Jump to content
The Community Blog (An Invitation)

Merlkir

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    410

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Merlkir

  1. Merlkir
    I won't vote in the poll, because I don't want to select any options in the 2nd and 3rd part, yet it requires me to do so. About weapons not accurately representing one type of damage - why not give them values from all three types? I suggested this before and I think it's still valid, though it was dismissed as too complicated. But! 1) a warhammer (a proper one, not the giant fantasy mauls) or a poleaxe deal both piercing and blunt trauma. 2) weapons could allow for different attacks with their parts - a sword blade deals slashing and piercing damage, while the pommel deals blunt. If you face a skeleton, you'd rather bash it with a pommel, or even hold the sword by the blade and use it as a hammer. Didn't Fallout have something like this? 3*) Missiles or ranged weapons being limited to piercing is also not true. You can have blunt arrows, slingshots and a boomerang could be a slashing one (or some kind of rotating thrown blade, whatever). While we're at it, if you wanted to deal with heavy armour, why not use heavy bodkin arrows? You'd get a bit of blunt, a bit of piercing.
  2. Merlkir
    You're making it into a false dichotomy, it's entirely possible to have both. Also SE2 is not a game for children.
  3. Merlkir
    IIRC spirit engine 2 uses both these faces and description in the dialogue window. Which worked quite well. I thought.
  4. Merlkir
    Spirit Egine 2 did something of the sort, quite successfuly I thought.
  5. Merlkir
    Almost everything you said is not true. 1) Unrealistic foes: a lich has the shape of a person. A dead person, a person who can probably cast spells, but if he's attacking me with a sword or a spear, we have a pretty good idea of what that'll look like. sure he might be a lot stronger than a human, we can adjust for that. A dragon will move and fight depending on its design. Dragons used to be quite lizardlike, lately the common design draws from lions or dogs as well. Besides, despite having a few monsters which are entirely made up and for which we can only come up with vaguely similar reference, there's always lots of humanoids fighting with weapons. No reason to not do it right because of one beholder. 2) Motion capture is a nice tool, sure. But it is not necessary. A good animator can animate this kind of motion well from video reference. Like the article mentions, Prince of Persia had rotoscoped animations of very low-res pixelated characters. And it looked very very good. 3) HEMA people aren't primarily the type of "reenactors" you can just put aside as kids playing knights. They're often much much better at what they do than your precious Eastern "masters". Surprise, these guys haven't been killing people for generations either. The master-student way of preserving a martial art is not entirely reliable, in fact I'd prefer to read a fighting manual written by a master who was doing killing for a living, rather than to study under a master of uncertain mastery passed down from generation to generation. (quite possibly losing important bits of the art in the process) The fact is, what these HEMA guys do works very well. There's a lot of study material, experimenting and sparring. It's most definitely not "almost entirely guesswork". The article is pretty good.
  6. Merlkir
    I have no idea what kind of lighting model Obsidian use, but I think they could work like that indeed. You need to account for clipping and render order, but most engines do that pretty well nowadays.
  7. Merlkir
    I think you're going for a bit too small and oddly shaped needlessly unique tiles. The advantage of dungeons is that they're often quite geometric in shape, there's some kind of symmetry. The basic units are corridors and rooms. The way games like Skyrim handle tiles (because they do use tile sets, believe it or not) is exactly that - bits of corridors, doors, turns etc etc. And you can do multilevel tiling - tile bits of basic architecture together and then tile smaller items inside those tiles as another layer, to create unique looking content inside the large architectural pieces. And of course, tiles don't necessarily have to be square shaped, there's a whole field of geometry/math dealing with tile/pattern generation. By traditional design, a location has to be fitted into a square or a rectangle, which makes things easier, as we can divide those into a variety of shapes. Of couse, another way to do it would be procedural textures painted and blended inside of procedurally generated shapes, at least for the very basic architecture. That would work well for what you English speaking people call "organic" areas like woods, clay tunnels, swamps and so on. edit: so in your example, the basic land and water are generated, the bridge and statues are another lever of tiles over them, as are all the grass patches, bushes and so on. Of course blending them properly so that there aren't seams would be a bit of a challenge, but it can be done.
