing Hero

New member
Feb 20, 2015
158
0
0
Gethsemani said:
I appreciate history a whole lot, to the point that most of my recreational reading are variations on history books (though lately that's mostly been limited to scholarly discourse on WW2). The problem with the "realism" in KC:D is that it is unevenly applied and not always for obvious reasons. For example, you need to bring food with you and eat at regular intervalls, because real people need to eat obviously. This is a chore from the get go, because finding food is not hard and you only need to eat to stave off negative effects. In a similar vein, the debuff from not sleeping is more of a chore then a serious gameplay consideration. Then on the flip side, you can teleport stuff from your own inventory to your horse and back with no delay. I am absolutely grateful that I don't need to run to my horse fifty times to sell off the stuff I scavenged, but in a game that's all about realism and simulation it feels off, especially when you have to repair your clothes after every battle where you took a hit (and where your clothes get dirty just from walking beside the road).

For a game that's all about "historical accuracy" the omission of the crossbow as a weapon is baffling. As is the entire set-up, where your dad is some master smith that's friendly with nobles, yet you don't know how to read (master craftsmen invariably knew how to read, since that was one of the few ways to share trade secrets within your guild with the other masters). Guess your dad really hated the idea that his son could pick up important life skills, huh? Let's also talk about how a lot of wooden buildings in this game have the textures of sun-dried wood, which is how they look now a days but not how they would have looked in the middle ages, when they would have been oiled, tarred or painted to prevent the wood from drying out and rotting. Oh, and then there's the entire Alchemy skill, which let's you do Geralt of Rivia-type potions (nightvision, really?) in a game that's supposedly all about being realistic and not offering concessions to fantasy.

And while I sympathize with the idea that Henry is a worthless fighter initially, the way the game shows that is by making one of its' core mechanics a chore. Bethesda, for all their shortcomings, learned this lesson 1,5 decade ago after Morrowind: You don't gimp the entire system and make it a drag to use until the player character gets good, you maintain the flow of the system but make it either harder or make it clear you are restricting options for now. KC:D makes it harder but also makes it sluggish and unresponsive and has a lot of feature hidden in the first 10 hours, which means the entire system feels like shit. Now that I'm 10 hours in and Henry has some skills, I am actually starting to see the flow, but that's as much down to me learning as Henry no longer taking a minute to wind up a basic slash. Keeping the flow even if Henry is unskilled, but making the AI parry or dodge more early on would have given the same effect, but with much less player frustration. You would still feel outmatched, but you'd do so because you'd feel your opponents are better, not because the fighting mechanic feels like trying to move through jello while drunk and concussed.
Sorry for the late reply but for some reason my account didn't show anyone replying to me. Good to see someone who likes history have another viewpoint about the game then my own. Still correct me if I am wrong but when it comes to brass tacks it feels like you are comparing game mechanics to the game world/setting which I think is a little unfair. By their nature video games can never hit true realism when it comes to their mechanics. For instance there is no quick healing in the real world. In the real world death is permanent and there are no continues. I doubt anyone would be satisfied with a game that never allowed you to play it after your first death or even made you wait months to years to heal from grievous wounds. I don't think you really can blame a game for having a mechanic to heal like alchemy.

Now your point about crossbows I fully agree with. They should have been included and the only reason I think they weren't was a lack of time and resources on the part of the developer. It is an odd omission that I really wish they had taken more time to include. But on the other hand I don't agree with your view that a craftsman's son would have been able to read. It is pretty apparent that Henry had not learned much of anything from his father about his trade so I really don't think it would be unusual that he would also lack the skill to read. As for the battle mechanics I really don't know how the devs could have properly illustrated Henry's inept fighting without making his controls somewhat sluggish. The problem with giving the player more sophisticated and responsive controls at the beginning is that there is always a way for a skilled gamer to overcome them and play Henry like he is a master of combat. I recognize this probably makes me come across as an egotistical ass but I genuinely have no doubts that if they used that type of system that I would have been able to breeze through the start of the game. I generally play on the most extreme difficulty for any game and rarely have difficulties. I actually appreciate the fact that I physically couldn't breeze through the combat of this game and it helped me role play as a schlub who didn't know how to fight. I haven't felt that powerless when playing a game in years. That for me is freaking awesome and actually somewhat nostalgic.
 

Cantehman

New member
Jan 25, 2010
29
0
0
Jeralt2100 said:
You don't need to do anything strange to loot Runt, that much is certain. Unless his corpse glitches out which didn't happen to me. I simply returned to the battlefield after it was over and loaded up on stuff. His body is exactly where it falls and you can climb up the same way you did during the initial battle. If you have a horse by that point with decent carry capacity you can rack up just selling all the equipment from the fallen soldiers. Numerous chests to open as well.

It was also mentioned that 'Damage from the battle carries over into your fight with Runt, with no opportunity to heal up.' That's also inaccurate. If you have Marigold decoction you can drink it and stand at the bottom of the ladders until it's had its full effect. You can also bandage up any bleeding. Yes, the game makes it clear you're heading to a showdown with Runt, but it doesn't 'railroad' you there with no opportunity to prepare. Granted, there's no quick healing in the game, but you can drink any potions you have and stop your bleeding before starting the fight.

