Singleplayer



  • If you guys end up doing something with singleplayer in mind. Just let it be an IP. So people can stop argueing about the whole Agathia is European and blah blah blah. Just make some epic story and let it be an IP. You guys were probably gonna do that anyway, but a good story with a great multiplayer aspect would make this game remarkable!!



  • I agree Mr. Whippy, a single player campaign would be great but I also think TB should just concentrate on what has been tried and true in the past, i.e. the multiplayer aspect.

    People only argue about such petty things because they have nothing else better to do and they don’t listen. The devs have always said this is a fantasy orientated game and following this logic there is no direct alignment with any real life cultures, though there are obvious influences.

    I say just concentrate on the multiplayer aspect of the game for now, as I am sure there will be a myriad of single player modifications in the future to compliment the vanilla version .

    (I know I will definitely be making a total conversion and the game isn’t even close to being out.)



  • I guess it would be nice, but I agree with GFK… they should focus on multi-player right now, since that’s probably the most important part right now.



  • The problem with AoC sp is the a.i. sucked. It was an old version of Source. Valve seperated sp and mp code. I dunno what all a.i. is left(From Half-Life 2), but fighting a combine soldier with a stun stick is way more fun than the mp bots of AoC.

    I hope in Chivalry II you can pick the class(among other variables) of the a.i., allow large team limits(ie 4/5/10 vs 1024++).



  • @IceIYIaN
    I think the bots in AoC were only ever for server testing purposes, never meant to be a worthy opponents.
    Will say one thing, those guys in messed you up if you tried to act heroic and charge into a group of them.

    Back to topic; it would be interesting to know what TBs plans are as far as SPer anyway, even if they are at a real raw stage or whether they are just leaving this one completely open to the community, i.e. mods.


  • Developer

    There will not be a full-blown single player campaign. There will be an in-depth tutorial mission and other options for offline play. We’re keeping those “other options” under wraps for the time being.



  • Good. As much as I would like to see an AoC-style SP campeign, I also want to make sure that the game that it’s SUPPOSED to be (A bash your friend’s face in game) will be good. It would be like trying to tack on single player to Counter Strike. It wouldn’t be quite right, or it’d be like Brink, Star Wars Battlefront, or UT3…a bunch of custom-faction botmatches with cutscenes between them. I would want that.

    Honestly, if they were going to do a SP campeign, I would love to see it done CoD-style. Would be great to see how that would work…CoD with swords and maces would actually fit very well. However, the Multiplay is, and should be, the first and foremost matter on the minds of the devs.



  • Oh I would love to see one myself. And there is a place. But to do any SPer part justice massive amounts of time must be spent scripting which people tend to complain about anyway. This one is best left to the community and more specifically, someone who is good at story lines.

    @Tibberius
    You sure you don’t want to tell? :P

    @Ajax
    Sorry man. You lost me. What do you mean specifically about a COD-style campaign. Do you mean heavily dramatised with theatrics and pre-scripting etc, like a movie?



  • @GFK: Kinda. The theatrics of a CoD would suit the medieval theme quite well. There are many exciting “Ride of the Valkeries” moments in CoD that are unrealistic and theatrical…in a medieval game, where you’re part of a full-on charge of 3000 men, rushing toward the enemy at breakneck speed, with as much danger from weapons in front as the footsteps behind, and you have an intense, realistic, and theatrical moment that would be worthy of a CoD game.

    As for scripting, yeah…there would be scripting mostly for parts of the battle you have no interaction wth, and they influence what you as the player can do and go. It would be on-a-rails, but less so than a real CoD game, simply because of the hecticness of a melee battle. Instead of sitting inside a building, you’re running from one man to the next, forcing you to keep on the move to avoid arrows and make sure you complete your goals.

    As for the dramatization, the davs already have a backstory for the land, all they have to do is tell the story of the Crusaders returning home and reclaiming the throne from the point of view of a group of soldiers. There was still plenty of downtimes when the armies would part to collect their dead and dying to allow for player rest and story moments, and there was still time in the battles when someone could shout out something important.

    I think a CoD-style game would work, if done right. more time would have to be spent on making the story actually worth it, but the setting lends itself to the theatrics of the type of game. Really, the stuff you mentioned is in almost all standard FPS games…the difference between CoD and other shooters is that instead of being a super soldier alone or with a group of regular guys, you’re a regular guy with the elite teams of other regular guys. The heroic theatrics on the disposable asset scale.

