Half-baked fencing system

[Manos_Argentis]

The fencing system feels a bit half baked... Don't get me wrong, it's a major improvement from other first person games where you are fencing, but still... While they were at it making a better system anyway, why not give it the whole nine yards?

 

There are no real combinations in the system, only very, very basic stuff... Also you can neither thrust, nor parry.

 

Interestingly, they neither thrust nor parry with the sabers in the movies, even though the weapon does seem to invite it...

 

Other options I would have wanted to see are things like being able to put together your own fencing style - perhaps in an external editor - by some easy to use interface, instead of limiting us in this way?

 

And there are no options for either stance nor height of attack/guard. And no two-weapon techniques? No selecting how you want to hold the weapon?

 

I'd expect this sort of block-headed adherence to the old, traditional ways of fencing from a traditional, block-headed Jedi, but I thought Kyle Katarn was supposed to be dynamic and such?

 

 

And again, where are my beautiful combinations when I want them?

 

Come _on_... This fencing system is a fine start, but why stop there? And if there was never any intention to develop it very much anyway, why give it such potential? If you're not going to include combinations, etc. you can just as well stick with the click-to-swing, hold-and-release-for-powerful-attack, secondary-trigger-to-block approach.

 

 

/MA

[Fettish]

Maybe in an expansion pack???

[sanpilou]

llllaaaaaame

[Hubris]

Originally posted by Manos_Argentis

 

There are no real combinations in the system, only very, very basic stuff... Also you can neither thrust, nor parry.

There are several thrust moves, and you can actually parry in two ways, lightsaber collision, or by going on the defensive and not attacking and keeping your eyes on your opponent.

 

Interestingly, they neither thrust nor parry with the sabers in the movies, even though the weapon does seem to invite it...

So I guess Qui Gon didn't die to a thrust by Maul, and Darth Vader wasn't repeatedly parrying Luke in the fight that resulted in his hand being cut off? Light saber clashes, probably the signature of the mythos, doesn't result from parries?

 

And there are no options for either stance nor height of attack/guard. And no two-weapon techniques? No selecting how you want to hold the weapon?

 

You have a stance key, giving you three stances, which controls your height, speed and length of attacks, and also your arc of guard, it also changes how you hold the weapon.

 

I think you may have mistakenly bought JK1

[Wes Janson SMR]

Er.. There's not a whole lot to say here. Jedi Art 'Saber Combat is vastly different from the sport of Fencing. It's like...comparing Samurai warriors with Tennis players..kind of.

 

Lightsabers and foils are two very different weapons, and require different mechanics to weild. Though there are Fencing techiques mixed in with the Jedi Art styles, it's not the sole basis. You can thrust, and parrying is a passive maneuver - it sometimes happens if someone hits you at the right spot, and as you block, you parry them to the side, or hit the weapon straight out of their hand at the higher defense levels.

[toolboi]

the Jedi Art styles

Am I the only one who finds this ammusing

 

Any how, I agree that block should work as a parry feature, maybe two buttons for swinging, and one just does a defensive slash. It would make for some interesting combos.

 

As for fencing... well sword fighters rarely (if ever) fence in a battle. Fencing is an art, while jedi skills are more based on fighting. If you look back at the first 3 movies the sword fighting is VERY basic but quite efficient (most notibly when luke runs in on Jabbas ship in ROTJ).

[colonel_stryker]

According to something I saw on starwars.com, the art of lightsaber dueling is supposed to include,

 

"the techniques of Epee, Kendo, and Rapier, throwing in a little influence from tennis and tree chopping for good measure."

 

http://www.starwars.com/episode-i/feature/19981216/index.html

[Wes Janson SMR]

Originally posted by toolboi

the Jedi Art styles

Am I the only one who finds this ammusing

 

Well hey, I use the term loosely. But, in the famous words of Wedge Antilles:

 

"I just report 'em. I don't make 'em up."

[posternutbag9d9]

Well, since this is a videogame and not a fencing simulation, it is not a problem.

[Mandamus]

No, he's got a point.

 

The saber system is vastly improved from the first game. It still deserves something more.

 

I always thought that "real" lightsaber combat would look something like Olympic fencing; the weightless blade and omni-directional-very deadly-cutting edge would simply be a matter of scoring a "touch" on your opponent.

 

I've seen some players demonstrate a surprising amount of control in a duel- maybe there's something more to this than just waving it around...

 

The only glaring problem is the damage-radius from heavy-stance slashes; seems awfully effective even after your opponent has lodged his blade in the floor.

 

Now if we can only get a little RP in the multiplayer games...that would be something.

 

M.

