PC Gamer: Lord British's rough new world

PC Gamer has an article giving their impressions of the current release:
http://www.pcgamer.com/shroud-of-the-avatar-impressions-lord-britishs-rough-new-world/

A couple teasers:
"It is rough, though. Combat is hilariously awful. My first battle past the brief tutorial sees me whipping out my sword and swatting at a deer with sounds that could have been someone's hand patting a flour bag. Never mind that the animations are disappointing by the standards of the last decade; that sound is the sound of madness, and it carries over to every other weapon I try. As for the deer herself? She merely bounds back and forth, letting me swat her with each pass until she plops over so I can loot her hide."

"All respect due to Mr. Garriott, but I can't help but think this is what most of us imagined Elder Scrolls Online would be like in the early days following its announcement, at least in concept. You can play alone if you wish, but you can also experience the same world with friends. Sure, its combat may be awfully rough, the framerates are jittery even with beefy graphics cards, and the environments (though lovely in spots) still look years old. But right now SotA comes closer to the reality of a "Skyrim Online" than anything I've seen in recent months."

What do you think of the impressions? Discuss below!

 

well sounds fair SOTA is not a pretty girl but she gets the job done with bag over her head

the one thing he does good is gets your imagination going if you don't have any your not going to like it

not to mention it is still very early lets get the whole game up and running then dress the old girl up

 

overall a good review

 

I liked the article except for: "Sometimes, however, a tiny, teensy-weensy bit of hand-holding would be nice."

 

From the article, "Combat is hilariously awful."

I can't disagree with that, but I'm sure I wouldn't agree with the reason "why" which isn't explained in the article other than to say that the sounds and AI are not up to the author's standards.

Dear game critics, the combat IS hilariously awful, but it's because it's a DPS war just like every other game out there on the market! If this combat is bad (and it IS), so too is anything else you've played in the last 20 years. Which is actually what you should be writing about.

I have mixed feelings about this article because on the one hand I have nothing wrong with some guy playing this game for the first time over a Thanksgiving weekend and then writing a "review" that is obviously less than informed about the game. Afterall, that's what customers do all the time they just don't publish what they think. So the devs had better take what's being said to heart and fix things because this is the reality of the world they're making a game for.

But on the other hand, this author is clueless and really doesn't seem to understand what a good game really is. I think the article is meant to be positive, but I came away thinking that it was uninformed, rushed, and typical of gaming critics everywhere.

 

please enlighten us drocis on what a combat system looks like that does not involve building dps?

I'm not sure what you're saying about combat systems in general?

Are you suggesting that there should be no hit points, and therefore no damage amounts

Multipliers and things like that which have come standard?

You are correct in saying that his judgement of a combat system based off of enemy AI and sound effects is terribly weak.

It's the other part of your threadI do not understand.

 

Sounds like the guy was trying to be fair, and he was ultimately optimistic about it being a good game.

I still don't really get what others are comparing the game to when they make general references to modern MMOs. Most recently produced MMO I played was the ESO beta, close to around when it left beta and was open to the public. Though obviously still rough, I still like the graphics and art in SoTA much better than anything I saw in ESO. And wasn't all deer did in any TES game just try to run away as you hit them? Or am I not remembering something? I'm hopeful that as the game is developed more, the creature AI is refined, and so are the graphics, and everything else progresses. But, like I said, I just don't understand some of the criticisms.

 

For better or worse, this game needs it. I have been against in-game tutorials for like ever (RTFM), but given this game is throwing away a lot of the modern conveniences of other MMOs -- games the current generation (and even past) have grown up on and become too familiar and comfortable with -- there will need to be some transition for these players. I think the first-action tutorials are a good step, but not necessarily so in its presentation currently. I'm sure it will evolve to make the first time user experience easier and more fun.

Welcome to PC Gamer, especially when forced to write an article over the Thanksgiving weekend on a game you've never played.

I did not take his comments about combat being awful because it was a DPS war (yes, I know you're on a tirade about this all over the forums). He's simply describing his visual / auditory experience of combat, not a commentary on damage calcs underneath. He clearly is new to SotA but that's exactly what every new player to SotA is experiencing right now, and you can see his same type of feedback on all the "new user" posts here. We can throw "construction zone" in their face all we want but it doesn't invalidate the experience. So you're spot on about that aspect and what the devs need to do, but we've seen this internal dilemma play out over the past year: feature implementation vs polish.

