Quote:
Originally Posted by Erlend Grefsrud
If I come across as whiny, I apologize -- I don't mean to waste anyone's time. However, I'd like to point out that you just dismissed my remarks about combat systems earlier here, without providing any arguments apart from making unreasonable assumptions about me thinking two games were similar because they were both easy. I understand that you're tired of getting shit over the AC combat, but acting petty about it doesn't make you look any better.
|
Well, you asked for it, so here we go.
First of all, comparing them even as simple input games with varied output is completely inaccurate. AC1 had an order more complexity than Batman has. You had two stances, and almost all of your moves were active -- you controlled exactly what happened. Batman is passive -- your button presses are completely different depending on what the enemies are doing.
In Batman, you don't even have a discrete fighting state, it was simply two attack buttons, and a counter button. On top of that, Batman doesn't just hold your hand, it screams at you what to do, so really you aren't controlling your combat at all. You are simply mashing attack buttons coupled with tapping a counter button when the game tells you to.
In AC, you had the ability to defend, something notably lacking from Batman. You can only attack and counter, removing all permutations possible with AC. Also, you only ever have NPCs attacking or not, they aren't really moving around in an intelligent fashion or taking a more defensive stance (which you could then capitalize on). On top of that, basic attacks had extra gameplay on top which allowed you to do special kills with proper timing.
With respect to counters, it actually required a modicum of skill in AC, as different weapons had different timing windows, and it was up to the player to learn how to handle them. NPCs also had different types of attacks which threw a wrench in to things -- you may know the timing for some of the attacks, then they mix them up and you end up missing. Again, this requires way more player skill than Batman.
And then there's the fact that you could be pretty clever with throwing enemies around if you wanted to.
Another move that's not in Batman. You could throw one in to another, or you could throw a guy off a nearby building. You could even, if you were advanced enough, throw a guy to the ground then run up and kill him with your hidden blade.
Yet another layer of complexity over batman involved having different weapons. Faster dagger, coupled with being able to kill with thrown daggers. Hidden blade allowing you to instantly kill people who would otherwise defend.
So yeah, I take issue with you saying Batman's combat and AC's combat is in the same league. You may think this is me being petty, but more it's you making a fool out of yourself, because ultimately of all the complaints AC1 had, very very few were actually about the combat, as most people genuinely enjoyed the combat more than the rest of the game. That you think it wasn't interesting makes me think you simply didn't know how to play it.
Batman, on the other hand, has a ridiculously simple system that's going to get pretty stale pretty fast, and doesn't even have close to the complexity of AC (which, BTW, pales in comparison to what AC2 has).