[parsehtml]<p><img src="http://www.taleworlds.com/Images/News/blog_post_32_taleworldswebsite.jpg" alt="" /></p>
<p>In our efforts to make Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord a visceral experience, we are constantly looking at different types of systems which will elicit an emotive response from players. By aiming for a certain level of realism, it becomes easier to make a game more relatable and immersive for players. However, striking the balance between realism and gameplay is a tricky subject, and we are firm believers that gameplay should always trump realism. Thankfully, there are other methods that we can use to draw players into the game and offer players a more realistic experience, without detracting from the gameplay. In this week’s blog, we would like to show you how we make use of inverse kinematics to make strikes in combat feel a bit more immersive.</p></br> [/parsehtml]Read more at: http://www.taleworlds.com/en/Games/Bannerlord/Blog/52
Dev Blog 22/03/18
- Thread starter Callum
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
DoHope said:Each object has more depth now in relation to physics, eh?
From what you've showcased so far, we've only seen the object suffer to a single impact. I would like to see how the engine reacts to multiple variables at once. Like, what if the shield gets bashed from the right and the left, while simultaneously taking arrows?
cheers.
Like more impact animations combining. It would be cool to see someone tossed around in different directions by recieving a thousand bashes from a group, not just by moving backwards.
Well, this would be much harder!
Auldman said:
Auldman said:
You started your post with the four words "I assume this means..." which carries the message that you are inferring whatever follows from Callum's quote. While you do make it a question, asking for confirmation from Callum on your thoughts, the tone that you set at the start sends the message you assume it is more likely to be true than not because of the message the first four words carry. That's where the confusion lies.
I'm not trying to nit-pick, but hopefully that helps explain where we are coming from.
SirMairaki said:
That sentence ends with a question mark. A question mark. That always means it's a question and not a statement. If I'd put a period there then you'd have a point. It means I am asking for this to be answered and not assuming it's a given. I don't think I could have been clearer. I think you and the other two are nitpicking my post to **** for trolling purposes and I am done with the discussion. I've blocked the other two. I've been on this site for years as well as having modded Warband so I am pretty familiar with how so many get on here for little more than **** and giggles. I think an answer to my questions from a developer would have been interesting. It's a shame that the whole thing turned into the inability of others to fathom what a question mark means at the end of a sentence and the difference between a question and a statement.
Auldman said:
I think we're on different pages, man. I recognize that its a question, I just take issue with how you phrased the question, specifically how you started it. I do not, however, take issue with the questions themselves. I think those are fair and interesting.Assuming you haven't blocked me yet, then cheers, mate!
This is going too far, please take your personal discussion to PM's and do not spam this thread anymore.
Remember this is a place where the revealed feature is to be discussed and where feedback is to be provided. Devs do read this and we don't want them to stop doing so because of senseless arguments among users.
Remember this is a place where the revealed feature is to be discussed and where feedback is to be provided. Devs do read this and we don't want them to stop doing so because of senseless arguments among users.
SilenterS said:
No problem mate, it occurred to me that I couldn't remember what the animations looked like in Skyrim and I was curious enough to check, so I got something out of it
.
BigVittles
Recruit
Looks great! Truly this game will be one of the most immersive once it comes out.
Sad to see so many people not appreciating how much work goes into this game.
Keep up the great work guys!
Sad to see so many people not appreciating how much work goes into this game.
Keep up the great work guys!
Will passive shields block arrows and weapons across the fill size of the shield or will you have to hold down block to actually block anything? Passive shields really need to block projectiles all over, and melee on a passive shield should block most of the damage still but push or flinch the holder since they're not ready.
KhergitLancer80
Banned
Willhelm said:
They already block stuff time to time but I agree that it needs to be improved.
It can contribute a lot to the combat depth.
Bustah
Regular
Could a very powerful hit from someone with very high strength with a heavy weapon push the shield back to the point of hitting the guy holding it? Perhaps this would also work with weapon blocks. I've always found it hilarious that a peasant with a hatchet can entirely block the overhead swing of a ****ing greatsword just by statically holding his hatchet up with one hand.