[obijonkenobi]

Some people expect the games sabre combat to equal the episode 1 combat. Others seem to compare it to what-should-be insted of what-used-to-be (eg: JK1). Comparing it to what was done last time is the only real thing you should compare it to I believe. Why do people insist on saying "It should have been this and that" instead of "i like how they improved this because that wasnt so good before". Its like people love picking things and taking the bad and magnifying it so the good improvments seem miniscule and irrelevant.

 

The Jedi Knight FPS game is far from dead in my opinion. So look at the leap in combat with Lightsabres which happened from JK1 to JK2. Just imagine what JK3 will be like if given the same leap in combat.

 

I guess people expect to go from poor sabre combat to flawless in only one game! Thats like saying "okay baby, your crawling now, but your next step i demand you do the 100 metre hurdles at the olympics". It is just not realistic. You can only improve on whats done beforehand and eventually after a few games you will get it right. But not after only the second game.

 

Like I said, the Jedi Knight series (be it as Kyle or whoever) is not dead yet. There will be a 3rd Jedi Knight game of some sort by Lucasarts featuring the force and lightsabres as the main focus (just like the current two) so let them develop the sabre combat with natural progression.

 

I hope this made sense.

[LooNBB]

I agree with the spirit of your original post, but not really on the content.

 

I am extremely dissapointed with the MP saber fighting. The SP model seems a lot more realistic and I don't understand why there is such a vast difference between the 2.

 

Eventhough there still really isn't a block key (you can turn off manual block and add one) in SP blocks happen a lot more fluidly. I haven't yet seen any responses from Raven on exactly why they made the two models so different or why they thought the button Mashing model of MP duels makes for a better experience.

 

I personally would love to see a MOD that includes the SP saber dynamics as opposed to the current MP.

 

I would love to have a block button and an attack button along with "style" changes as opposed to Swing Strength/length changes. The attack button swings the saber at the opponent whereas the Block button attempts to contact the other saber.

 

I am confident Raven tried out these other fight models and from test feedback, design feedback etc decided that their implemented model was the best to suite the wants of the majority of gamers. But, I still find Spawning NPCs in single player mode and fighting them, MUCH more entertaining than the MP duels.

 

Now... Just gives us an SP arena with expanded NPC add-ins so we can spawn all kinds of "Movie" Jedi and Sith.

 

I want to fight Vader... the big sissie!

[Kataarn]

@Mandamus:

 

We've already established that the lightsaber is NOT weightless, as people seem to think.

 

Check out the 'Sabers' thread to see the logical physics and chemistry behind this establishment.

 

Besides, only a fool would try to thrust with a lightsaber. You can do that with Rapiers because you have no other way to attack. However, with a lightsaber, if you thrust, you leave yourself WIDE OPEN to retaliation...something your opponent is definitely going to take advantage of.

 

Besides that fact, Qui-Gon didn't die from a thrust, you can't exactly 'thrust' with saberstaves, because there's no point.

 

[Mandamus]

Ahh...I seem to have stepped on the toes of a Star Wars-o'phile or two.

 

This is the trouble with discussing anything with fanatics. They don't see the forest for the trees. Imagine going to a "Star Trek" forum and discussing...tribbles...or something...If I said they were furry and cute, I'd probably get ten people jumping down my throat explaining how they're really dangerous reptiles and Captain Kirk was perfectly justified in "beaming" them all into space, and if I DARE say anything different, I'll get my pocket-protector stolen and a slurpee poured down my pants!

 

The slurpee sounds like fun, actually.

 

I'm tempted, but not terribly interested in what a bunch of Star Wars Nerds came up with regarding "canon" lightsaber technology.

 

It's a $#!@!! energy weapon. Energy is $#!@!! weightless.

 

George Lucas didn't make them wave them around like flashlights because that would look spastic (like Olympic fencing looks spastic--it really does) and the old rotoscope he used in the '70's to film it required the props have a solid blade of some kind. It looks cool anyway.

 

You all might be interested to know, that the original concept art for SW included EVERYONE with a lightsaber AND SHIELD--even the stormtroopers got lightsabers and shields. Cool, eh?

 

Qui-Gonn got stabbed to death. I saw it with my own eyes. Nasty points on those double-saber thingies.

 

M.

[JediMouse]

About Kyle not being a more adept fencer --

 

Remember, he's untrained. No one ever really taught him to use the saber. It's all instinct and Force sensitivity. I can't imagine he'd have trained extensively with any melee weapon before the saber, either. Cut him some slack!

 

~JediMouse~

[Kataarn]

@Mandamus:

 

I personally couldn't care less about what happened in the Original Star Trek series, so it's kinda a moot point. Besides, reptiles don't have fur.

 

If the saber IS an energy weapon as you seem to think, besides the fact such a thing is impossible (think, the repulsion force exerted by electrons would be WAY too strong to produce an energy weapon with constant length / width, without a containment field, and of course, you wouldn't be able to take this containment field off, which means you could never do any real damage with the saber, which we all know doesn't happen).

