I adree with you. I apologize if my comment was meant in any way to criticize the way KCD does skill leveling. In my clumsy manner I was only pointing out that in the interest of playability and accuracy, historic or otherwise, that the game needs to be playable and not tedious in spending hours upon hours in honing a basic skill. The game tries to make a balance of realism and playability and that is a challenge with KCD doing a very good job at both.
1 Like
to me, this is WH’s IP.
personally, wish it would be restructured as follows:
all noobs to martial arts have bad form/technique. over time the frequency and severity of those technical mistakes diminish. i don’t want hours of practicing how to hold weapon X. but, i wish the game gave me bad form/technique to start off with (eg Henry trying to slice the stick in the cutscene), and that bad form/technique diminished as Henry gains weapon specific experience. so, rather than getting asinine attack bonuses (in some games – eg Commando perk in Fallout 4 that give xx% damage bonuses when using automatic weapons) or silly perks (KCD weapon combo strikes), i’d like my character to achieve technically correct techniques (hand placement, body position, arm motion, etc) over time. accordingly, your first perk becomes something like 80% efficiency in hand placement (80% is just an example; if you think a different percentage would be appropriate as first stage, then that % would be used).
i’d still keep the combos but i’d make them learned. how is negotiable. but, spitballing here, i’d be fine with either having a new technique (combo) enabled by practicing it some with Capt Bernard or Pribyslavitz veteran or having the new technique enabled by (acquiring and) reading a weapon skill book
if developed, this mechanic would be helpful for differentiating the NPCs. stupid run off the mill bandits could be assigned technique penalties. that way they’d be noticeably sloppy(-ier) in attack instead of their current formal, efficient strikes
The historical accuracy, or at least attempt to get as close to that as possible (yes, there are some things that will not be realistic since it is a game after all) makes the immersion much better than most video games. I’m not always trying for immersion in games though so perhaps it depends on the genre or style of the game. If they are not explicitly trying to be accurate, I can be be more forgiving when it comes to historical aspects. However, when done well, it really does make the game so much more fun to play… and get lost in. I don’t feel like a protagonist with a checklist or quest list to fulfill, like I have some kind of achievement rate to unlock. I just feel like a normal guy in the medieval age who is going through some rough times.
When discussing video games and movies historical accuracy and realism often get conflated.
As far as historical accuracy I think WH hit the nail on the head.
Those who were here in the beginning know that we spent literally years debating architecture, clothing styles, armor, weapons, flora, fauna, the stars, the color of the carrots of the time, and untold other aspects of historical accuracy . Honestly after four years it was almost like going to university on medieval Bohemia.
That was just us forum history buffs, there were experts consulted and employed throughout development. So long as History itself has been retained accurately, I would say KC:D hits the mark.
As for realism, we could debate this forever. There are some areas where WH was innovative (combat mechanics, Satellite terrain mapping, 3D scanned faces and objects) and other areas lacking (gore mechanics).
On the subject of realism, I have had the thought that what we want (gamers/Humans) is a full matrix reality and we will never be satisfied until we push to achieve that reality.
3 Likes