I think in general you guys could take some notes from KC. The combat there is much better but it doesn't have to focus on scale... but that doesn't mean you guys can't incorporate some elements. One thing that would be great is that if you are holding LMB and moving the mouse around it should change the direction of the swing instead of doing nothing. I know people don't like feinting but people in Warband did it anyways, and there it just looked spammy and annoying. If you incorporate a legit feinting system it would look good and be more fair (predictable) than the feinting in Warband. Something else you could take from KC is to make weapon hits actually calculated by what they hit. If I swing a sword at a guy who is blocking in my direction but in watching the swing my sword still hits him, I should do damage. Same with shields, if a guy is holding his shield in front of him, mid-swing, all hits should still be blocked by that shield. I know I've talked about this ad nauseam but that's the point of a shield! And considering that this blog is about shields, please please please make this the case. If you think it makes shields overpowered then you have learned something new about history: they were. That's why they used them, all over the world, for thousands of years. Same with armour. Same with spears. Same with horses. And yet for some reason in Warband, all of these things are woefully underpowered.
Another suggestion is to make combat faster. This would increase difficulty such that people don't feel the need to resort to spinning and doing weird glitchy **** to win a fight, in singleplayer or multiplayer.
Thanks for the gifs tho, it looks cool. You might want to scale it up though. I feel like a hit from a big hammer would just go right past the tip of that shield. That way all the people *****ing about how this isn't a good enough blog can be satisfied that it translates to gameplay.
I think in general you guys could take some notes from KC
. The combat there is much better but it doesn't have to focus on scale... but that doesn't mean you guys can't incorporate some elements. One thing that would be great is that if you are holding LMB and moving the mouse around it should change the direction of the swing instead of doing nothing. I know people don't like feinting but people in Warband did it anyways, and there it just looked spammy and annoying. If you incorporate a legit feinting system it would look good and be more fair (predictable) than the feinting in Warband. Something else you could take from KC is to make weapon hits actually calculated by what they hit. If I swing a sword at a guy who is blocking in my direction but in watching the swing my sword still hits him, I should do damage. Same with shields, if a guy is holding his shield in front of him, mid-swing, all hits should still be blocked by that shield. I know I've talked about this ad nauseam but that's the point of a shield! And considering that this blog is about shields, please please please make this the case. If you think it makes shields overpowered then you have learned something new about history: they were. That's why they used them, all over the world, for thousands of years. Same with armour. Same with spears. Same with horses. And yet for some reason in Warband, all of these things are woefully underpowered. Another suggestion is to make combat faster. This would increase difficulty such that people don't feel the need to resort to spinning and doing weird glitchy **** to win a fight, in singleplayer or multiplayer.
Thanks for the gifs tho, it looks cool. You might want to scale it up though. I feel like a hit from a big hammer would just go right past the tip of that shield. That way all the people *****ing about how this isn't a good enough blog can be satisfied that it translates to gameplay.
zabfalat said:Like more impact animations combining. It would be cool to see someone tossed around in different directions by recieving a thousand bashes from a group, not just by moving backwards.
Well, this would be much harder!
That is actually a very good point. Also, we should walk backwards way slower so that the soldiers coming from the opposite direction can spread out, eventually reaching and surrounding us.
Other than that, thanks for the blog - details like this make the game get closer to perfection.
Some people here have no idea of how difficult it is to implement such features. At least have some bloody respect for their work.
I am sorry if this is needless for the devs and is off-topic, I am feeling bad now, so I will put it in a spoiler to consume less space.
3 - Great work is often disregarded. I'm a writer, I know that.
2 - Exactly. This is what ties the whole game together. Not just this, but together with all the other details. It is a detail made to be subtle. Its subtlety is exactly why it's so great: you stop noticing it, and start feeling it. So much so that, when it doesn't happen, you actually notice its absence. Just like this guy said:
And that's why this guy's got it all wrong:
To create a wonderful diegesis, you need to keep the familiar and add little changes here and there. You make small additions that are barely noticeable, which ultimately result in a completely different experience. You don't need 2 times the amount of "exciting new features" from warband for bannerlord to be empirically better, else it would turn into another game, as Armagan and others have stated over the course of last year. I am not criticising you personally, just your approach to this "small useless addition", but you are free to like, dislike or disregard it. I just hope I am right in saying that it will be one of those little things you can't live without anymore that annoy you when you try to come back to warband or something like that.