I'm not going to say the game is great, it is buggy and some of the decisions were baffling, but after hitting level 7 with my sword skill I started noticing the game felt much more responsive. Doesn't make it good design to make it feel clunky from the start, as that's frustrating, but I'm 40 hours in now and one on one fights are a joke. Takes a group of 3 or 4 to get me concerned. I think this is one the mod community will have a field day with. I remember the broken mess Vampire Bloodlines and KOTOR 2 were on launch and how much I enjoy playing them still today with the unofficial patches. I think this game has got that kind of potential to it, but to each their own.
Guess there's a lesson in there about not necessarily trusting everything you read for me, eh? But yeah, I'll fully admit the game should receive praise on many points, but this being the developer's first game really shows in some design decisions. And it just so happens to be on some critical issues. If anything, the only thing that really bothers me (as you say, to each their own on the game's advantages and disadvantages) is the sheer fervour in which some people defend the game's flaws, really.
 

4Aces

New member
May 29, 2012
180
0
0
Zaper said:
nope he was complaining about how the camera swings around during combat a thing that is solved by the lock on system
Actually he said that, but ended with "..and press your button to slash your sword, about half and hour of camera jiggling passes and then the slash happens." Does lock-on negate the massive delay between telling the game to attack, and the attack actually happening? If so WTF are these devs on, and where can I get some?

Lock-on: The essential mechanic the devs could not be bothered to mention in the tutorial that is only 6-7 hours long...

To those claiming, or is that maiming, realism (not aimed at OP): If this is so realistic, why does does everyone have more stamina than a 20 year old blacksmith when running? Especially if they are in armor and he is not? Real-lipstick indeed, and you are the trap in that relationship.

If this is not early access, then why does the song "Bugs, Bugs, Bugs, glorious Bugs, Bugs, Bugs..." play in my head when I read the serious Steam reviews (excluding "get gud" and "crap")? What can this teach Bugthesda about the next Elder Scrolls game someone asked. My response: They do not need to work as hard (snicker) as they currently do, just toss in some artifical limitations, call it science (cough-realism-cough), and shove it out the door about a month earlier than usual, which is usually two months before being stable so they can work on the paid-DLC, or their tans at the salon.

Yahtzee - We are the PC Master Race, not those nock-kobblers. We are not exclusively S&M freaks for bragging rights on how virtually hardass we are. We leave that to the DS-ish crowd (nudge-nudge). If consoles can meet the average PC gaming rig, then consoles would be a welcome edition to the club. It would bring in some desperately needed membership dues. But those companies seem to think shiny (4K) is more important than refresh rate, so it may be awhile. The executives running those companies are the peasants, not the people forced to suffer their slavery to screen tearing, and lags. The true PC Master race hopes console execs will one day evolve into an equal, so we can all be one. We will bring the oil. ;)
 
Feb 26, 2014
668
0
0
Meh. I lost interest at "first-person camera". For shooters or puzzle games? Sure. For melee? No. Realism is also kind of a red flag for me. Whenever I hear a anyone go on about a games realism it immediately translates to, "This game will be a chore to play. Do Not Touch!"
 

monkey_man

New member
Jul 5, 2009
1,164
0
0
I'm not particularly interested in the game, but I enjoy his reviews. I'm always entertained at the shitstorm that went on in here, I mean, it's just a game, not the holy grail. Besides, Yahtzee regularly shits on games I happen to enjoy, that doesn't dampen my enjoyment in any way. nor should it yours. He's a game reviewer, his opinion about/stance on games is entirely subjective
I don't think some people realise he's an entertainer, hyperbole and snark are his trade by design.
you'd think Yahtzee personally punched a couple of babies in the head or something by the way some people are upset.

I'm also quite amazed more than 60 people still post on this site, I thought this place was kind of done for. Or at least on its last legs or something. I mean, to me it appears that the only remaining content is zero punctuation.
[this has been a personal pondering by a user who's been inactive on this site for a while now, I don't intend to derail the thread.]
 

Dalisclock

Making lemons combustible again
Legacy
Apr 18, 2020
6,634
1,281
118
Country
United States
Gender
Male
I'm kind of interested in this game, Yathzees dislike notwithstanding, but the fact it's apparently buggy as hell is a constant in every review I've read so far.

So I'll wait until the game is reasonably bug fixed before jumping in, especially since I wouldn't have time to play it until at least next year anyway.
 

Fdzzaigl

New member
Mar 31, 2010
822
0
0
Must say that I enjoy this game immensely, even though I really didn't think I would (it wasn't even on my radar, picked it up because a let's play made me interested).

Always take Yahtzee's reviews with a grain of salt. I really don't agree with any remarks about story, it's excellent and refreshing, especially because the atmosphere and the world itself is really authentic.

The limited save system can be easily circumvented with mods, many of the game's problems can be fixed this way already. On the combat I will agree that it isn't optimal, but I do feel like he didn't approach it in the right way.
 

Gethsemani_v1legacy

New member
Oct 1, 2009
2,552
0
0
Blazing Hero said:
Sorry for the late reply but for some reason my account didn't show anyone replying to me.
Quote notifications has been broken for quite some time. Just another of those things after DEFY laid off the tech team.

