The Great Irony of For Honor

[The Seraph of Tomorrow]

For Honor is a rather ironic title, given that the narrative main character of the campaign The Warden as well as the rest of the Knight characters live by their oaths of virtue, pride, and honor. Seeking to better the lives of their people and serve to protect the law and land, they are led down a path by a mad warlord who convinces them that her cause is just. Despite destroying all hope of peace and common good. Eventually leading to the knight characters to become disgruntled and turning against her in order to uphold their honor.

Now where is the Irony you ask?
lets go over this a different way.

For Honor is a rather iconic title, given that it a fighting game designed by Ubisoft with a rather unique story driven narrative unlike many fighting games; typically telling a vague story in the background through a series of games. Though through trying to implement a multiplayer system and variety within it, they have caused countless issues. The idea that most characters have a niche ability in which if you do not use it you are put at a startling disadvantage, classes which have no counter for others thus inherently unbalanced, and even some in which spaming a one or two movesets is nearly all the class can do by design and not the players choice.

This ironically brings forth a mentality that is common among games which feature unpolished, unbalanced, or simply broken mechanics. You find those who will take advantage of these things out of a vain pride derived from the pleasure of victory when it comes from using any known advantage. Thus other players will follow this trend, choosing to play with that which is broken in order to level the playing field. Which in the end becomes an endless cycle of chasing after the next broken or unbalanced item, move set, character, etc.

The idea For Honor becomes For Victory, devoling into a cluster of players who will not attempt to learn various characters and moves due to their inherent impracticality and disadvantage. Else if they do it's to learn the one Niche ability which will allow a player to hold their own against the broken nature of other move sets and characters.

So at this point the game has become a rat race, each player looking for the next best thing. Honor has been thrown out the window as it is impractical and not upheld.

Then it gets worse, a multiplayer fighting game which pits many players against each other at once. Which by all intensive purposes sound interesting, but when classes are designed linearly to fight 1v1 but now can end up as 2v1, 3v1, or 4v1. There is not much of a chance for the individual to fight back as the game is not deigned to fight more than a single opponent with the targeting / focus system. And now in addition another advantage is given for players to tip the scales in their favor by fighting in numbers. Which agree or not, encourages playing honorlessly; what incentive is there to play fairly when you can easily win this way?

I need not mention the various instant kill objects on the map which trade skill for ease.

To summarize, with all these factors taken into account. The hero's of our story fight For Honor, yet the entire design of the multiplayer encourages players to fight Without Honor. and that is the great irony.

[Just Hitting My Stride]

It's called For Honor, not With Honor.

[The Seraph of Tomorrow]

Първоначално публикувано от Doot:

It's called For Honor, not With Honor.

For Honor, means to fight For your Honor.
That makes no sense.

[Just Hitting My Stride]

Първоначално публикувано от The Necromancer:

Първоначално публикувано от Doot:

It's called For Honor, not With Honor.

For Honor, means to fight For your Honor.
That makes no sense.

Killing someone while in a war where everyone is depressed and dying, killing someone even without honor is still something to behold.

[JKArtorias]

Gladiators are brawlers. They fight for entertainment. Yes they kept the real life story of Gladiators

Conquerors are criminals turned warriors.

Centurions are Roman commanders who fought for victory. Not Honoring there enemy. But Honoring Rome by winning. I think they kept the same history as real life. Can't tell though.

What i'm saying is what about any of these characters screams honor.

Warden's oath was to uphold peace. That's the code they fought for. Yes they do hold honor highly. But not the false "honor code" the honor of fighting well in battle as well as honoring there leader. We saw this with Daubeny, how the Warden was willing to risk his life for his lord, Daubeny. Nothing to do with ganging up or not ganging. You can see that he still called his opponent honorable even after the wolf incident.

Lawbringers obviously fought to uphold law. But they aren't honorable to any enemy either.

Peacekeepers are assassins, spies, and scouts. What about them screams an honor code? They'll stab you in the back or in your sleep. They also took an oath like Warden. Guess what that oath is? To uphold peace. But they aren't Knights of honor to any enemy. That's not how they were chosen to be Peacekeepers.

Also the Knights weren't led down the path by a Warlord. If you know the story then you know what i mean. Apollyon was just the strongest. Which her backstory is psychotic while having some tragedy to it.

The game was never meant to played with honor. That was an unfortunate thing that happened. Honor was never intended. But they did intend for players to gang up on 1 person.

So the only Knight you can call Honorable in game is Warden.

[JKArtorias]

For Honor can mean anything. But i don't take it as have honor. No i take it as Honoring my faction. I fight for the honor of my chosen faction.

[GANK]

if its "for honor" or "with honor" doesnt matter. its a good but unbalanced broken game. its the ♥♥♥♥♥♥ comunity wich make this game dying. as mentioned above, taking advantage of broken mechanics and only uses heros wich have the highest spam output will reduce the players which will play this game. Funniest are those who claim themself "pro" and judge others if they´re good or "noob". Ubi brakes the game and you destroy it...No Honor.

