Support NeoGAF

[Nintendojitsu]

No, because RE4 exists

I love me some RE4 as much as the next person but I can't do sick flips and time manipulation shit while kicking ass in it so Warrior Within wins.

 

[Dahbomb]

I kinda dug the stealth sections in Two Thrones and felt was a good midway between platforming and combat. Could've been done better of course but that applies to everything in the series.

 

[Resident4t.]

I love me some RE4 as much as the next person but I can't do sick flips and time manipulation shit while kicking ass in it so Warrior Within wins.

You can explode a guy's face with a suplex, though.

 

[ZealousD]

I definitely wouldn't say that Two Thrones is significantly better. Warrior Within still only focuses on the things that matter: platforming, and to a lesser extent combat. Two Thrones added stealth sections, chariot sections, and the dark prince sections; the former is an unnecessary addition and generally forgettable while the latter two are absolutely awful. Aesthetically Two Thrones is better, but thematically the stuff with the The Dahaka in Warrior Within is much more interesting than anything in Two Thrones.

It's all subjective which is better, but one is definitely not "significantly" better.

Two Thrones doesn't have stealth sections per se, what it does is integrate platforming and combat for stealth-like quick kills. Which I honestly felt like was one of the best improvements of TT over WW. WW had too much combat. TT found a way to integrate platforming and combat together and had less combat overall, and was a much better balanced game for it, I feel. The chariot sections were small distractions and I honestly didn't find the dark prince sections to be all that bad, just not as good as the main stuff.

Personally didn't like WW all that much, but I think TT is the best in the series. So, opinions, I guess.

 

[Cave Johnson]

Also I contest that PoP: WW is the best crowd control simulator.

For it to be called that it would need to have numerous ways to crowd control enemies (as in inflicting a status effect, moving them around that sort of thing). PoP: WW certain has some of that:

*Grab enemies
*Toss enemies behind you
*Toss enemies in front of you
*Kick enemies into other enemies
*Standard knockbacks from attacks (like the spin kick when grounded)
*Environment effects

That's about it. Compared to your standard action game these days, that's not that much though. Let's look at Shadow of Mordor.

*Stun enemies with O
*Vault over enemies then stunning them
*Grab enemies
*Toss enemies
*Brand enemies
*Knock back attacks (like the Shoulder charge)
*Environment effects
*Puncture an enemy's foot so they are locked in place
*Brutalize enemies which causes other enemies to be feared or Wraith Burn


Sure SoM doesn't really make you use all of these tools but neither does PoP WW. They both aren't particularly difficulty games or require a high degree of skill.

There's more to WW combat than simply taking the context "flow-chart" at face-value. There is no pre-defined method of initiating or chaining combos. You can either start from rolling, vaulting/wall vaulting, straight-up-assault or direct projectile throwing. For instance, if you are surrounded by weak enemies you can - with skill cut them up to a point where the final kill move is a guaranteed finished. This is not exclusive to single enemies as I have, in some instance used a 360' movement that decapitates multiple enemies in one go. You also utilise platforming eliminating wall-cornering which plagued a lot of games. He vault slash is a long- distance attack manoeuvre while the vertical backflip-to-slash eliminates enemies at zero point range.

Then there is the variety of weapons, each with their own individual traits. The throw-weapon move practically saved me numerous times and the fact this can be applied even through vaulting showcases how flexible the combat is. There's also the case of taking the enemy's weapon mid combat adding an extra layer of secondary weapon retrieval without disrupting the flow of combat. All of this can be applied independently without ever needing to follow your "flow-chart" chain systems to the letter. It is just a framework of what he combat is. Trying to pull that off is far more exhilarating and rewarding because it doesn't reply auto-based systems. You control vaulting, rolling, ambidextrous-weapon handling independently.

 

[Fancy Clown]

I love me some RE4 as much as the next person but I can't do sick flips and time manipulation shit while kicking ass in it so Warrior Within wins.

If you think warrior within is better, then you most certainly do not love RE4 as much as the next person

 

[Resident4t.]

Two Thrones doesn't have stealth sections per se, what it does is integrate platforming and combat for stealth-like quick kills. Which I honestly felt like was one of the best improvements of TT over WW. WW had too much combat. TT found a way to integrate platforming and combat together and had less combat overall, and was a much better balanced game for it, I feel. The chariot sections were small distractions and I honestly didn't find the dark prince sections to be all that bad, just not as good as the main stuff.