Blazing Hero said:
Good to see someone who likes history have another viewpoint about the game then my own. Still correct me if I am wrong but when it comes to brass tacks it feels like you are comparing game mechanics to the game world/setting which I think is a little unfair. By their nature video games can never hit true realism when it comes to their mechanics. For instance there is no quick healing in the real world. In the real world death is permanent and there are no continues. I doubt anyone would be satisfied with a game that never allowed you to play it after your first death or even made you wait months to years to heal from grievous wounds. I don't think you really can blame a game for having a mechanic to heal like alchemy.
Sure, I am doing a bit of that. However, I wouldn't do it if Vavra hadn't doubled down on hos realistic this game was and how it would dispense with the magic and fantasy of other RPGs. If your defense against criticism is "historical accuracy" and "realistic mechanics" then you better deliver on both fronts. KC:D often does, at least far other than most historical games, but as I said, it is still unevenly applied. This game is so realistic it has to have food and energy mechanics, yet I can just keep a thousand bags of mushrooms on my horse and snack on them whenever I need food or healing.

My problem is that the more I play, the less realistic KC:D makes my behavior. Once I realized that dried mushrooms were cheap and provided only minuscule nourishment, I realized that I can just keep my hunger slightly above 50 (to avoid the hunger debuff setting in) and then gobble down on pound upon pound of mushrooms to get my health back after some guy bashed my ribs in with a warhammer. Henry, with the right (easily available) perks, can literally go 2 days without sleeping or eating without serious side effects and still fight unimpeded. I wanted to level stealth and lockpicking, so I broke into people's house at night, knocked them out while they were asleep, picked the locks of their chests and left. Because that was the quickest and cheapest way to get good at sneaking.

I can absolutely forgive these things because KC:D is a game. It is harder to overlook them when Vavra insists on how realistic this game is and there are other mechanics that are just fake difficulty (the removal of the aiming dot for archery, the atrocious save mechanic) because of 'realism'. KC:D applies its' realism very unevenly and to very different effects. It is really cool that you actually get thrown in jail if you mouth off to a nobleman, it is less cool that the only reason archery is hard (because archery is hard in real life) is because the game absolutely forbids you from taking proper aim.

As a minor gripe here, the inconsistency with which KC:D handholds you is also irritating me. Most quests give you a quest marker and asks you to follow it, even making the journal imply that it is the only path available, only for there to be "hidden paths" that you can find by disregarding the journal and quest updates. The "Saintly Remains" quest is a great example of this, where the quests wants you to find a charlatan to get flashier relics, without ever informing the player that it is totally possible to just show up with the "plain" relic you've found. Some times it is like that, at others you absolutely must do exactly as the journal and quest updates says. This inconsistency is not "deep" or "incentivizing exploration", it only breeds distrust in the author (to borrow a literary term), because it is never obvious if you are allowed to strike out on your own or must follow the author's intent to the letter. It is a sign of someone who can't make up their mind about whether KC:D is a simulationist RPG or a traditional RPG where the authors quests are sacrosanct in their execution and the end result is a janky game that frustrates more than it achieves player connection.

Blazing Hero said:
Now your point about crossbows I fully agree with. They should have been included and the only reason I think they weren't was a lack of time and resources on the part of the developer. It is an odd omission that I really wish they had taken more time to include.
My guess is that a crossbow would be a game breaker like you wouldn't believe it. Imagine a boss fight with a fully clad knight that ends before they reach you because you point and click with the most powerful weapon in the game. A weapon that every other soldier and hunter in the game has access to. Unlike the fake difficulty archery, the Crossbow would be very easy to use and it would be insanely powerful, which would be realistic, but would require a total rebalance of the entire game. Not to mention how shitty it would be to get killed in every other encounter because one of the enemies spawned with a crossbow.

Blazing Hero said:
But on the other hand I don't agree with your view that a craftsman's son would have been able to read. It is pretty apparent that Henry had not learned much of anything from his father about his trade so I really don't think it would be unusual that he would also lack the skill to read.
I can concede this point. It is just one of those slight annoyances that is exacerbated by Vavra's insistence on historical accuracy. A master smith that commanded the respect and friendships of nobles would most certainly be a guild higher up and as such would most certainly be literate. That he'd fail to pass that highly useful skill onto his son (who will one day take up his trade and legacy) seems highly unlikely. Just as it is unlikely that adult Henry somehow isn't a proficient smith on his own, and in fact is so inept that he can barely sharpen a slightly dulled blade prior to 10 hours of Maintenace skill level ups.

Blazing Hero said:
As for the battle mechanics I really don't know how the devs could have properly illustrated Henry's inept fighting without making his controls somewhat sluggish. The problem with giving the player more sophisticated and responsive controls at the beginning is that there is always a way for a skilled gamer to overcome them and play Henry like he is a master of combat. I recognize this probably makes me come across as an egotistical ass but I genuinely have no doubts that if they used that type of system that I would have been able to breeze through the start of the game. I generally play on the most extreme difficulty for any game and rarely have difficulties. I actually appreciate the fact that I physically couldn't breeze through the combat of this game and it helped me role play as a schlub who didn't know how to fight. I haven't felt that powerless when playing a game in years. That for me is freaking awesome and actually somewhat nostalgic.
I think this is a hard issue to solve overall. The problem is that a lot of people will try the clunky combat of early game KC:D and will probably think that this sluggish, unresponsive system is all there is to it. Which will get them fed up and have them give up on the game, because no one wants to play an action RPG where the combat sucks. Then there are some people, like you, that will be quick to master the system and who could use that to break the difficulty curve utterly.