Aaaand as I asked before, really want to know if this applies to parries with weapons, weapon hits, and with just held shield (not blocking shields).
I can wait until the game release to find that out, of course... Maybe I should... another thing to test out...
1 - Yes, it should be more balanced, but I still think that low weight + >8 AGI should allow for this to happen. It would be frustrating to never be able to run away, even if you're the medieval Usain Bolt.Iberian Wolf said:
3 - Great work is often disregarded. I'm a writer, I know that.
2 - Exactly. This is what ties the whole game together. Not just this, but together with all the other details. It is a detail made to be subtle. Its subtlety is exactly why it's so great: you stop noticing it, and start feeling it. So much so that, when it doesn't happen, you actually notice its absence. Just like this guy said:
kalarhan said:
And that's why this guy's got it all wrong:
You are thinking too much in the "breaking news mindset", it's like michael bay movies with explosions: people expect too much awe every single frame, and think they're wasting money every minute that something doesn't show boobs, explosions or both. Think about your sex life, do you need, each night, and each time to go "higher and more extreme" to be so "awed" the performance doesn't matter that much? Do you need to evolve into athletic positions, then all the kama sutra positions, and when it's all done, you go into bdsm? It doesn't work that way, I think at least.Lamias said:
To create a wonderful diegesis, you need to keep the familiar and add little changes here and there. You make small additions that are barely noticeable, which ultimately result in a completely different experience. You don't need 2 times the amount of "exciting new features" from warband for bannerlord to be empirically better, else it would turn into another game, as Armagan and others have stated over the course of last year. I am not criticising you personally, just your approach to this "small useless addition", but you are free to like, dislike or disregard it. I just hope I am right in saying that it will be one of those little things you can't live without anymore that annoy you when you try to come back to warband or something like that.
This. Passive shields (just being held, or when unequiped on the back) should be improved to better block projectiles.KhergitLancer80 said:
Interesting to know, will the animation "restart" with each hit, or will it stop (for a microsecond) where it is and continue to the newest kinetics point of impact?DoHope said:
Aaaand as I asked before, really want to know if this applies to parries with weapons, weapon hits, and with just held shield (not blocking shields).
I can wait until the game release to find that out, of course... Maybe I should... another thing to test out...
monoolho said:I am sorry if this is needless for the devs and is off-topic, I am feeling bad now, so I will put it in a spoiler to consume less space.
1 - Yes, it should be more balanced, but I still think that low weight + >8 AGI should allow for this to happen. It would be frustrating to never be able to run away, even if you're the medieval Usain Bolt.Iberian Wolf said:
3 - Great work is often disregarded. I'm a writer, I know that.
2 - Exactly. This is what ties the whole game together. Not just this, but together with all the other details. It is a detail made to be subtle. Its subtlety is exactly why it's so great: you stop noticing it, and start feeling it. So much so that, when it doesn't happen, you actually notice its absence. Just like this guy said:kalarhan said:
And that's why this guy's got it all wrong:You are thinking too much in the "breaking news mindset", it's like michael bay movies with explosions: people expect too much awe every single frame, and think they're wasting money every minute that something doesn't show boobs, explosions or both. Think about your sex life, do you need, each night, and each time to go "higher and more extreme" to be so "awed" the performance doesn't matter that much? Do you need to evolve into athletic positions, then all the kama sutra positions, and when it's all done, you go into bdsm? It doesn't work that way, I think at least.Lamias said:
To create a wonderful diegesis, you need to keep the familiar and add little changes here and there. You make small additions that are barely noticeable, which ultimately result in a completely different experience. You don't need 2 times the amount of "exciting new features" from warband for bannerlord to be empirically better, else it would turn into another game, as Armagan and others have stated over the course of last year. I am not criticising you personally, just your approach to this "small useless addition", but you are free to like, dislike or disregard it. I just hope I am right in saying that it will be one of those little things you can't live without anymore that annoy you when you try to come back to warband or something like that.
