That thread was more of a announcment thread. This one is pretend I have all the media kind of thread. :mrgreen:
Ye haha, i missed your thread when i looked if there had already been one made. I used the forum search engine and as LordBerenger has mentioned already, that's why i missed it :).
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: chadz on June 30, 2015, 07:44:47 am
Always nice to see some more exposure for non-fantasy medieval games. May bring in new players in the long run
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Xant on June 30, 2015, 08:03:51 am
The cool factor of the melee in For Honor with its combat that looks like swordfighting will bring in a ton of players by itself. MB completely lacks that and it just looks horrible to anyone who isn't familiar with it. MBG should strive for cool looking combat too, within the limits of no-targeting of course. Will make all the difference in trailers that people look at to determine whether they want the game or not.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: chadz on June 30, 2015, 09:27:08 am
The problem with melee fighting in multiplayer games is that it's a triangle with those 3 corners:
Looks cool / \ / \ / \ Is fun ----------- Player skill matters You can shift the focus around, but so far I have not seen one that can fulfill all three.
For M:BG, we are striving to get all three, but our focus is in the lower middle.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Vovka on June 30, 2015, 09:39:17 am
Looks cool <- 202_ / \ . / \ <- december 2015 / \ . Is fun ----------- Player skill matters <- soon (c)
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: //saxon on June 30, 2015, 04:57:33 pm
The Premier Trailer is great, properly done. The game looks fun also and i can almost picture them putting DLC in the game that adds more cultures, like Spartans and Romans to Huns, Saracens and Egyptians.
Ubisoft better not mess anything up and the game better not be £50 on steam :?.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Xant on June 30, 2015, 07:02:44 pm
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Golem on July 01, 2015, 01:44:45 pm
Forronor will obviously have lots of unused potential. I hope this will not apply to Melee. You will continue adding minor features after release, correct?
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: //saxon on July 02, 2015, 06:30:56 pm
It's a shame to see the Vikings and Samurai speaking in English, like when the Samurai shouts "archers" in the trailer and the one Viking says "over hear" to the other one, shit like that. I do hope this is just for the trailer and in the game the Vikings speak obviously Scandinavian and the Samurai speak Japanese, it will be a massive immersion hit if everyone speaks English..
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Teeth on July 02, 2015, 06:50:41 pm
Because the suspension of disbelief isn't at all shattered by the fact that there are Vikings fighting Samurais in the first place.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Xant on July 02, 2015, 08:11:52 pm
I didn't know Scandinavian was a language.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Siiem on July 02, 2015, 08:34:19 pm
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Daunt_Flockula on January 13, 2016, 08:31:55 pm
Looks like I totally missed this thread when it was first created.
Rock Paper Shotgun has just written about the game. The end product might be a nice arcadey game, probably one that will resemble War of the Roses and not be so rough around the edges. My only concern is that the price tag might end up being too high just like Saxon pointed out.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Gravoth_iii on January 13, 2016, 08:50:49 pm
This might appeal to the dynasty warrior fans more than it would the average crpg player i assume, looking at the gameplay hes just mashing through a bunch of bots who have shields that do absolutely nothing. That already would kinda make it unimmersive. If it had bots that worked like warband bots that wouldve been cool, make them a bit sluggish but atleast make them do something.
On that topic, crpg combined with both bot armies and players wouldve been sick.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Golem on January 13, 2016, 10:16:51 pm
This might appeal to the dynasty warrior fans more than it would the average crpg player i assume, looking at the gameplay hes just mashing through a bunch of bots who have shields that do absolutely nothing. That already would kinda make it unimmersive. If it had bots that worked like warband bots that wouldve been cool, make them a bit sluggish but atleast make them do something.
On that topic, crpg combined with both bot armies and players wouldve been sick.
ikr, when retiring you could choose to either get a loom or a pawn
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Schoi on January 13, 2016, 11:15:02 pm
This game looks very good. Very visually appealing and fast paced.
But would I spend over 2000 hours in it like I did in Mount & Blade: Warband? Fuck no.
Don't buy it in my opinion, save your money for M:BG & Bannerlord.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Gravoth_iii on January 13, 2016, 11:44:27 pm
Another reason why i wish Battle of Europe mod had lasted, for just the couple of weeks that it was populated there were huge battles with 100 bots per team and like a dozen human players. Each player commanded a small contingent of 10-20 bots and it was truly epic. Lining up your ranged across the battlefield or charging along with your infantry...
It was especially fun since players could easily blend in if they tried but you were constantly looking for irregular human-player movements that would give the enemy away and let you hunt them (since a human player can make mincemeat of bots)
Maybe one should start a thread asking for something like this, but then again, that takes a lot of coding i believe (unless they have some leftovers from the commander mode)..