I am not saying my solution is necessarily good, but it'd probably be better to have enemies that scaled in reverse to Henry. So that when Henry is a schmuck who can't wield a sword his enemies will dodge, parry and riposte often. As Henry gains skill, those enemies that he levels past start becoming worse, they will stop being able to dodge and parry and will much more frequently be unable to interrupt his combos. Meanwhile, high skill opponents like knights will still keep doing all that fancy parrying and riposting until far into the game when Henry is nearing maxed out skills. To me it seems a more elegant solution, because early in the game you'll see your opponents outfancy you, but you won't feel as if Henry is a rheumatic turtle stuck in syrup (apologies to any rheumatic turtles I offended) and get fed up with an unresponsive system.
 

Schadrach

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 25, 2020
1,498
104
68
Country
US
Darth_Payn said:
Limited saves? Are you shitting me?! I thought we all agreed that was terrible 3 console generations ago!
Specifically it saves whenever you complete a quest, sleep in a bed that doesn't belong to someone else, or if you drink one of those limited save items he was talking about. Which are limited insofar as you are only given a limited number of them and if you want more you have to craft them by learning the appropriate skill and getting the right flowers to use for ingredients.

Undomesticated Equine said:
I forgot to add the Archery is designed as a big FU to players. There is cross hair dot on the screen entire time but when you pull out the bow it disappears and you have to guess what you aiming at and your aim swings like you just drank bottle of hard liquor on empty stomach it is absolutely useless.
Like most things that people complain about your illiterate peasant being completely ass at, you gradually get better at them if you actually *do* them. Like if you're having that much trouble shooting, got to an archery range for a while and actually do it until he gets less terrible. Same applies to melee, the better your combat related skills, the quicker and more competently he moves, it doesn't just effect damage numbers like Skyrim.

darkrage6 said:
I was previously put off this game by the developer making some bigoted and ignorant statements
You mean his statements that there probably weren't any black folks in this particular 9 square kilometers of Bohemia at the start of the 15 century, so he didn't put any in his game? Or was there another one?
 

Arnoxthe1

New member
Dec 25, 2010
3,374
0
0
Silentpony said:
Boy, there sure are a lot of new users signing up just to defend this game. Not suspicious at all that.
Only the Inner Circle of the Escapist may have an opinion. None can dispute our superiority,
 
Mar 30, 2010
3,788
0
0
Arnoxthe1 said:
RedRockRun said:
All this being said, I think anyone would be doing himself a disservice to base his decision to buy a game on a Yahtzee review. This is akin to how people shouldn't watch The Daily Show for news. It's entertainment with bits of truth sprinkled about. Somehow, the fact that it makes you laugh gives the impression of veracity.
Well, the limited saves alone are still a large deal-breaker for me.
The save system isn't really limited, despite what Yahtzee says. The game auto saves whenever you start/complete a quest, and it also saves every time you sleep more than two hours in a bed. Add onto that the fact that the recipe for 'Savior Schnapps' is auto-unlocked without the need to learn it, and that the raw ingredients for it a) grow outside the first house you have access to after the tutorial and b) can be bought at any alchemist shop for less than four Groechen and you can basically drop a save whenever the mood takes you (except in combat - you can't save in combat).
 

Arnoxthe1

New member
Dec 25, 2010
3,374
0
0
Grouchy Imp said:
The save system isn't really limited, despite what Yahtzee says. The game auto saves whenever you start/complete a quest, and it also saves every time you sleep more than two hours in a bed. Add onto that the fact that the recipe for 'Savior Schnapps' is auto-unlocked without the need to learn it, and that the raw ingredients for it a) grow outside the first house you have access to after the tutorial and b) can be bought at any alchemist shop for less than four Groechen and you can basically drop a save whenever the mood takes you (except in combat - you can't save in combat).
But there's the thing though. If it's so easy then why is it even limited at all? And that's the problem. You make it easy, it might as well not be there. You make it even just kinda hard and then it's just super annoying.
 
Mar 30, 2010
3,788
0
0
Arnoxthe1 said:
Grouchy Imp said:
The save system isn't really limited, despite what Yahtzee says. The game auto saves whenever you start/complete a quest, and it also saves every time you sleep more than two hours in a bed. Add onto that the fact that the recipe for 'Savior Schnapps' is auto-unlocked without the need to learn it, and that the raw ingredients for it a) grow outside the first house you have access to after the tutorial and b) can be bought at any alchemist shop for less than four Groechen and you can basically drop a save whenever the mood takes you (except in combat - you can't save in combat).
But there's the thing though. If it's so easy then why is it even limited at all? And that's the problem. You make it easy, it might as well not be there. You make it even just kinda hard and then it's just super annoying.
I'll admit it does add another level of faff to saving, but there are reasons which kind of make sense as you play the game. For example, even if you have a dozen Saviour Schnapps in your inventory you still need to be careful about popping one as they are, as the name suggests, alcoholic and getting pissed just before attempting delicate tasks (*cough* lockpicking *cough*) isn't the greatest idea in the world. The fact that it has, in most cases, been many in-game hours since your last save makes you approach decisions in general and combat in particular in a very different manner to most other RPGs that I've played.
 

