Anyone else? (kind of a rant)

[Isz]

Does anyone else have an issue where you see a game and you think it looks fantastic and maybe you've heard some good things and you maybe see it on sale and consider it for some variety. Then you think "I'll check out a bit of let's play to see what this is really all about..."

Only to see that it's yet another auto-combat game where it's just a bunch of quicktime button press events strung together and it's more like guitar hero than a fight.

That happened to me today with this game. Visually the game looks really cool and I dig the lore and the style. I was really looking forward to something new, got home and I was so bummed when I saw some gameplay. I guess it's a standard of the industry now.

Anyway I was legit wondering if anyone else had the same type of experience.

[devSin]

The game has two quicktime events (one at the beginning, and one at the end).

The combat has a considerable amount of depth, but you have to train to acquire some of the more advanced moves and combos.

Sorry you didn't find it fun, but gameplay is one of this game's primary strengths.

[Isz]

I'm just not down for "Press B to do a finishing move" "Press Y to block" "Press x to parry" being broadcast above the fight. I just don't feel like I'm actually doing anything I feel like I'm just enabling cinematics.

It's the reason I couldn't get into SoM as well.

[devSin]

That's just the style of game it is. You deal damage (using your moves and combos); depending on your execution chance (which can be raised through equipment), you'll sometimes get the ability to perform an execution (which is a synched animation with invincibility frames, though most enemies are scripted to disengage while you're executing another target).

There isn't really any blocking or parrying (there are buckler weapons, but it's not something you would use all the time). You can get a retribution strike for a perfect dodge (only the neutral dodge), but there is no prompt or indication for it.

The game has a fair number of weapon types (all the secondary weapons have their own move sets), so it accommodates a decent number of styles (you just have to play long enough to unlock all the moves).

It's fine to not like it or enjoy this sort of game, but I really wouldn't characterize it as "auto-combat".

[Isz]

You have given me some reason to take a second look. I'll watch more let's play and check it out.

I really didn't like how Shadows of Mordor handled it's combat because EVERY LITTLE THING was a quick press event.

Thanks for your 2 cents.

[devSin]

No, this is very much a fighting-style game. You chain your moves and dodge around a lot, but the only interactive prompt is for execution (which is an individual chance rolled for every enemy, determined by your execution chance). You have to manually control everything else that happens.

It has a surprising amount of depth. It's not a particularly difficult game (and the equipment system makes it much easier, since you can always just get better weapons), but the combat is very much central to the gameplay, and it feels great.

[Isz]

Do you think it's worthwhile to play through the first one?

[mgdagirl137]

I do. You get a lot more backstory and lore by playing the first one.

[devSin]

The first game is great. The combat is nowhere near as fluid (War has fewer moves, and he's a lot slower), and the puzzle design isn't as strong as the sequel, but I definitely think it's a worthwhile game (the combat and puzzles are still a lot of fun).

It is a shorter game (the sequel has a tendency to drag on, unfortunately), and it lacks some of the RPG elements they added to the second (which is either a good thing or a bad thing, depending who you ask), but the core gameplay is solid enough (it definitely has a "first effort" feel to it, but they got enough right that it still feels pretty good).