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: SeQuel on January 14, 2016, 05:03:36 am
Looks cool / \ / \ / \ Is fun ----------- Player skill matters You can shift the focus around, but so far I have not seen one that can fulfill all three.
For M:BG, we are striving to get all three, but our focus is in the lower middle.
Hopefully Bannerlord will get it right :lol:
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Daunt_Flockula on January 14, 2016, 11:01:17 am
This game looks very good. Very visually appealing and fast paced.
But would I spend over 2000 hours in it like I did in Mount & Blade: Warband? Fuck no.
Don't buy it in my opinion, save your money for M:BG & Bannerlord.
I am only getting it if it comes at a reasonable price like Warband did or WotR and Chivalry did. There is no way I am paying triple A price for another arcadey medieval war game.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Kafein on January 15, 2016, 07:02:19 pm
Playing Warband before all these new Medieval combat titles really does ruin all of them. Just watching 5 seconds of that video and I can already dismiss it.
Also what the hell these models have tiny heads.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Kafein on January 15, 2016, 09:35:13 pm
It's easy to take Warband for granted with it's comparably shitty graphics and kinda lolzy animations but years later we still havent seen anything live up to it
The worst thing is that it takes about 10 minutes in the SP tutorial to figure out that Warband's combat system has unbelievable depth. All it takes is actually having people play it.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Tibe on January 15, 2016, 09:56:20 pm
M&B is a disease that should be avoided. I played almost everything before it and I was happy. Now I seek for something similar to it and always end up disappointed. :(
If Bannerlord ends up sucking, I will truly be lost forever.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Asheram on June 14, 2016, 02:10:28 am
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Golem on June 14, 2016, 04:31:53 pm
Best moba 2016
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Asheram on July 25, 2016, 04:43:41 am
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Leshma on July 26, 2016, 02:29:14 am
That's kind of a badass tbh
Would love roleplay brienne the tart
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Tibes on July 26, 2016, 10:31:15 am
Watching these vids I begin to realise that M&B is more realistic than we thought. :lol:
You just rushing in the middle of sea of enemies and they all take turns on hitting you does not work in any way and is cheesy as fuck. It just makes me horribly cringe these days. Mindless Warband bots all charging and swinging at you all at once is where the realism is at. You have to make an insane amount of effort to not get overwhelmed. The typical Ubisoft thing of adding more enemies to the insane crowd around you does not increase difficulty really. Just makes the fight longer.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Taser on July 27, 2016, 03:45:56 am
Yeah it isn't a great combat system. Does look fun though but along the lines of an upgraded dynasty warriors. Better combat but still not up to par
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: [ptx] on July 27, 2016, 10:21:19 am
Well, I liked Dynasty/Samurai Warriors, this looks like good, shallow fun. Not worth a 60$ price, but i'd be totally fine shelling out some 30eur or so for it.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Asheram on August 18, 2016, 02:03:24 am
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Kafein on February 14, 2017, 07:54:21 pm
So, anybody played this? Thoughts? It's casul shit isn't it?
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Asheram on February 14, 2017, 07:59:33 pm
I played the beta this weekend for about 20 minutes, not my cup of tea. The aesthetics were nice though. I would play Chivalry before this.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Molly on February 14, 2017, 08:10:17 pm
So, anybody played this? Thoughts? It's casul shit isn't it?
Yeah it good, 2v2 is especially fun. Its got depth in the combat, a bit like m&b combined with chivalry but also with fighting game elements to it. It wouldnt surprise me if this gets rather competitive even, it really does seem pretty well made. Havent played since beta though even if i bought it.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Vibe on February 14, 2017, 10:01:50 pm
It's definitely far more difficult than the videos show. It's more of a fighting game than a Warband style game. It's good but there's some serious balance issues at the moment.
source: a lot of hours in beta
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Kafein on February 15, 2017, 12:43:38 am
Ok, great. Even watching streams I had the impression this was more interesting than the trailers suggested.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Vibe on February 16, 2017, 10:44:34 am
Ok, great. Even watching streams I had the impression this was more interesting than the trailers suggested.
There's a lot more mechanics and interactions than videos can show, unless you're watching for hours and know what you're looking for. Add to that every character being different in terms of attacks, health, damage, moves, animations all the way down to different dash and guardbreak distances, throws and other special mechanics and it adds up to a lot.
It's definitely not on the difficulty level of fighting games but to be honest those games are frustrating unless you've poured hundreds upon hundreds of hours of learning the basics, your characters and every other characters movesets enough that you can defend against. I think ubisoft made a good middle ground here.