Personally didn't like WW all that much, but I think TT is the best in the series. So, opinions, I guess.

It's definitely opinion based. I just get tired of people shitting on Warrior Within because of the tone of the game, which was indeed terrible, but it's not a bad game because of it.

 

[Jaded Alyx]

This reminds me, the dialog is so edgy it cuts me every time the characters talk. The prince in particular feels needlessly edgy to the point I wonder if it's the same character from the original game.

It kind of isn't. Play The Two Thrones to understand better.

 

[Dahbomb]

There's more to WW combat than simply taking the context "flow-chart" at face-value. There is no pre-defined method of initiating or chaining combos.

This is true of most action games with dial a combo like Ninja Gaiden and Bayonetta as well. You are free to start from whatever position you like but once the combat sequence is started it's following a strict path unless cancels are involved which PoP WW lacks.

For instance, if you are surrounded by weak enemies you can - with skill cut them up to a point where the final kill move is a guaranteed finished. This is not exclusive to single enemies as I have, in some instance used a 360' movement that decapitates multiple enemies in one go. You also utilise platforming eliminating wall-cornering which plagued a lot of games. He vault slash is a long- distance attack manoeuvre while the vertical backflip-to-slash eliminates enemies at zero point range.

Again this is not too dissimilar to what NG already does. There are different moves for different types of enemies. You have your Flying Swallow (which can be done from a wall run), your Izuna Drop, your vertical wall jump into downward slash, wall jump throw projectiles, jump on top of enemies for positional advantage etc. And NG came before WW.

Then there is the variety of weapons, each with their own individual traits. The throw-weapon move practically saved me numerous times and the fact this can be applied even through vaulting showcases how flexible the combat is. There's also the case of taking the enemy's weapon mid combat adding an extra layer of secondary weapon retrieval without disrupting the flow of combat. All of this can be applied independently without ever needing to follow your "flow-chart" chain systems to the letter. It is just a framework of what he combat is. Trying to pull that off is far more exhilarating and rewarding because it doesn't reply auto-based systems. You control vaulting, rolling, ambidextrous-weapon handling independently.

The dual wielding system of PoP is certainly unique.


In any case my original point was that many of these crowd controlling options are very situational and stuff like the wall dive are generally superior options because of their safety and efficiency. Blocking/countering is also very powerful in this game. When you start breaking it down, some options are better than others and when the point is to just kill enemies as fast as you can a lot of options are automatically ignored. It's certainly a problem in NG but it's a very real problem in PoP as well.

I also think that you should reconsider calling it "best crowd control simulator". It doesn't really make much sense and when it comes to actually controlling crowds a game like Batman, Godhand or Shadow of Mordor are better at controlling crowds... hell even the new DmC. PoP doesn't have high enemy density and thus crowd control moves are very narrow. Crowd controlling is stuff like performing a double counter in Batman or pulling in 10 enemies with the Aquila in DmC or launching multiple enemies with Osiris or stunning them/crumpling them. Usually you need combat encounters to have more than 3 enemies and the player having access to many moves/abilities that can physical move or alter those enemies (not just hit them) to be considered an action game with a focus on crowd control.

It's more appropriate to call PoP WW the "best acrobatic/weapon combat" game around because in terms of acrobatics it does allow you plenty of options. But while PoP has acrobatics like wall jumps and vaults... other games have crazier stuff like teleports, dashes, launchers, better jump arcs.

Like does this fit into people's definition of "acrobatics"? Dude is zipping around the enemy like crazy.

or stuff like this:

 

[Cave Johnson]

This is true of most action games with dial a combo like Ninja Gaiden and Bayonetta as well. You are free to start from whatever position you like but once the combat sequence is started it's following a strict path unless cancels are involved which PoP WW lacks.


Again this is not too dissimilar to what NG already does. There are different moves for different types of enemies. You have your Flying Swallow (which can be done from a wall run), your Izuna Drop, your vertical wall jump into downward slash, wall jump throw projectiles, jump on top of enemies for positional advantage etc. And NG came before WW.