 

It is a nice first impressions from a person...no more valid then any other opinion though...so take it for what it is.

I'm curious \what reaction the game will get from reviewers around.

 

Yes, I know that smack. I was saying that instead of making a commentary about "combat" while really talking about the sounds his weapons made, I would've rather there was actual substance there - and I gave an example of what I consider valid critical feedback that I'd like to see.

 

We don't have all the spells implemented, and the combat isn't fully balanced. I imagine in the end, it won't just be a pure DPS race. Bludgeon weapons have some great non-DPS abilities (stun/root/etc) that look very interesting.

I like how SWTOR handles aggro abilities in PvP. If a tank taunts a player, and that player attacks someone else (a DPS or healer for example) then they do less damage because they are distracted by the tank. So tanks can use aggro abilities to protect other classes in PvP.

 

I don't think this reviewer has really thought that much about his stance, like he doesn't comprehend the alpha part of this game.

Stating the sfx as a issue atm is complete idiocy.

 

a mixed review learning slightly more on the friendly side. I don't think he will be the next 'a jwilson'.

 

enderandrew, don't you see that even in your example of SWTOR you're talking about DPS?

It's not just you, almost everyone does this. The problem is DPS, the solution is DPS, the examples are DPS. That's because all these games are like this, broken DPS wars.

Players need to wake up and realize that this is unacceptable. A system built on DPS, can't get more skills that make it not built on DPS. It doesn't work that way. The system has to be designed around elements that don't care about DPS (like blocking and countering).

 

But isn't combat itself a DPS race? I would imagine the main goal of combat would be to inflict as much damage to your opponent in the shortest amount of time.

 

I respect your point of view, Drocis. The thing is that damage has to be done in this game to progress past enemies and to participate in PvP, you have to do damage. Are you proposing that we scrap the 'damage' model from the game and just let our characters attack with no damage?

More specifically Damage is a crucial portion of the game, and is based off of dice rolls much like dungeons and dragons. Where would the D&D influence go to if you couldn't do 239 damage critical?

Damage is to Weapons
as Materials are to Crafting

 

I disagree.

Using a stun isn't causing damage.

Healing isn't causing damage.

Taunting to drag aggro isn't causing damage.

I'm not sure how you got that my entire post is about damage.

Ultimately, you kill someone in PvP when they run out of life, but you need to survive as well. You can't fully escape that model. You can only add depth. You're asking to have a model for sports where you feel like everything is ultimately about points and you wish the sport would eliminate points.

 

No. No it's not. But I realize this is completely counter intuitive to today's gamer.

Try to think outside of the box you've been put into for a moment. (This is not an insult, it's me pleading for you to forget what you think you know about "combat")

In real life, do swords have "damage" multipliers? In real life, if I stab someone with a polearm do they bleed "hit points"?

Of course not. But we've been trained to think in terms of this stupid hit point system.

What should be happening is that when I walk up to someone with a sword and stab them in the back, they're dead. End of combat. But because of latency, and the reality of computer gaming...that's not fair or "fun" for various reasons.

But this doesn't mean that having DPS wars is needed. It just means we have to try to simulate the experience of combat in a more tactical way. For example, if shields can BLOCK your attack, then it doesn't really matter what your DPS is because I can block it, right? So now the question should be, well then how do I counter a shield block? Then the question is, well then how to do I counter that move as a defender?

See, the whole thing could be more of a chess match if we wanted it to. We don't need DAMAGE at all. We could design a system that has more to do with the choices that players make and not the damage their weapons and armor can do or take.

And honestly, someday some game developer out there is going to do this and the whole gaming world will say "this is so brilliant!" But until this happens, people don't want to take the risks of doing it a different way.

For all the inventiveness of the "deck system" the core base of the combat system is no different than WOW or EQ or Archeage. It's just DPS vs. DPS. Yawn, boring, stupid, I hate it.

 

Everything you named, (stuns and healing), are DPS. While someone is stunned they have zero DPS.

Stuns and roots and all that are just tricking people into thinking it's something else. But the reality is that it's just a DPS attack. EVERYTHING in the combat design for SOTA is a function of DPS....everything. (unless you count a few skills like Light that have no impact on combat at all).

Unless you can BLOCK and Counter skills and spells...it's a DPS war.

 

/me came to see about an article and see what everyone thought of it... Got confused reading the replies... How are these remotely on topic? Aren't there topics for these kinds of discussions? Why always bring em everywhere else?