Why the SP lightsaber system wouldn't work in MP

[Zek]

As I'm sure most of you have noticed, the lightsaber system in SP seems to be a little more intricate: mostly, blocks happen much more often than if you're just standing idle. This seems to be the source of much complaining, but if you think about it, this really wouldn't work properly in multiplayer. The only way to have two dueling people block so many of their swings is if the game changed one person's swing in mid-air to stop the other person's. It would have to automate most of the controls and would remove a lot of the control over your character.

 

As it is, dueling is still quite complex in multiplayer; I've had matches in Duel mode go on for 5-10 minutes, and not just running from eachother getting force power for heals either. Maybe it's not quite as movie-looking as in singleplayer, but it's great fun either way, so why are so many people complaining?

[Patton]

I'd say people are complaining because the MP battles aren't very movie like. They're fun, yeah, but its mostly hit or miss with it. Blocking and parrying are way too hard to be useful.

 

I honestly would not mind a change in the saber combat to the way it is in SP. If it moved my character's slash move automatically to block a blow, that would rock. I'd have less control over my character in the end, yeah, but when it comes down to it, I'M the one making the decision to slash left or right and I'M the one choosing WHEN to do it. A key part of the SP combat is looking for opening in your opponents attack/defense. In fact, its quite difficult to defeat Tavion (sp?) without paying attention.

 

So, I'm gonna go bump that other thread when I'm done here. A server-side option/side (hell, even a client-side mod) would be great.

[Kalishnikov]

The thing I'm unhappy about is the lack of blade collision. Sure, if one of us is standing still and the other swings, there's a chance for an auto block. But if we both swing at each other, the blades pass through each other. Even if it was just added as a server option such as 'advanced saber collision', it's something I want to see put into multiplayer. I'd also rather not have thrown sabers pass through walls and the ability to turn it off in mid-flight like in singleplayer would be good.

[EekTheKat]

The only way to have two dueling people block so many of their swings is if the game changed one person's swing in mid-air to stop the other person's. It would have to automate most of the controls and would remove a lot of the control over your character.

 

Unless I'm misreading this ....

 

Since attack based saber on saber collisions already occur in single player (in way higher frequency), doesn't this also apply to single player then?

 

I'd love to hear from Chang or Toshiya on what exactly they saw in running the SP saber system in multi-player that caused them to change MP to the way it currently is (which I agree isn't bad and is still quite a lot of fun under ideal circumstances)

 

I'm wondering though - what exactly are the conditions required for two players to saber-lock in an online saber fight? Is it a result of player A (attack) being aggressive and player B (defense) being passive?

 

Or is it a result of both players being aggresive and two saber swings (any swing or a specific swing) colliding with one another and the game triggers the saber-lock sequence.

 

If there is already a system to determine aggressive saber collisions (as is above) would it be possible to expand this system to allow for parrys/blocks *and* the current saber locks?

 

I think Raven might have bumped into the problem of syncronizing that in multi-player due to the wide range of system specifications out there.

 

Odds are they chose to simplify the saber system so multiplayer would remain playable on the mid to lower end systems (though browsing on the boards right now there seems to be some people running into difficulty as it is with the current MP system).

 

I *really* hope they work on this as part of the next patch. Having it configurable like saber locks would be great as well.

[Zek]

Eek, the computers have no problem with moving their saber to block you, but when there are two players, one of them will sacrifice all control over the swing in order for the game to block for them.

[Chanke4252]

I would guess that sabers passing through eachother thing is a lag issue. Wouldnt that make sense? I dont know, I did notice it does this though.

[Kalishnikov]

I can't see it creating much lag. They only really need to keep track of the coordinate data for the tip and the hilt of each active saber. The majority of the work would be done by the server's processor, checking to see if the line generated by one saber collided with the line of another. If they can handle the data of where every gunshot goes and where they reflect off of light sabers without lag issues, then I don't see why saber collision should be left out. Just my opinion.

[GRIMLOCK]

lets put it this way

in the movie its the "Force" that controls the Jedi's Lightsaber moreso than the jedi

so, in turn. if the computer AI was to cut off a swing to block an attack than that would more or less be an act of the "Force" for the game

as is done in single player.

in turn making the game more starwars like than it is (and more than JK1 ever was)

plain and simple

[CGameProgrammer]

I believe in dueling games or duel challenges, the advanced saber collision should be implemented. Only the two duelers need to have the intricate collision data sent between each other; the spectators can have a simplified version sent so what they see is a reasonable approximation of what's happening.

[jedi-redemption]

i agree partially. the game shouldnt be about luck. if it was computer blocking then it would take all elements of skill out of the game. IMO they should slow the game down by about 1/5 to make it so you can block and so on.

[EekTheKat]

Originally posted by Zek

Eek, the computers have no problem with moving their saber to block you, but when there are two players, one of them will sacrifice all control over the swing in order for the game to block for them.

 

How much control over a weapon do you have when you're parrying in the single player game? In the brief moments after the sabers collide, in the single player game there's an interrupt of sorts in the animation as both sabers collide with one another and bounce back.

 

Personally I've had my weapon attacks knocked all over the place by Desann's heavy swings when I'm dueling him in a light stance.

 

The thing is, the computer doesn't have to block for them in an active saber collision. It just has to register the collision and tell the clients (players) to do that very same animation that already exists in single player.

 

With active saber collision ( or saber collision detection), if both players swing a saber and the server registers the two sabers colliding, all that would happen(should happen) is playback of the respective recovery animation by each player from their own weapon swings.

 

Unless there's a way to cancel your attack in mid-swing (which I haven't seen yet in either SP or MP games) then there shouldn't be an issue.

 

What you describe is pretty much how blocking currently works in multi-player, which is Player A attacks and Player B (in neutral defense position) blocks, and the computer is the one that automatically decides what blocking animation is used in that instance.

 

I think what we're missing here is we're both assuming two different things. None of us can really know if mp saber collisions can indeed be tweaked to be more along the lines of single player saber collisions but the programmers at raven themselves.

 

Assuming my understanding of how saber locks work in the multiplayer is correct, I think Raven still has some room to tweak the multi-player to allow for what many posters on this board have been asking for.

 

of course my theory on this is probably way oversimplified. On most machines active saber blocking probably looks or syncs really bad causing the MP game to drop out or desyncronize or something....