The story mode was decent enough as well and not that easy on hardest difficulty (no block indicators).
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Gravoth_iii on February 19, 2017, 09:36:25 pm
There are class tiers, but it seems like most can be put to use quite well even if they arent top tier. Top tier combat seems to boil down to feints, guard breaks and parries, lots of reads and mindgames and basically no spamming. A bit similar to M&B but much easier to grasp, and all the parts are much more necessary to win. Being defensive is beneficial which can be rather boring, but duels last shorter than the average crpg duel so to me its still in a fine spot.
Cant wait for Xena Valkyrie buffs, just a slight boost in damage would be sick. Having a good time still, you know its a good gameplay when you can get locked in hours upon hours of practise, and still enjoy it thoroughly. Same happens to me in Rocket League, nice to have other semi competitive games to swap between.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Vibe on February 20, 2017, 09:51:31 am
This is a good review of the game for those who haven't played yet:
Tbh my only gripe with the game at the moment is that high skill play is ultra defensive. If you attack first you're pretty much guaranteed to be punished. Really hope they change that up as it's a game of patience currently and a bit boring because of it. Thankfully not a lot of people play like that, so most of the matches are still fun.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Patoson on February 20, 2017, 05:58:13 pm
Everything in that review are exactly my thoughts. So many people complain about P2P, and I agree that the disconnects and not being able to play suck, but, if Ubi manages to fix these problems, it would be perfect, because, unlike with dedicated servers, I never notice lag (missing blocks, parries,...), and in Warband I raged so many times because of having a higher ping.
I love For Honor.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Kafein on February 21, 2017, 12:09:14 am
He talks about group fights being kinda bad, is that true? I don't mind playing only duel, though.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Gravoth_iii on February 21, 2017, 01:12:17 am
He talks about group fights being kinda bad, is that true? I don't mind playing only duel, though.
Easier with some classes. The game has a ton of environment kills so you always have the chance of throwing people off cliffs or into spikes quickly. But otherwise you gotta block a lot and build up revenge to fight back with hyper armor. Its an okay system, a bit annoying at times. But duels or 2v2 is preferred, less ganking.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Taser on February 21, 2017, 01:24:56 am
Going off the beta since I haven't bought it yet, group fights were a bitch a if you had nothing around to throw them down or into. At least in mount and blade you can handle multiple opponents especially since you don't lock on to fight.
Its not to say it can't be done even without the revenge buildup but its not as easy. If it had been setup so you didn't have to lock on, oh fuck it'd be awesome.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Gravoth_iii on February 21, 2017, 06:51:41 am
Going off the beta since I haven't bought it yet, group fights were a bitch a if you had nothing around to throw them down or into. At least in mount and blade you can handle multiple opponents especially since you don't lock on to fight.
Its not to say it can't be done even without the revenge buildup but its not as easy. If it had been setup so you didn't have to lock on, oh fuck it'd be awesome.
Well, it took me hundreds of hours to survive ganks in M&B, to say that its harder to survive ganks in For Honor after ~10 hours gameplay is at least in my perspective not right. Revenge mechanic actually makes it quite doable, it all comes down to being able to counter-guard break, and to keep track of blocking. You can block multiple people while targetting one, so you just follow the markers that show up on your character.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38sPNZ8QHO4&t=0s Based crowbcat, not that ive experienced this yet, not at this scale at least.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Patoson on February 21, 2017, 10:55:07 am
That all sounds scary. I had a lag or whatever it was situation once where the enemy did a heavy attack on me without animation, and suddenly I was being executed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xf9NS-Hkwy4
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Vibe on February 21, 2017, 12:17:13 pm
Group fights are both good and bad.
Bad from two points: - revenge with a proper build is retarded (damage really high), and you can do cheese knockdowns with the activation for guaranteed hits - against players that know what they're doing you won't be able to win 1vX (as in they dont just spam attacks at you), revenge or not
Good from one point - it breaks the monotony of the ultradefensive playstyle that's currently how most tryhards play. Luckily there's not so many tryhards around yet (no ranked gamemode), but just because of that I like 4v4 or 2v2. It forces people to fight differently and can make for some interesting fights.
To sum it up, I like group fights myself.
As for P2P: sure there are some legit complaints but honestly more than 90% of my games don't have any issues (lags, disconnects). Seeing the comments in that video just makes me think none of those people have actually played the game or they don't know how to forward ports or something. They're talking as if the game is completely ruined by P2P when in fact most of the time players don't really have issues with connection.