Cantehman

New member
Jan 25, 2010
29
0
0
Grouchy Imp said:
Arnoxthe1 said:
Grouchy Imp said:
The save system isn't really limited, despite what Yahtzee says. The game auto saves whenever you start/complete a quest, and it also saves every time you sleep more than two hours in a bed. Add onto that the fact that the recipe for 'Savior Schnapps' is auto-unlocked without the need to learn it, and that the raw ingredients for it a) grow outside the first house you have access to after the tutorial and b) can be bought at any alchemist shop for less than four Groechen and you can basically drop a save whenever the mood takes you (except in combat - you can't save in combat).
But there's the thing though. If it's so easy then why is it even limited at all? And that's the problem. You make it easy, it might as well not be there. You make it even just kinda hard and then it's just super annoying.
I'll admit it does add another level of faff to saving, but there are reasons which kind of make sense as you play the game. For example, even if you have a dozen Saviour Schnapps in your inventory you still need to be careful about popping one as they are, as the name suggests, alcoholic and getting pissed just before attempting delicate tasks (*cough* lockpicking *cough*) isn't the greatest idea in the world. The fact that it has, in most cases, been many in-game hours since your last save makes you approach decisions in general and combat in particular in a very different manner to most other RPGs that I've played.
Hard to predict bugs/crashes though.
 

Silentpony_v1legacy

Alleged Feather-Rustler
Jun 5, 2013
6,766
0
0
Arnoxthe1 said:
Silentpony said:
Boy, there sure are a lot of new users signing up just to defend this game. Not suspicious at all that.
Only the Inner Circle of the Escapist may have an opinion. None can dispute our superiority,
To be fair we've had a plague of advertisers on this website of late. Not just bots, but people just openly advertising stuff.
And with this games stupid but admittedly passionate controversy, its not so absurd to think people are coming here to defend the game, thus advertising for it.
 
Mar 30, 2010
3,788
0
0
Cantehman said:
Grouchy Imp said:
Arnoxthe1 said:
Grouchy Imp said:
The save system isn't really limited, despite what Yahtzee says. The game auto saves whenever you start/complete a quest, and it also saves every time you sleep more than two hours in a bed. Add onto that the fact that the recipe for 'Savior Schnapps' is auto-unlocked without the need to learn it, and that the raw ingredients for it a) grow outside the first house you have access to after the tutorial and b) can be bought at any alchemist shop for less than four Groechen and you can basically drop a save whenever the mood takes you (except in combat - you can't save in combat).
But there's the thing though. If it's so easy then why is it even limited at all? And that's the problem. You make it easy, it might as well not be there. You make it even just kinda hard and then it's just super annoying.
I'll admit it does add another level of faff to saving, but there are reasons which kind of make sense as you play the game. For example, even if you have a dozen Saviour Schnapps in your inventory you still need to be careful about popping one as they are, as the name suggests, alcoholic and getting pissed just before attempting delicate tasks (*cough* lockpicking *cough*) isn't the greatest idea in the world. The fact that it has, in most cases, been many in-game hours since your last save makes you approach decisions in general and combat in particular in a very different manner to most other RPGs that I've played.
Hard to predict bugs/crashes though.
Amen to that. After my first hour of gameplay I thought I was playing a Bethesda game. :)
 

Headdrivehardscrew

New member
Aug 22, 2011
1,660
0
0
RedRockRun said:
Of all the things to criticize in KCD. He could have gone on about the game still needs a lot of patching, the NPC's who have American accents, the lack of variety in NPC faces, the exploitable gameplay mechanics, the dodgy horse controls, and the lack of grand pitched battles. I was waiting for that stuff. Yet he rags on the combat. I'd be keen to take his word for it too if I haven't seen so many people playing the game who don't have any issues.

I never thought I'd have to say this Yahtzee, but git gud.
The probability of Yahtzee ever getting gud at gaming is very slim. He has other qualities.

If you didn't catch the live stream, Yahtzee pretty much outed himself as a bit of a disinterested hater that didn't feel like putting up with anything the game threw at him, basically refusing to even attempt to understand any of the evident or underlying mechanics, self-sabotaging himself into a corner and proving for the entire runtime that he really, really couldn't be bothered to get over it or himself. When success in one particular fight eventually happened, it was too late to change his tune or the already uploaded video, so that's what we got.

For a game set in 15th century Czechia, any form of English feels quite wrong. That said, the story does not suffer any more from this than any movie in the past did. It certainly felt more tolerable than, say, A Knight's Tale (2001). I put the year there since I don't know how many remake reboots Hollywood has farted out in the meantime.

After playing through the game in English, I started another run and chose the German audio. It's fine. Regionally closer to the area depicted, the only bad thing that I noticed about it was that I didn't know any of the voice actors involved, which isn't necessarily a bad thing at all. I would have preferred a fully voiced Czech version, but that does not (yet?) exist, if I'm not mistaken.
 

RobertEHouse

Former Mad Man
Mar 29, 2012
152
0
0
Cantehman said:
Grouchy Imp said:
Arnoxthe1 said:
Grouchy Imp said:
The save system isn't really limited, despite what Yahtzee says. The game auto saves whenever you start/complete a quest, and it also saves every time you sleep more than two hours in a bed. Add onto that the fact that the recipe for 'Savior Schnapps' is auto-unlocked without the need to learn it, and that the raw ingredients for it a) grow outside the first house you have access to after the tutorial and b) can be bought at any alchemist shop for less than four Groechen and you can basically drop a save whenever the mood takes you (except in combat - you can't save in combat).
But there's the thing though. If it's so easy then why is it even limited at all? And that's the problem. You make it easy, it might as well not be there. You make it even just kinda hard and then it's just super annoying.
I'll admit it does add another level of faff to saving, but there are reasons which kind of make sense as you play the game. For example, even if you have a dozen Saviour Schnapps in your inventory you still need to be careful about popping one as they are, as the name suggests, alcoholic and getting pissed just before attempting delicate tasks (*cough* lockpicking *cough*) isn't the greatest idea in the world. The fact that it has, in most cases, been many in-game hours since your last save makes you approach decisions in general and combat in particular in a very different manner to most other RPGs that I've played.
Hard to predict bugs/crashes though.
Have you had the flying glitch yet?