I only added context to your WW list, it's not a contest to see which game has it or not as it's not the whole point of the discussion. I've already pointed out that WW is distinct from hack-and-slash territory due to the nature combat which overall compliments the design. Your examples are a requirement for the genre not for the sake of.

In any case my original point was that many of these crowd controlling options are very situational and stuff like the wall dive are generally superior options because of their safety and efficiency. Blocking/countering is also very powerful in this game. When you start breaking it down, some options are better than others and when the point is to just kill enemies as fast as you can a lot of options are automatically ignored. It's certainly a problem in NG but it's a very real problem in PoP as well.

Those are valid points but the angle which I am inferring from is because of the situational. It is the catalyst that expands the nature of the combat systems but it does not shove it down your throat since it is primarily a platformer. Enemies in this game are not grind-based (thank god), they're practically optional (aside from a few contextual scenarios). Unlike dedicated hack-and-slash titles, you do not to refine your "combat" skills to progress in the same vein you would in a specialised genre. There is limited benefit to killing your enemies as they primarily meant to regain sand time or limit your dynamic obstacles that will impede on your platforming (A change from SoT which I appreciate). They are essentially are more complicated form of the goomba or any other Mario's enemies. You don't need to necessarily kill them, but you can judge for yourself what benefits in that scenario. And for that, I am really thankful for the developers for such foresight. Games Batman is combat required as that is the only way to escalate your skills. This does not make them bad games, I'm just not fond of enforced scenarios.

I also think that you should reconsider calling it "best crowd control simulator". It doesn't really make much sense and when it comes to actually controlling crowds a game like Batman, Godhand or Shadow of Mordor are better at controlling crowds... hell even the new DmC. PoP doesn't have high enemy density and thus crowd control moves are very narrow. Crowd controlling is stuff like performing a double counter in Batman or pulling in 10 enemies with the Aquila in DmC or launching multiple enemies with Osiris or stunning them/crumpling them. Usually you need combat encounters to have more than 3 enemies and the player having access to many moves/abilities that can physical move or alter those enemies (not just hit them) to be considered an action game with a focus on crowd control.

It's more appropriate to call PoP WW the "best acrobatic/weapon combat" game around because in terms of acrobatics it does allow you plenty of options. But while PoP has acrobatics like wall jumps and vaults... other games have crazier stuff like teleports, dashes, launchers, better jump arcs.

Like does this fit into people's definition of "acrobatics"? Dude is zipping around the enemy like crazy.

or stuff like this:

Here is probably where you misinterpret the notion of my post. The reason why I call PoP: WW the "best" crowd control simulator is because the very nature of the game is based around platforming. Unlike Sands of Time, there is less emphasis on eliminating them. WW's can be alternatively a form of dynamic obstacles to get around with, which is very different to the traps and other complex platforms. The game treats them as such, which is why you can utilise "platforming" techniques from or to them. It's not an enforced design but allows for more perspective players to experiment to discover.

Your examples are different, hack-and-slash games needs a form crowd control as a feature but the overall goal is to eliminate the enemies, not getting around them. Even if you could, it serves no discernible advantage to be underpowered before a boss. Treating PoP' as an "acrobatic" game undermines the depth and complexity of its systems. Here, crowd control is a core aspect to the game, as it is the only other obstacle other than traps and platforms that act as a road block to your intended goal.

For instance, in a traditional genre, having low health pretty much guarantees a death for the majority of the time, especially if it involves waves of enemies ambushing you. WW is different, the majority of the difficulty stems from platforming and traps which tends to be the biggest cause of your health deterioration (hence the time mechanic fallback). I tend to find myself limited in health on numerous occasions with enemies willing to take me down. If it wasn't for the combat mechanics, I would've died in similar situations like Ninja Gaiden or DmC. Isolating on enemy just go fill up one sand slot makes all of the difference in game especially when direct "combat" is the last resort. The wealth options provided has allowed me to proceed with minimal or get any damage before I can proceed with the platforming. This is especially true when you're dealing with troublesome enemies like the wraiths where running away. is the preferred method. But as you may know, it isn't that simple when you have other enemies blocking your way. Hence, a form properly established crowd control mechanics must be in place and so far it has succeeded its design.

I hope that clarifies my stance on the subject.

 

[Neiteio]

I lost it at "I smolder with generic rage." XD

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

Warrior Within is basically just improving on Sands of Time.