This. Passive shields (just being held, or when unequiped on the back) should be improved to better block projectiles.KhergitLancer80 said:
Interesting to know, will the animation "restart" with each hit, or will it stop (for a microsecond) where it is and continue to the newest kinetics point of impact?DoHope said:
Aaaand as I asked before, really want to know if this applies to parries with weapons, weapon hits, and with just held shield (not blocking shields).
I can wait until the game release to find that out, of course... Maybe I should... another thing to test out...
Wow, it seems like you ate trough yourself on the whole comment section at least twice for this long comment.
And I think that if you rewach the gameplay videos than you may see if it applies for the sword parrying or not. Feels like you already did that.
But I would also like to see a blog post about it.
Bustah said:
This isn't directed to anyone in particular (even though I quoted some folks, so don't take this personally), but we seem to have fuzzy memories about Warband here. Shields already have 100% passive coverage across their model. Block crush-through is also already a feature, and since we know Bannerlord will have the potential for cleaving through multiple enemies with a single swing it would be very questionable to not retain block crush-through.monoolho said:
Lolbash, easy9:
I have deleted several comments spamming about a senseless discussion after moderation verbal warning, %'s have been issued as well. Keep it on topic or further action will follow.
I have deleted several comments spamming about a senseless discussion after moderation verbal warning, %'s have been issued as well. Keep it on topic or further action will follow.
KhergitLancer80
Banned
+Orion
Passive blocking with the shield isnt 100% in WB.
You still get shot from the back even though you carry your shield on your back which really breaks the ambience.
If it was the case in WB I would develope tons of tactics fighting against archers.
When charging against an archer with a lance while carrying a shield in my left hand I locate my passive shield so that the archer cant shoot me but the system is a bit unreliable as it is flawed.
For the "block crush through" I did not understand it can you tell me what you meant ?
Passive blocking with the shield isnt 100% in WB.
You still get shot from the back even though you carry your shield on your back which really breaks the ambience.
If it was the case in WB I would develope tons of tactics fighting against archers.
When charging against an archer with a lance while carrying a shield in my left hand I locate my passive shield so that the archer cant shoot me but the system is a bit unreliable as it is flawed.
For the "block crush through" I did not understand it can you tell me what you meant ?
Falcon_lover2
Recruit
Looking forward to next week blog!
Striga
Recruit
+KhergitLancer80
With the shields on your back, for WB, it depends on the shield's resistance, and the force you get hit by. If you get shot by a strong bow from behind while using a really weak shield, you're still going to get hit. On the other hand, if a forest bandit shoots you from behind, while you have something like a huscarl shield on your back, it's going to do no damage.
I'm not sure if it shows in native, but with every mod I've played (minus Gekokujo that doesn't have shields), there's usually also a message of "Hit Shield on Back".
As for crush through block, some heavy weapons (usually blunt ones) have that label, and with an overhand swing, it compares the weapon weights, and the speed of the swing, and it can hit an enemy through their blocks. I think, but I'm not sure if it also slightly reduces the damage that the opponent would have received if they didn't block at all.
With the shields on your back, for WB, it depends on the shield's resistance, and the force you get hit by. If you get shot by a strong bow from behind while using a really weak shield, you're still going to get hit. On the other hand, if a forest bandit shoots you from behind, while you have something like a huscarl shield on your back, it's going to do no damage.
I'm not sure if it shows in native, but with every mod I've played (minus Gekokujo that doesn't have shields), there's usually also a message of "Hit Shield on Back".
As for crush through block, some heavy weapons (usually blunt ones) have that label, and with an overhand swing, it compares the weapon weights, and the speed of the swing, and it can hit an enemy through their blocks. I think, but I'm not sure if it also slightly reduces the damage that the opponent would have received if they didn't block at all.
