TW3 & Horsees

[AceofAces1981]

TW3 & Horsees

Does anyone know if a horse call will be implemented to retrieve your mount in case it runs off? Also, what do we know about the addition of mounted combat?

 

[Agent_Blue]

Does anyone know if a horse call will be implemented to retrieve your mount in case it runs off? Also, what do we know about the addition of mounted combat?

Apparently, it suffices to whistle and one's horsie will come running.

I object.

No to magic horses.
No to them materializing out of thin air.

You should either bring your own with you to the Skellige, for example, or you attempt to tame a wild stallion or you just

*walk*.

 

[FoggyFishburne]

Apparently you'll be able to whistle and your horse will come prancing to you. Just like in Red Dead and AssCreed.

 

[AceofAces1981]

Perfect! Now what about mounted combat? Confirmed or not released yet?

 

[FoggyFishburne]

Perfect! Now what about mounted combat? Confirmed or not released yet?

A little birdie told me that RED was considering it but nothing's set in stone. It's very likely that we're gonna get mounted combat in TW3 but it's not going to be very deep. The real meat of the game is fighting on foot. Not to say that the mounted combat will be shit, but it's not something that's going to be viable tactic in every single fight.

That's all I "know" and with know I mean "I have no idea what the fuck's going on!" Rumours and speculations, that's all we're getting at the moment regarding some of the more obscure mechanics and features. We'll just have to wait and see.

 

[AceofAces1981]

A little birdie told me that RED was considering it but nothing's set in stone. It's very likely that we're gonna get mounted combat in TW3 but it's not going to be very deep. The real meat of the game is fighting on foot. Not to say that the mounted combat will be shit, but it's not something that's going to be viable tactic in every single fight.

That's all I "know" and with know I mean "I have no idea what the fuck's going on!" Rumours and speculations, that's all we're getting at the moment regarding some of the more obscure mechanics and features. We'll just have to wait and see.

LOL! Thanks, Foggy! Yes, I figured mounted combat wouldn't be a huge part, but a side accent for those who wish to dispatch with pesky wolf packs or the lone wandering thief along the trails in quick order.

I wonder if RED is going to allow you to use sneak attacks and pick how you want to fight and engage enemies. In the TW1 & TW2 it's very linear and more of a point A to point B and get shit done kind of thing. Now I know this isn't Skyrim or Red Dead Redemption, but freedom in these types of games to fight how you want, go where you want and do what you want when you want to do it is kind of the trend these days, no?

 

[volsung]

Let's not get into the whole linearity issue. I swear, it's like we played different games entirely. So much asscreed and bethesda has clouded people's vision.

 

[AceofAces1981]

Well, those are the biggest games that have raised the bar in what makes a good RPG. They have redefined what an RPG should be. These are the giants that RED has to compete with in order to be successful. RED isn't just going to ride on the long time fans that have played every RPG since Zelda and can't handle the wonderful change and advancement into what an RPG needs these days. Most people come to expect certain things of a game once the bar in that genre has been raised; whether it's someone who had played every game in the series or a new fan that they have just earned.

You can't deny that all of The Witchers, although they are great games, up until this point are very linear in many ways. It's only reasonable that RED update their game rules and freedom to what is now a staple in the genre.

All of this being said, I have no doubt that RED will do this and have a great foot hold on the competition.

 

[Beestonian]

You can't deny that all of The Witchers, although they are great games, up until this point are very linear in many ways. It's only reasonable that RED update their game rules and freedom to what is now a staple in the genre.

Just because mediocrity is staple doesn't mean everyone has to adopt it.

 

[ONLY_ONCE]

I just hope the horse looks and plays Nothing like Skyrim.
It looked like two people inside a stuffed animal costume
and it jumped as light as a feather. Hell No. LOL..

 

[AceofAces1981]

I suppose you think that winning Game of the Year, making millions on the first day of launch, and retaining the game's replay value to this day mediocre? You must be the blindest fanboy of them all.