Here's a funny fact, in Rainbow Six Siege, Ubisoft's other popular multiplayer game that works on a server basis, I have way more connection/lag issues (everyone does...) :lol:
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Gravoth_iii on February 21, 2017, 06:16:32 pm
Okay so im on NAT Moderate, and my friend i want to play with is NAT Strict. So we are unable to play with eachother. Had to open ports and shit, still no success, P2P SeemsGood
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Vibe on February 21, 2017, 08:39:42 pm
Okay so im on NAT Moderate, and my friend i want to play with is NAT Strict. So we are unable to play with eachother. Had to open ports and shit, still no success, P2P SeemsGood
Unrelated to P2P, probably. Rainbow Six Siege has the same shit. I had NAT strict (in FH as well) until I opened all the required ports, are you sure you got them all?
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Gravoth_iii on February 21, 2017, 09:27:09 pm
Unrelated to P2P, probably. Rainbow Six Siege has the same shit. I had NAT strict (in FH as well) until I opened all the required ports, are you sure you got them all?
Will try it again i guess. And ill just simply blame ubitrash then.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Taser on February 21, 2017, 11:32:31 pm
Well, it took me hundreds of hours to survive ganks in M&B, to say that its harder to survive ganks in For Honor after ~10 hours gameplay is at least in my perspective not right. Revenge mechanic actually makes it quite doable, it all comes down to being able to counter-guard break, and to keep track of blocking. You can block multiple people while targetting one, so you just follow the markers that show up on your character.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38sPNZ8QHO4&t=0s Based crowbcat, not that ive experienced this yet, not at this scale at least.
Fair point but without the markers coming up for block its much harder since you're locked in on one enemy.
I will admit that any melee game that comes out is compared to the standard of mount and blade and I usually find flaws because of this. For honor is fun and I liked it in the beta but I dislike the locking on. If it didn't have that and you could fight freely, oh shit it'd be awesome. Even with only 3 directions.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Molly on February 22, 2017, 08:14:27 am
At least theyve stepped up their game quality, Rayman, R6S, For honor. All pretty good.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Vibe on February 22, 2017, 09:41:01 am
Ubi gets a lot of shit but at least their multiplayer games are quite decent. This might sound like fanboyism but trust me it's not, there's plenty of very annoying issues ubi needs to fix in their games.
Rainbow 6 Siege, which is a shooter that has grown quite a lot after a very rocky release (this is very rare to see in gaming world). Steep, at least personally, I found it pretty decent. For Honor, which is another good multiplayer game that went far beyond my expectations from videos. The Division, while I only played betas and free weekends, since I didn't have time for another game, I also found pretty decent.
To add, Ubi takes great care of their games post release. Sure, some content is through their DLCs, which in R6 can simply be acquired by playing enough and I'm going to guess it's going to be the same for For Honor (god what a cringy name for a game). But in both R6 Siege and Division they've fixed up a LOT of shit and catered their games to community's wishes.
They get a lot of flak but they don't deserve half of it, these days at least.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Umbra on February 22, 2017, 12:13:55 pm
Sees "locking on" shit tier console pesantry. Moves along
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Patoson on February 22, 2017, 12:40:08 pm
They've said that in For Honor you can get all the DLC content by just grinding for free too, so that's cool. And the microtransactions, even though they are not cool, don't mean much of a difference, since it's just for gear for 4v4 modes, and if you are a good player you can beat people with better gear than you.
About the name - For Honor - yeah they chose the right one. The amount of salt it produces is priceless.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: njames89 on February 22, 2017, 12:55:24 pm
Seems interesting as a game. Might look into it if CRPG ever dies again.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Asheram on February 22, 2017, 05:49:52 pm
What is the point of 3 factions if the PvP is only a two way fight? Talk about non immersive, medieval knights fighting on the same team as their supposed enemies.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Gurgumul on February 22, 2017, 06:28:36 pm
What is the point of 3 factions if the PvP is only a two way fight? Talk about non immersive, medieval knights fighting on the same team as their supposed enemies.
Now that you mention it, yeah, it makes no sense. :D The game is fun though.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Kafein on February 23, 2017, 12:14:21 am
Dark Souls PvP is an acquired taste tbh. Mount & Blade really spoiled it for me. All these games lacking feints and not letting you trade 600 blocks per minute with your opponent just aren't as good.
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: Kadeth on February 23, 2017, 01:30:11 am
My experience with the beta was terrible, as it is with most peer to peer games. Too much inconsistency, which is disappointing because it looks like it could have been a lot of fun while waiting for bonerlord.
I guess it's probably not as much of a problem in EU/NA where general internet connection quality is decent... but surely Ubi can afford dedicated servers?
Title: Re: For Honor (Medieval War Game)
Post by: njames89 on February 23, 2017, 01:18:31 pm