It isn't though. It's taking everything that was remotely endearing about Sands of Time and thinking "Hm... let's make it all angry!". Sands of Time was wonderfully unique, and beautiful.

 

[Dahbomb]

Well platforming (or navigating through enemies) isn't crowd control, you are still confusing the two.

A game that is specifically designed around doing nothing but crowd control is Dynasty Warriors. Attacks have huge arcs to hit multiple targets allowing you to literally control crowds during combat. You are separating crowd control from hack n slash when pretty much all hack n slash games have some form of crowd control. When more than a few enemies are on the screen then crowd control comes into the equation.

PoP can't really be a good crowd control simulator if by DESIGN (as you say) it's optional and the benefit to killing them or interacting with them is low. If I don't need to employ the various CC options in the game then that does not make it a good CC game. It wasn't even as if the combat was hard, it was actually quite easy so it's not like you were meant to skip combat to conserve health.

It's more appropriate to call PoP WW a good platform combat game. The combat is intertwined with the various platforming aspects of the game (wall running, vaulting, spinning around poles etc).

 

[Cave Johnson]

Well platforming (or navigating through enemies) isn't crowd control, you are still confusing the two.


A game that is specifically designed around doing nothing but crowd control is Dynasty Warriors. Attacks have huge arcs to hit multiple targets allowing you to literally control crowds during combat. You are separating crowd control from hack n slash when pretty much all hack n slash games have some form of crowd control. When more than a few enemies are on the screen then crowd control comes into the equation.

PoP can't really be a good crowd control simulator if by DESIGN (as you say) it's optional and the benefit to killing them or interacting with them is low. If I don't need to employ the various CC options in the game then that does not make it a good CC game. It wasn't even as if the combat was hard, it was actually quite easy so it's not like you were meant to skip combat to conserve health.

It's more appropriate to call PoP WW a good platform combat game. The combat is intertwined with the various platforming aspects of the game (wall running, vaulting, spinning around poles etc).

What confusion? Enemies in this game may not provide the same mechanics driven as other hack-and-slash titles. Right there, you are confusing difficulty with design. I provided the "low health" example specifically for that purpose because it:

a) Exemplifies the lack of health may not be inherently detrimental to repeated failstates

b) Provides a scenario CC must be enforced.

To you, best crowd control would mean "dominating" the situation . To me, it's all about flexibility to get to your goal. WW optional CC isn't about being "optional" but rather when the situtuation calls for it (and it does call for it whether you like it or not, hence the "low" health context); then you do stand a fighting a chance to survive. "Crowd" here being implicit rather than explicit in this example.

 

[Resident4t.]

It isn't though. It's taking everything that was remotely endearing about Sands of Time and thinking "Hm... let's make it all angry!". Sands of Time was wonderfully unique, and beautiful.

We're talking about gameplay here.

 

[Atuin]

I think it's a real shame they dumbed down the secondary weapon system in all sequels after Warrior within. If you exclude the hidden joke weapons like teddy bears and hockey sticks, Warrior Within had 48 secondary weapons while Two Thrones had only 13 and the weapons in WW were more unique (damage/speed/durability instead of just dmg/dur and more unique qualities like healing power or cursed).

Hell, WW had more secondary axes than TT had any secondary weapons and TT had 0 axes which is a huge personal downside for me Not to mention that WW weapons had names like Ereta, Vahishta and Rustam while TT had such imaginary weapons like Sand Guard Sword 2 and Sand Guard Sword 3.

 

[grandwizard]

I do think this game gets treated unfairly due to how badly they screwed up the entire tone and feel of the series by trying to make it super edgy. It was such a bone headed move to go in that direction after how well Sands of Time pulled off the quasi fantasy light hearted adventure romp feel. However, gameplay wise WW is actually pretty damn good and an improvement in some ways over SoT (mainly in combat, which is still not good but better than before). The environments and environmental puzzles are great and the Dahaka chases were super intense and a precursor to the 'run away while stuff explodes/crumbles' sequences that would come to the forefront in the next generation of consoles in games like Uncharted.

 

[Ophiuchus]

Totally agree with the very first comment.The game had tons of weapons and gaming styles and you had the control of time with some beautifully executed effects.And blocking/counter attacks were perfect if was executed on time.So with all these one could enter crowd and dismantle every pieces.