I participated in discussions of potential upcoming features (map, open world), I engaged with the community because it was this community, and I copy/pasted posts made by the dev team to answer newbie questions because there was a lot of misinformation and not a whole lot of community management. But I didn't make a judgement on 'game good'/'game bad'/'game fail'/'game success', because I was watching and waiting.
You did also participate in balance discussions, one of them beign a thread on archery balance.
Balance discussions? Between 1v1 vs a bot or crashing to desktop I never had anything to add regarding the core combat mechanics. Although I did take issue with the 'make it exactly like Warband' argument, I believe ironically at the time I said 'let the team who came up with the game, make the game they want', can you see how my current view is still consistent with this now that a different team is making a different game? At best in terms of combat mechanics and proposed changes I copy/pasted statements already made by devs on a subject since there was a lot of misinformation and thread duplication at one point on the forum, and I deemed that more helpful than the usual "Use Search Function before posting" that others were in the habit of saying.
Why do you have to be so disingenuous Heskey? You participated in a thread about archery balance where players like Jambi and Tobi (actual good archers) had legit concerns about the game. One of the concerns brought up by the players was that archers would get stuck in animation if they were hit in melee and unable to draw their secondary weapon, which you responded with telling them the issue must've been noticed by the devs and probably being fixed thus that complaint wasn't valid or pointless and didnt belong in the thread. This is straight up taking a stand in defense of the developers and in the same time downplaying people with criticism (btw that issue is still in the game and probably brushed aside or considered a feature lmao). But you know what? This is not really an issue, you could've geniunely thought that the issue was worked upon at the time also if the archery bug was the only complaint in the thread I'd agree with you that such a thing might not merit complaint especially if the issue is being worked upon. There being several duplicate threads and very repetetive complaints means that an issue like this might've been best approached like you did.
That was not the only issue however as in the thread players would discuss about archery damage and complain about how aiming worked. These complaints are some of the examples you categorize as "make it exactly like Warband". The fact that it could take like several arrows to kill an opponent made it so that archers would get majority of their kills from melee, I mean when I played archer myself I would either shoot some arrows until I realized that is was pointless so I'd just draw my axe and get some kills in melee. Either that or I'd go naked archer and pretend I was an easy kill so whenever someone came to kill me I'd draw my weapons and attack them for an easy kill. In addition to the low damage there was also the issue of awkward aiming which you also dismissed as a "make it exactly like Warband" argument. I mean this is just straight up bad design. Let's say you shoot about 10-20 arrows a round you'd have to endure the bad aiming and low damage, now think of having to play a map with such inconvenience. Make it exactly like warband? Sure why the fuck not, ask yourself what archery in warband is? It's not like it is super unique and at its core it is very basic, something basic like that can later be built upon to give OKAM its own unique twist to it. Heck isnt that how the directional system is? They increased the amount of attack directions, made it so feinting requires 1 button and not two and making chamber a button etc.
Archery should be 'easy to play and hard to master' not 'awkward to play and fuck it I might as well take out my axe and kill this retard in melee'.
This was straight up bad game design/decisions which you decided to defend, not by claiming it was good design but by constantly discrediting the opposition you would for example compare them to people complaining balance in cRPG without actually understanding their complaints at the core since you didnt play the game.
If you actually played the game and not the forum you would've experienced this all first hand I mean the whole game was filled with shit like this:
Weapons getting stuck in the ground and obstacles because weird hitboxes making battles on uneven terrain or narrow corridors absolutely atrocious.
The combat being deceptively shallow because even though you have additional directions it replaced the feature of aiming your attacks in warband. If you wanted to do a diagonal attack in warband you could stare at the ground or the sky and how you aimed your attacks could lead to all sort of insane feints. Since in OKAM all your attacks are set you actually lose options in what you can do in combat which made the combat very fucking stale and basically became all about footwork trying to get on your opponents flank so you could abuse the awkward camera system.
Shields being by far the most retarded of designs, you could just spam them and permastun them and since shields blocked strikes automatically shielders became practise dummies especially in 1v1s. Man shields also had ghost block ranges, like a friendly shielder could be fairly far behind you and when you tried to attack an enemy his shield would just block the attack even though he wasn't facehugging you or wasnt even touched by your strike.
The list goes on but the point here is that the game was in a terrible state and you decided to engage in conversations about these issues by dismissing the criticism or actively defended the design choices which most definitely is not something a person without bias would do, person who "waits and sees".
I did actively participate in a lot in threads talking about possible features and implementation of ideas for Open World/Strategic Map though, since I had a lot of interest in Open World games (and Strategus) at the time. Dont see how I've done a 180 there, if Dupre said he'd be bringing back Strategus tomorrow (or anyone said they were working on an Open World game) and wanted ideas/discussion I'd take part instantly.
Yes those threads about the open world were perfectly suited and you did contribute to them no doubt I have no issue with that. In threads like that brainstorming and theory is more valuable since we dont have the open world out yet but threads you shouldn't have taken part of are combat threads since there's no point to speculation everything is grounded in the combat which is playable. I have to remind you again that you didnt play the game which meant you had no experience of the combat, no knowledge of it. You were completely ignorant of it and yet you decided to go to a thread about combat and give your input which would've amounted to nothing and also just so happened to be in favor of the devs.
You seem desperate to paint the picture that I ever once said the game in it's current state was good. You'll find I never did. So how can my current view contradict a view I've never expressed?
I think people like you really should look into a mirror because when you point out supposed flaws in others you are just ironically describing yourself. I never said you claimed the game was good which you can still see in my post, what I said was that you defended its flaws from a point of ignorance while actively shitting on people with actual experience of the game which is in stark contrast with the image of you as a person who "waits and sees". So who is desperately trying to paint others here? You were the one who discredited players' arguments by simplifying them to "make it exactly like Warband". You are the guy who painted your opposition as irrational and stupid by bringing up Jambi (coincidentally one of the archers you argued with).
I did enjoy that Jambi took my 'An Admin Could You?' thread seriously as a desperate plea to be made admin. Including all my broken english, and a personal guarantee to never play the game and administer justice purely from an ivory tower.
How did you make a 180? Let's just take your actions into consideration and then make a judgement based on that. Together with a group of OKAM supporters you were very active on the forum mocking staunch criticizers of the game while ridiculing their complaints. Now together with a group of OKAM scepticists you you mock staunch advocates of OKAM and ridicule their arguments and devs' changes of the game on this forum.
The thing worthy of note here is when you did this, you were exclusively mocking anti-OKAM when OKAM was still fairly popular and spirit was high, then you went with a more reserved approach when OKAM transformed from shit to unplayable and support had massively declined(entire teams falling through the ground at the beginning of the round, mass pop decline leading to small boring battles) and around the time the game was empty and Donkey Crew left you started solely mocking pro-OKAM. This is why I referred to you as a conformist.
Believe it or not I am not trying to attack your person. In the end I only got one thing to say to you, just drop the act dude, I mean don't take yourself so seriously c'mon bro. Instead of denying it just embrace who you were, we all know you were part of THE OKAM SQUAD.
visitors can't see pics , please
register or
login