I am enjoying the game but when i get off from a horse and start to fly ten feet off the ground unable to move. That is one reason the save system might need so rework. Not because i hate the save system the opposite is true it just because the game still is not glitch free yet.

If anything if they had the option in the menu for a player to decide if they want this type of saving feature or another. That i feel might be the best solution in order to please fans on both ends.
 

Adam Jensen_v1legacy

I never asked for this
Sep 8, 2011
6,652
0
0
There's realism and then there's stupid realism. So far the only game that managed to do realism well is Mafia 1. This game just sounds tedious.
 

TheFinish

Grand Admiral
May 17, 2010
262
0
0
The game gets infinitely better when you mod the save system to just be a normal save system, really. It's the game's biggest misstep.

Aside from that it's enjoyable, if a bit stunted. I really don't understand when everyone says this game is deep. It's not, nor is it particularly realistic, despite what the game claims.

The combat system is fairly okay, until you learn masterstrokes and then it devolves into baiting an opponent into attacking you so you can Masterstroke them to death (insert handjob joke here). If you try to fight high level enemies fairly, THEY Masterstroke you back almost always, so it's just boring. Honestly late game I just headshotted them with arrows to make it less tedious.

Stealth gameplay is also bad, given that stealthily eliminating sleeping enemies immediately wakes up everyone else around you. Want to clear a camp like an assassin? Too bad, bucko. And pickpocketing is just straight up random.

The game also completely lacks any sort of exploration incentive, which for me is a big, big minus in an open world game. Even without the save system actively discouraging you, there's nothing to explore. There's no unique loot to find (more on this later), no quests to stumble on, nothing. Aside from going into forests to hunt animals, the world is incredibly barren and lifeless.

The other thing (which Yahtzee touches on) is that the economy is absolutely broken. Just going through the story and looting everyone (which is easy once you get a horse) will net you piles and piles of money.......and there's nothing to spend it on. You can get the best armor and weapons for your playstyle halfway through the game, and then there's nothing to work towards. The game has one unique weapon, which as a reward for a specific quest that you can make impossible to complete by accident in the first big city after the prologue (the quest gives, meanwhile, is in the last big city you get sent to). And to top it all off, it looks exactly the same and has the same stats as a sword you can just buy in any of the swordsmiths. Or find as loot in high level enemies. Woo-hoo.

So it's a big open world with nothing to discover; and an RPG where you can get endgame gear by the mid point. At that point the only thing holding it up is the gameplay, which is good once you discount the bugs, and the story, which is serviceable without being anything great.

Take the engine, put it in a well developed fantasy setting, and you'll have a much better game. As it is, it's alright, but I'd tell anyone interested to wait 2-3 months for patches, and THEN wait for a good sale.
 

Zaper

New member
Feb 28, 2018
10
0
0
Imre Csete said:
Actually he said that, but ended with "..and press your button to slash your sword, about half and hour of camera jiggling passes and then the slash happens." Does lock-on negate the massive delay between telling the game to attack, and the attack actually happening? If so WTF are these devs on, and where can I get some?

Lock-on: The essential mechanic the devs could not be bothered to mention in the tutorial that is only 6-7 hours long...

To those claiming, or is that maiming, realism (not aimed at OP): If this is so realistic, why does does everyone have more stamina than a 20 year old blacksmith when running? Especially if they are in armor and he is not? Real-lipstick indeed, and you are the trap in that relationship.

If this is not early access, then why does the song "Bugs, Bugs, Bugs, glorious Bugs, Bugs, Bugs..." play in my head when I read the serious Steam reviews (excluding "get gud" and "crap")? What can this teach Bugthesda about the next Elder Scrolls game someone asked. My response: They do not need to work as hard (snicker) as they currently do, just toss in some artifical limitations, call it science (cough-realism-cough), and shove it out the door about a month earlier than usual, which is usually two months before being stable so they can work on the paid-DLC, or their tans at the salon.

Yahtzee - We are the PC Master Race, not those nock-kobblers. We are not exclusively S&M freaks for bragging rights on how virtually hardass we are. We leave that to the DS-ish crowd (nudge-nudge). If consoles can meet the average PC gaming rig, then consoles would be a welcome edition to the club. It would bring in some desperately needed membership dues. But those companies seem to think shiny (4K) is more important than refresh rate, so it may be awhile. The executives running those companies are the peasants, not the people forced to suffer their slavery to screen tearing, and lags. The true PC Master race hopes console execs will one day evolve into an equal, so we can all be one. We will bring the oil. ;)
ok lets unpack your statement the game does explain the lock bearly a hour in you being blind is your own problem the reason it takes a long time to swing at the start is because you are shit as you increase your skills you swing faster and faster as to your condescending statement this game is what skyrim dreamt to be a actual rpg not a overly open mess with shit combat as to the bugs first of all you are massively exaggerating i have played 40+ hours and the worst ive seen is a single crash and some texture glitches second of all this is a indie studio with a budget of 12 mil
 

Darth Rosenberg

New member
Oct 25, 2011
1,288
0
0
I'm interested in HEMA yet not overly interested in this game, which is kindof annoying.