    Instead of heroic theatrics surrounding a hero, it’s heroic theatrics surrounding the Regular Joe. Kind the idea of “this person is a hero…and this is how he came to be.” And that kind of theme would work well for a Medieval game. Rather than being thrust into events far bigger and having to convince people you’re a hero (As with Dragon Age or Elder Scrolls, where you’re told you’re a hero from the start), you earn your way to hero status.

    For example, Soap McTavish was considered a badass in MW2, and was the best of the best, there was no one better. But at the start of the first game, he had barely earned his way there, and was being called a muppet by his CO. He became a hero, and one of the best in the course of a very hard week, under the most stressfull situations. Had he not gone through that, he would not be at the level he was in MW2, and someone else, like that awful character, Ghost, would be in charge. Soap earned his right to be hailed as a hero, and wasn’t told he was one when he started out. That’s the difference between CoD and a lot of other games. You’re either a standard soldier with no claim to fame, and never will have one…or you’re called the best, the elite, and you start the game as a hero. Do I agree with how CoD works or plays? no. I have my problems with the game. But it does have a tried-and-true formula that if you change a few things about it, it would work for a whole variety of games.

    tl;dr The theatrics and drama of CoD serves it’s “earning a hero” theme…something that would translate extremely well into a medieval-themed game. Much better than the gameplay of a Halo or a Ghost Recon, and would certainly be a refreshing take on a CoD-style game, and it would be vastly different from any other medieval-style game on the market.



  • Ajax.

    I agree. This game would be a great platform for the CoD style campaign. You actually made me remember the level from the original CoD where you take the role of a Soviet peasent defending an apartment block during the Battle of Stalingrad, a direct reference to the real life event of Pavlov’s house (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavlov’s_House). Showing regular men can do great things when forced to fight for what they believe in.

    As much as I am a person of free roaming and being unrestricted as possible I also like the way you follow a carefully constructed (not flawless) story. Hey this is entertainment in the end after all, like playing through an interactive movie. The other thing is I have played FPSs since the days of Rise of the Triad (as anyone who played stuff back then the SPer was fun but basic) so playing more modern titles (not just FPSs) have shown the way single player has developed into some masterpieces, some decent stories, and some straight out bombs but developed nonetheless.

    Relating this to Chiv, as has been mentioned at this point in time there are no plans for SPer

    @Tibberius:

    There will not be a full-blown single player campaign. There will be an in-depth tutorial mission and other options for offline play. We’re keeping those “other options” under wraps for the time being.

    I think a dedicated modding community can easily fill the role of providing this leaving TB just to improve on the core of the game. Of course anything that would be made would have to be directly related to the lore that these guys have created. I have been a bit slack as to keeping up with that lore probably because I am seeing the game still in relation to it’s parent, i.e. AoC.
    Down-times would be excellent for many reasons story development, more careful inspection of the environment, exploring game mechanics etc, like the way you think there. As you said, melee can get very hectic and all concentration is kept on staying alive.

    Instead of heroic theatrics surrounding a hero, it’s heroic theatrics surrounding the Regular Joe. Kind the idea of “this person is a hero…and this is how he came to be.” And that kind of theme would work well for a Medieval game. Rather than being thrust into events far bigger and having to convince people you’re a hero (As with Dragon Age or Elder Scrolls, where you’re told you’re a hero from the start), you earn your way to hero status.

    I think you have somewhat of a backstory yourself for a specific character in the whole scheme of the Agatha/Mason world which would relate more to most of us gamers (average joes/joesephines), but also allowing us to delve into a nicely constructed character of that world. I think there is still room for having all sorts of character types, e.g. an elite fighter of the royal guard who smells corruption and dives into a bloody frenzy of justice or something like that, while sticking to the lore and present visual layouts.

    As mentioned. I have enjoyed most of the SPer campaigns of CoD and would think that formula could easily work with a Chiv SPer campaign. Soap was awesome, Ghost was a wanker. And I also agree this is not perfect but hey, at least it is something to go by and then improve on. Like you say, tried and true and one people will mostly relate to. I mean, look at the title of this game. Chivalry: Medieval Warfare.

    As much as AoC had it’s faults, I love the uncomplicated visceral gameplay of it. Steps to follow: Pick class, then kill. At the moment there is a saturation of Medieval RPG style games, hence why I look forward to Chiv so much, and probably another decision for the game title. To indicate it is NOT ANOTHER RPG.

    To be honest, after watching that trailer, I am going to say it … I can’t wait for this game to come out. Until then I am very happy to wait and support TB as I can :D

    Thanks for your post.


Log in to reply