 

Therefore, you are wrong, and the explanation in the 'Sabers' thread makes a lot more sense.

 

My original point was that you are able to stab people with a saberstaff, because of several reaons:

 

1) You have another blade to defend yourself with.

2) You don't have to lunge to preform the thrust.

3) There's no risk that your opponent's saber will harm you when he/she is impaled upon yours.

 

Hence, it makes perfect sense why Jedi don't thrust with sabers.

[Fyunch Click]

Originally posted by Kataarn

 

Besides, only a fool would try to thrust with a lightsaber. You can do that with Rapiers because you have no other way to attack.

 

Erm,

 

Speaking as a classically trained Rapier fighter you are wrong. Rapiers had edges. Draw and push cuts were a part of life. If you caught someone's brachial or carotid artery with the edge and pushed or pulled they were as dead as if you ran them through. You didn't hack with a rapier like you would have with a cut and thrust sword but you could indeed cut with one. So that statement is a bit out of line.

 

A lightsaber might not have an edge per se but a true Rapier did.

[JediMouse]

Right, Fyunch.

 

So many people, when they think western fencing, think Olympic sport fencing, not life-and-death true fencing as was really practiced -- yes, not just in the movies, people really did that.

 

And yes, there are thrusts in the movies. Obi-Wan vs Vader, Ep4, Death Star Hangar Bay. Obi-Wan thrusts, and Vader performs a circular parry, as is appropriate -- you catch the side of the incoming blade and spin it off away from you.

 

That said, the saber fights we see in the classic trilogy owe a lot more to kendo/katana style than to western fencing -- western fencing is not generally done with two hands... Almost every ready pose, swing, parry, and step is straight out of kendo -- if you really are into this stuff, look it up, it's quite cool.

 

~JediMouse~

[Mandamus]

Okay, Kataarn, I'll admit that it's sometimes fun to explore the technical possiblities of fantasy-weapons--but your entire argument hinges on the mass of the blade.

 

How much would this small amount of plasma weigh?

 

I thought that if I were in the films, that I would ask the props manager to make me a saber with a heavy pommel, so that I could more effectively simulate a light-bladed weapon.

 

And speaking as a trained fencer myself, thrusting with the weapon is a real and deadly tactic. Luke does it in ROTJ against Darth V.

 

Another possiblity to consider is how the Force would affect such combat. Imagine being able to anticipate your opponents movements, or using the Force to mentally "feint" against your opponent. Perhaps this is why we see so much acrobatics in the SW movies.

 

M.

[Low Rent]

Originally posted by Kataarn

@Mandamus:

 

I personally couldn't care less about what happened in the Original Star Trek series, so it's kinda a moot point.

 

Yeah I don't care about star trek either...so you are right...it's moot.

[Kataarn]

Ok, I'll admit it, I was thinking about the western-style rapiers that only have a point, and no edge.

 

After I read your post Fyunch, I remembered that rapiers do have edges, and kicked myself for saying they didn't. I forgot the difference between the western style, and original rapiers.

 

That being said, you don't even have to preform a circular parry to counter a thrust, just sidestep, and counter with your own attack. That is, of course, unless you have no room to sidestep, or are too slow to do so (Vader's problem). However, I believe that if someone mistakenly tried to thrust against Darth Maul for instance, he would just sidestep and slice them in half on the way by.

 

[Mandamus]

My point wasn't about Star Trek, it was about fanatics-- nerds who are fascinated with technical details and their imaginary worlds which cannot be invaded by outsiders.

 

Star Wars, Star Trek, DragonballZ (shudder)...

 

Western-style rapiers have both edges and points. Foils do not. I am struggling to remember if epees do or not. Naturally, the weapon design determines it's use in combat.

 

Lightweight blades are easy to counter, the trick is speed. Vader wasn't necessarily "slow", I think. He was very deft at blocking and parrying. George Lucas wanted him to look "solid"--a big, black, shadowy thing of evil--no jumping around for the Lord of the Sith!

 

M.

[Fyunch Click]

Hey, NP.

 

Just hate to see misinformation about a hobby of mine get put out there thats all.

[Chiles4]

Fascinating! as Spock would say. Oh nevermind, I never watched that show.

[Kataarn]

My point was about people that come in here and claim things that have been thoughtfully discussed and found to be proven otherwise, by people that know more about the subject.

 

If you would be so kind as to post a long and thoughtful explanation as to how a beam of pure energy could possibly exist and remain constant, I might actually believe you.

 

However, you didn't, claimed something that has been proven otherwise, therefore I think it was a pointless claim...and frankly, just made you look dumb.

 

Aanyways...I suppose it all comes down to fighting style. Vader prefers to beat people fairly. Maul on the other hand, isn't exactly someone that plays by the rules.