The main character seems ferociously dreary, the main narrative scenes I've seen so far have been bewildering generic/tropey (voice acting and writing veers from the pretty darn good to the atrocious), and even putting aside some nitpicks with body mechanics and guard positions, the combat seems a clunky mess which ironically doesn't seem that realistic at all. Was it Skallagrim who gave the account of a peasant punching his plate armour so hard it got dented and did damage? Along with the insubstantial impacts (I'm not a gore hound but KCD really needed to be nastier), I can understand why Yahztee was so scathing.

...however, after some patching and a few months playing other games still on my backlog, I would like to try it out just to see how I get on with it.

Still, KCD's produced some hilarious bug/glitch compilations already, so it's already entertained me in that sense.
 

CyanCat47_v1legacy

New member
Nov 26, 2014
498
0
0
While the game certainly looked interesting and has some pretty brillian quest design in places, it seems rather misguided overall. Realims does not excuse bad game design, and there is a limit to how far we want realism to go in a game, loath as the hardcore players might be to admit it. Do you want a WW2 game that can randomly give you an instant game over and force you to restart midway through the story because you caught dysentery? Plus, the needs and maintainance only really add chores, and there is a limit to how many you want which is why there is no need to relieve yourself, you can't get apendicitis from a bad diet and you won't randomly catch smallpox or beubonic plague.
 

Cantehman

New member
Jan 25, 2010
29
0
0
RobertEHouse said:
Have you had the flying glitch yet?
No, but I did see a youtuber randomly start floating when stepping backwards from an opponent.

Darth Rosenberg said:
I'm interested in HEMA yet not overly interested in this game, which is kindof annoying.

The main character seems ferociously dreary, the main narrative scenes I've seen so far have been bewildering generic/tropey (voice acting and writing veers from the pretty darn good to the atrocious), and even putting aside some nitpicks with body mechanics and guard positions, the combat seems a clunky mess which ironically doesn't seem that realistic at all. Was it Skallagrim who gave the account of a peasant punching his plate armour so hard it got dented and did damage? Along with the insubstantial impacts (I'm not a gore hound but KCD really needed to be nastier), I can understand why Yahztee was so scathing.

...however, after some patching and a few months playing other games still on my backlog, I would like to try it out just to see how I get on with it.

Still, KCD's produced some hilarious bug/glitch compilations already, so it's already entertained me in that sense.
Don't forget that you can also block blades just by crossing your arms!
 

Jamcie Kerbizz

New member
Feb 27, 2013
302
0
0
Saelune said:
I...I think Yahtzee has actually influenced my decision to not get this game. Limited saves plus unfair combat!? No thanks.
Well at first I thought that this is absolutely old console games like (to limit save space), ridiculous idea and was my main reason to not bother with the game (between work and family I figured I will not have time for a game that tries to be obnoxious on utility side).
Given the actual gameplay? You will look at having available 5-10 saves per game session. It knocked me out of the habbit of saving like a spastic monkey (in RPGs... to 'just' look up what the other option does or make sure combat goes perfectly) and actually smoothed out the gameplay. Game's 'worth it'. Especially if you never seen / been to central Europe (Czech Rep) and would like to have a look at the setting and very peculiar culture and 'mood' of that nation. 'Un-McDonald-ized' version.
 

Smithnikov_v1legacy

New member
May 7, 2016
1,022
0
0
Eh,it's a game I can respect and admire from a distance, but no way I could ever get into it with the system it has. One of it's devs being involved in some apparent white supremacy doesn't improve the odds of changing my mind either.
 

Urh

New member
Oct 9, 2010
216
0
0
Normally when I have a difference of opinion with Yahtzee I just shrug my shoulders and move along, but this time I cannot hold my tongue. When Yahtzee says the combat in KCD is "fucking terrible", I cannot help but conclude that what he is really saying is that HE is fucking terrible at it. I'm not going to blow smoke up people's arses and brag about my prowess at the swordplay in this game - I would describe my ability as mediocre at best. But I was able to reach my level of mediocrity with ease - all it took for me was to realise that combat in this game is *not* a case of charging in and mashing the attack button like one does in Skyrim (as much as I like the Elder Scrolls games, the combat is rudimentary and is more about having bigger numbers than actual skill), and is actually far more akin to dueling, a form of fighting which requires patience and....dare I say it? THINKING. And yes, once you start taking damage the reduced stamina makes winning more difficult (but not impossible), but the enemies are bound by the same strictures - as a fight progresses, you *will* start landing hits with increased frequency as the reduced stamina takes its toll on your foe.

Also, the save system is an absolute non-issue. If you need to talk to an NPC and try waking them at 2 in the morning, the majority of the time they will just tell you to piss off, so the logical thing to do is to just sleep in a bed until morning (which saves your game!). The game actually *requires* your character to sleep in a bed from time to time, so your game gets saved on a regular basis without having to spend money on potions (or brewing them in the game's fantastic alchemy system, which Yahtzee barely even mentions). I am scratching my head as to how Yahtzee was able to lose three hours of progress because of a lack of saving. I can only surmise that he chose waiting over sleeping, a la Elder Scrolls.