For it's day, TW1 and 2 were right up there with TES, but not on the open world exploration aspect. They have a great story and good battles, but now they can have it all and then some.

 

[Aaden]

Well, those are the biggest games that have raised the bar in what makes a good RPG.

Assassin's Creed and Skyrim are no Benchmarks for good RPGs. The former isn't even a RPG and the latter is a shame for the genre in every way except sandbox game worlds. I won't question AC's or RDR's success or appeal, but if you want to talk good RPGs you have to look elsewhere - these games merely adopted few RPG elements and put them into the action/action adventure genre, a thing very common these days.

Still, there's one lesson (open world) RPGs can learn from AC: Huge, sprawling cities that feel alive. But there's several key differences between action adventures and RPGs that make it a lot harder to implement - most importantly that NPCs are usually linked with the game mechanics a lot more in RPGs, instead of being mere cardboard cutouts.

 

[AceofAces1981]

I just hope the horse looks and plays Nothing like Skyrim.
It looked like two people inside a stuffed animal costume
and it jumped as light as a feather. Hell No. LOL..

Agreed! The horses in Skyrim move very awkwardly and weren't at all that much faster than travelling on foot. They are also very vulnerable. In the trailers for TW3 you can see that the horse riding is very much like Rockstar did in Red Dead Redemption with very realistic movements and speed.

 

[AceofAces1981]

Assassin's Creed and Skyrim are no Benchmarks for good RPGs. The former isn't even a RPG and the latter is a shame for the genre in every way except sandbox game worlds. I won't question AC's or RDR's success or appeal, but if you want to talk good RPGs you have to look elsewhere - these games merely adopted few RPG elements and put them into the action/action adventure genre, a thing very common these days.

Still, there's one lesson (open world) RPGs can learn from AC: Huge, sprawling cities that feel alive. But there's several key differences between action adventures and RPGs that make it a lot harder to implement - most importantly that NPCs are usually linked with the game mechanics a lot more in RPGs, instead of being mere cardboard cutouts.

I disagree with your first point. Just because the RPG genre changes or evolves from what it started out as in the early 90's doesn't mean it isn't still an RPG. Skyrim is completely an RPG. You have to look at the definition of the term. You can choose many different ROLES in which to PLAY the GAME. Choose your own style of combat, factions, weapons and armours. The only thing I can see a difference with are the lack of huge cumbersome menus that accompany so many dated RPG's. I'd rather focus on playing my role than going over huge menus in order to level up, checking your inventory, preforming alchemy, and learning spells. The old ways are changing, the new ways are here and can only continue to change.

There's no point in being a PURIST in the ever changing world of video gaming.

 

[volsung]

I suppose many classic action games like Blade of Darkness and Alien Shooter are RPG's according to your definition. Also Batman Arkham series and probably even sports games.

Lets see... should I shoot or should I pass? well my character has a good long range shooting attribute so I'll try and score 3 points!

-- NBA Jam the RPG.

 

[Beestonian]

I suppose you think that winning Game of the Year, making millions on the first day of launch, and retaining the game's replay value to this day mediocre? You must be the blindest fanboy of them all.

Okay, let me rephrase. Skyrim (I can't speak of Assassin's creed because I haven't played it) had a totally different goal. It was extremely modular exploration and customization based system, but its story is lacklustre. The Witcher, by contrast, is all about relating ideas through storytelling - it introduces themes to the player's mind and invites them to think about complicated topics relevant to their own lives. (The Witcher 1 did anyway.)

To that end, having controlled linearity allows you to better design the developer's story, and conservatively opening it up to player choice allows the player to associate their decisions with consequences on fictional characters they care about. If you take too much power away from the developers to control the player's experience of the game, it becomes harder to achieve that goal, and the fundamental strength of the Witcher series is weakened as a result.

Does that answer your protest?