[Syd]

Wow, long philosophical post about this game. Honor is something that, i suppose, seems to be held in esteem through the eyes of the group or individuals that claim their actions are with or for honor. However, we have to take human nature into account ( people can be quite dishonest), so, it isn't surprising to me that those who take advantage of "broken mechanics" (term used from Gank's post) or bugs in the game do so and convince themselves it is okay as long as they win. Playing a game should be something that one does for fun, however, the fun can be ruined by a few individuals who find ways to exploit certain bugs and flaws just for the satisfaction of winning.

The more I play the more I am beginning to understand the complaints concerning this game. I can see that some of the points on how people play the different characters and how they seem to "spam" a particular function does cause some irrritation especially when someone is facing two or three on one in dominion and all three are doing this. I have taken up for the game since I downloaded the starter edition. I have taken up for the game even more since I prepurchased "Marching Fire". I think I have been trying to convince myself that I made a good 29.99 USD purchase ( I am beginning to wonder about that now).

[The Seraph of Tomorrow]

Before someone makes another post saying they don't have to play honorably because (insert reason here) you should read the whole post because it's saying it's ironic that given the name. (then i list all the reasons this game encourages you to play without honor)

[incredibilis]

Първоначално публикувано от The Necromancer:

Before someone makes another post saying they don't have to play honorably because (insert reason here) you should read the whole post because it's saying it's ironic that given the name. (then i list all the reasons this game encourages you to play without honor)

I don't think people disagree that the name is ironic so much as you saying people in the storyline showed honor aswell as implying that it is better to play with honor.

[JKArtorias]

Първоначално публикувано от The Necromancer:

Before someone makes another post saying they don't have to play honorably because (insert reason here) you should read the whole post because it's saying it's ironic that given the name. (then i list all the reasons this game encourages you to play without honor)

I read your entire post. My post was about what you first said. About the Knights being honorable. When in reality campaign and story wise. The Knights are the least honorable faction. Sure Vikings are barbarians but do you expect anything more from Vikings?

[FU∂LBIT]

Първоначално публикувано от The Necromancer:

The idea that most characters have a niche ability in which if you do not use it you are put at a startling disadvantage, classes which have no counter for others thus inherently unbalanced, and even some in which spaming a one or two moves is nearly all the class can do by design and not the players choice.

I can only agree with this. That you are forced sometimes to use, let's say, not your favourite strat to win. Conq and Orochi are very good examples for me. I love them both (their looks, weapons and what they are) but damn do I hate their movesets and the way they HAVE to play to win.
Other than that. It's what York said in his long a-s-s post. It's For Honor, not With Honor.

[Undead Rufus]

Първоначално публикувано от The Necromancer:

For Honor is a rather ironic title....

The meaning of honor changes from culture to culture, and even from person to person. There's nothing inherently "dishonorable" about ledging an opponent or using the most effective weapon (e.g. moveset) at your disposal. Unbalanced elements are going to be exploited regardless of what the game is called.

Ultimately, for most people, survival and victory win out over pretty much everything else. Getting caught up in the concept of honor is an exercise in futility, because survival, victory and honor aren't even mutually exclusive in the way you seem to suggest.

[Robert Zerker]

Actually, you find yourself playing for honor and not rage quitting when your team is losing beyond the point of no return and you are the only one standing. At this precise point, honor is all what's left to keep you playing despite zero chance of turning the tide.

[Doc]

Първоначално публикувано от The Necromancer:

Първоначално публикувано от Doot:

It's called For Honor, not With Honor.

For Honor, means to fight For your Honor.
That makes no sense.

It makes perfect sense. What doesn't make sense is "your" fantasy version of what "Honor" is.

What exactly is dishonorable in Multiplayer? Group fighting, Ledging?

How is the game not designed for group fighting? this is just false. there are plenty of mechanics in the game that will allow you to survive being grouped up on.

If you are not changing targets in group fights your are only hindering your own survival. Attacking different enemie moves you out of the range of others and opens people up for parries.

The only dishonorable act in this game is when your teammates just stand around and watch people have 1v1s in group modes. Go duel/brawl if you wanna have your 1v1s.

You make claims about people using unbalanced/broken items, move sets or even characters, yet you give no examples of what the said actions are or who the broken characters are. care to explain?

Don't fault people for playing a character that they like just because "people" feel they are OP.

If someone is using the same Move Set over and over, adapt and adjust your playstyle.

Feats have always been broken/unbalanced.

I fail to see the irony, when your opinion of Honor is scewed.

[Chikuwu]

For Honor multiplayer is literally No honor.

You rarely see people actually play balanced/Weak heroes in higher prestige. 90% go for the easy way out, and 10% of the people just handicap themselves for playing "honorable" way.