Finally.....I know this is a cheap shot, but I have to laugh at Yahtzee requiring "six or seven" attempts to clear the bandits at Pribyslavitz. I did it on my second go, and the only reason my first attempt failed was because my first try at sneaking around and sabotaging the camp failed. The boss fight at Pribyslavitz, while a nice challenge, was by no means unfair in its difficulty, and just bolsters my opinion that Yahtzee couldn't get his head around the combat. Instead of taking a moment to rethink his play style, he just blamed his failures on the game itself. And not being able to recognize your own failures is not the hallmark of a good critic (or it's at least a sign that Yahtzee may be overworked, and possibly even burnt out after averaging roughly 50 reviews a year for 10 years). I'm a little saddened that people have blindly taken Yahtzee at his word in regards to KCD - they are robbing themselves of an amazing experience.
 

Cantehman

New member
Jan 25, 2010
29
0
0
Urh said:
Normally when I have a difference of opinion with Yahtzee I just shrug my shoulders and move along, but this time I cannot hold my tongue. When Yahtzee says the combat in KCD is "fucking terrible", I cannot help but conclude that what he is really saying is that HE is fucking terrible at it. I'm not going to blow smoke up people's arses and brag about my prowess at the swordplay in this game - I would describe my ability as mediocre at best. But I was able to reach my level of mediocrity with ease - all it took for me was to realise that combat in this game is *not* a case of charging in and mashing the attack button like one does in Skyrim (as much as I like the Elder Scrolls games, the combat is rudimentary and is more about having bigger numbers than actual skill), and is actually far more akin to dueling, a form of fighting which requires patience and....dare I say it? THINKING. And yes, once you start taking damage the reduced stamina makes winning more difficult (but not impossible), but the enemies are bound by the same strictures - as a fight progresses, you *will* start landing hits with increased frequency as the reduced stamina takes its toll on your foe.
Or just spend some time training and roll over anything with your inflated combat stats. Or just use the mechanics that rely mostly on dice rolling. Or use perks like headcracker to just flat out OHKO enemies. See, it's alright to call Yahtzee out and all that, but must people be so pretentious about the whole thing.

Urh said:
Also, the save system is an absolute non-issue. If you need to talk to an NPC and try waking them at 2 in the morning, the majority of the time they will just tell you to piss off, so the logical thing to do is to just sleep in a bed until morning (which saves your game!). The game actually *requires* your character to sleep in a bed from time to time, so your game gets saved on a regular basis without having to spend money on potions (or brewing them in the game's fantastic alchemy system, which Yahtzee barely even mentions). I am scratching my head as to how Yahtzee was able to lose three hours of progress because of a lack of saving. I can only surmise that he chose waiting over sleeping, a la Elder Scrolls.
It's still busywork that benefits nobody though, sleeping. Sure there's inns in every town and all that, but just being forced to do it over and over certainly doesn't make the game more fun. And it's not that hard to lose three hours of progress:

Step 1: Do stuff that takes a few hours.
Step 2: Game glitches/crashes because the game is a buggy mess for plenty of people.
Step 3: Lose said progress.

A simple autosave function could alleviate so many issues, but no, the devs don't want you savescumming lockpicking etc so you just have to deal with it.

And the alchemy system looks cool and all that, but after you've seen it once it just takes so damn long to get stuff done.

Urh said:
Finally.....I know this is a cheap shot, but I have to laugh at Yahtzee requiring "six or seven" attempts to clear the bandits at Pribyslavitz. I did it on my second go, and the only reason my first attempt failed was because my first try at sneaking around and sabotaging the camp failed. The boss fight at Pribyslavitz, while a nice challenge, was by no means unfair in its difficulty, and just bolsters my opinion that Yahtzee couldn't get his head around the combat. Instead of taking a moment to rethink his play style, he just blamed his failures on the game itself. And not being able to recognize your own failures is not the hallmark of a good critic (or it's at least a sign that Yahtzee may be overworked, and possibly even burnt out after averaging roughly 50 reviews a year for 10 years). I'm a little saddened that people have blindly taken Yahtzee at his word in regards to KCD - they are robbing themselves of an amazing experience.
Good for you that it worked out. And I'm not even being smarmy or sarcastic about it. People that didn't take the time to gear/train up instead get stuck in a setpiece that often doesn't allow healing in some cases, has enemies spawning in big numbers despite whatever you do in the prior mission and is overall just cringey when there's a squad of enemies marching in in formation while ignoring the fact that you're whacking them in the head the entire time.

I've seen plenty of let's plays now already and for some people, it's just a painful and buggy experience. The game obviously requires some polish and someone in the dev team that doesn't hate people playing a game that doesn't rhyme with the devs' notion of how the game should be played.
 

mrdude2010

New member
Aug 6, 2009
1,315
0
0
Its commitment to realism is admirable aside from that weird decision to completely exclude anyone who wasn't a white dude from the game, despite there definitely being people who weren't white dudes in Bohemia at the time.

That and the totally out of place American accents.

That and the [insert glitch].

I'm not asking for a game this big to be perfect, I'm asking for it to be playable.
 

Urh

New member
Oct 9, 2010
216
0
0
mrdude2010 said:
Its commitment to realism is admirable aside from that weird decision to completely exclude anyone who wasn't a white dude from the game, despite there definitely being people who weren't white dudes in Bohemia at the time.
I have heard people make this claim, and yet absolutely none of them have provided a shred of evidence to back it up. Anything that is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.
 

Mad World

Member
Legacy
Apr 23, 2020
795
0
1
Country
Canada
Haha! Yahtzee acknowledging the fact that he created the "PC Master Race" thing is hilarious. That's got to be the funniest moment I've seen on Zero Punctuation.

Anyway, I hate limited saves. Obviously, there should be a lesser difficulty and/or option to use a more typical style of save.