 

[Aaden]

I disagree with your first point. Just because the RPG genre changes or evolves from what it started out as in the early 90's doesn't mean it isn't still an RPG. Skyrim is completely an RPG. You have to look at the definition of the term. You can choose many different ROLES in which to PLAY the GAME. Choose your own style of combat, factions, weapons and armours. The only thing I can see a difference with are the lack of huge cumbersome menus that accompany so many dated RPG's. I'd rather focus on playing my role than going over huge menus in order to level up, checking your inventory, preforming alchemy, and learning spells. The old ways are changing, the new ways are here and can only continue to change.

There's no point in being a PURIST in the ever changing world of video gaming.

I didn't claim that Skyrim isn't an RPG, I said it's a bad one. The interaction with the world is so shallow that it hardly matters what role you assume. There's nearly no reactivity, other than a few audio cues. There's not a single memorable character with any depth in his/her personality - nor can you interact with characters in any meaningful way. The whole world stands still unless you do something (best example: the civil war that is supposed to be raging on, but nothing whatsoever happens). The storywriting for both main and side quests is a joke.

If that's what you think the RPG genre should involve into, okay. But I don't. I want complex, intriguing stories with meaningful decisions. I want memorable NPCs that have more purpose than waiting for you to fetch their quest. I want the world, characters and story to react to my choices and develop accordingly. And in all these aspects and more, that make a RPG good in my opinion, W1+W2 kick Skyrim's ass (as do many other games, because Skyrim does a very poor job at them).

 

[Agent_Blue]

Here's my suggestion. Two sticky threads:

#1. What is a RPG? Community section.

#2. Water balloons, throw your own water balloons at SKyrim. Fan Art section


On topic and on the Fan Art section, Skyrim's take on horses is immensely flawed. They serve no purpose. They're slow and look chubby as draught horse, yet can't carry anything besides the PC. They're inventory-less. Neither do they have any stats associated to them.

Todd Howard specifically stated Bethesda could have implemented inventories but felt it would have made horses overpowered.

I call bogus on that. CDProjekt, make a left instead.

 

[AceofAces1981]

Okay, let me rephrase. Skyrim (I can't speak of Assassin's creed because I haven't played it) had a totally different goal. It was extremely modular exploration and customization based system, but its story is lacklustre. The Witcher, by contrast, is all about relating ideas through storytelling - it introduces themes to the player's mind and invites them to think about complicated topics relevant to their own lives. (The Witcher 1 did anyway.)

To that end, having controlled linearity allows you to better design the developer's story, and conservatively opening it up to player choice allows the player to associate their decisions with consequences on fictional characters they care about. If you take too much power away from the developers to control the player's experience of the game, it becomes harder to achieve that goal, and the fundamental strength of the Witcher series is weakened as a result.

Does that answer your protest?

Indeed that made more sense to me. Now I see your point of view more clearly. Thanks for that. It's not really a protest, just open for discussion.

 

[AceofAces1981]

I didn't claim that Skyrim isn't an RPG, I said it's a bad one. The interaction with the world is so shallow that it hardly matters what role you assume. There's nearly no reactivity, other than a few audio cues. There's not a single memorable character with any depth in his/her personality - nor can you interact with characters in any meaningful way. The whole world stands still unless you do something (best example: the civil war that is supposed to be raging on, but nothing whatsoever happens). The storywriting for both main and side quests is a joke.

If that's what you think the RPG genre should involve into, okay. But I don't. I want complex, intriguing stories with meaningful decisions. I want memorable NPCs that have more purpose than waiting for you to fetch their quest. I want the world, characters and story to react to my choices and develop accordingly. And in all these aspects and more, that make a RPG good in my opinion, W1+W2 kick Skyrim's ass (as do many other games, because Skyrim does a very poor job at them).

I do see your point. And I do agree with you on the story and NPC front. I see no reason why we can't just have it all, which is what I think TW3 is going to trying to achieve. I realize that it's hard to have everything perfect, but why not strive for it? All I was saying is that comparing to what I get to do in TW1 and TW2 to Red Dead, Skyrim, and others of today, they lack the freedom of choice when trying to play a certain way. Which is why the situational writing in Skyrim is dull. I suppose it's pointless and foolish to compare two games from different decades to each other.