  8. Merlkir
    Sorry, if you insist on "rephrasing" what I write, I won't be wasting more time with you.
  9. Merlkir
    I said nothing about its looks. Roguelikes by their nature have a specific look. Duh, tiles. It CAN be done, they'll already have plenty of graphics assets, rendering them in tileable form is a matter of hours, days at most. If one decides to play a roguelike minigame, one does not expect it to look like the other locations in the whole game. If you weren't such a troll, you'd not keep making up stuff on top of "I was wondering whether (either in this game or in the expansion) it would be possible to consider leaving a "secret entrance" to levels below 15 that are randomly generated with increasing difficult monsters and sort of act like a "rogue-like" mini-game?". Because the answer to OP's idea is "Yes, it is entirely possible."
  10. Merlkir
    FFS. The point is - the guy explained what he wanted very clearly, there was no reason to bring up Diablo. And no, the graphical style allows for plenty of randomness and yes, I think they could do a very simple roguelike minigame extending the Endless Paths. Nobody asked for a Diablo clone, he clearly states his understanding of the adjustments that would have to be made to the graphics.
  11. Merlkir
    You can choose to play in Hardcore mode, which does that. So it's like a Roguelike for pussies.
  12. Merlkir
    The guy said "like Roguelikes". Which pretty much sums up what he described in the longer post. Randomness, procedural generation, increasing difficulty towards infinity. Like Roguelikes. Dream came in, being his usual self, and posted "Couldn't you have just said Diablo? ". The thing is, even if the people at Blizzard were inspired by Roguelikes, Diablo isn't a typical Roguelike. As someone else pointed out - Diablo is only semi-random, it has a finite set of levels containing constant objects and quests. There is no reason why he should've likened it to Diablo rather than Roguelikes. Then again, Dream knows better, as always.
  13. Merlkir
    Dream, dude. Stop trolling, go play a Roguelike and then come back telling us Diablo is exactly like that.
  14. Merlkir
    No, Diablo is not really a Roguelike.
  15. Merlkir
    This is not true. Some of the nicer Roguelikes actually have graphics tiles. There's no reason why those tiles couldn't be tileable prerendered assets. Hey, Diablo was made that way. It's an interesting idea, one that I'd see being done by a mod, or an expansion. Why not.
  16. Merlkir
    I'm glad they realized what was so awesome about the IE games' UI. One of the many reasons I love Baldur's Gate II so much is the GUI, the mosaics in the menu and loading screens. Do something like that, please!
  17. Merlkir
    Oh. This makes me somewhat happy. Nice.
  18. Merlkir
    Can we extend the plea to spears being useful for once? Or, being present in the game at all, you know. Swords, as Avellone seems to think, are kinda boring. If there's too many of them that is, I love swords. But spears, man! Now, for anyone who thinks a spear is only useful in formation, can't possible defend, or is easily overcome by getting close (or any other old forum nonsense):
  19. Merlkir
    Sang Han (?): http://fluxen.deviantart.com/
  20. Merlkir
    The thing is - open face helmets had been used throughout history, very very commonly. More so than masked or fully closed helmets. So it seems ease of seeing around you is a good tradeoff for that specific lack of protection. Similarly, that helmet was made to be worn. The decoration wouldn't be my first choice either, but it had to be light enough to be worn (which is possible. I doubt the lion is solid metal). Plumes and helmet decorations have also been used for a long time, so it appears it's not that much of a disadvantage. So, yes, I'd prefer a real functional helmet over a poorly designed and poorly crafted fantasy one. edit: by gaps I mean primarily the gaps between the plates. There's no reason why a helmet's bowl should be made of overlapping segments with gaps between them, other than the armourer thinks it looks badass and cool, or if he can't make a single bowl. It's weak design and it's done purely for the jagged profile, I think.
  21. Merlkir
    Pavises in Mount & Blade actually work? There's a mod which allows you to stick one on the ground. Other than that, you can have it on your back and turn away while reloading.
  22. Merlkir
    Play Mount and Blade then. It has crossbowmen and pavises.
  23. Merlkir
    While it wouldn't be my outfit of choice for spelunking, it's entirely possible to travel in plate armour and to fight in it for quite a few hours. Then again, I wonder how many people would complain about the need to pull a cart full of armour and having to put it on for several minutes before every fight.
  24. Merlkir
    You said so a couple of times. We know.
  25. Merlkir
    Imagine that when it was new, in full sunlight. Man.
×
×
  • Create New...