Anyone with a finger can kill someone? Well if you let them walk up to you and point a gun at you, both in game and in real life.

Guns still take skill. Both in in real life and and in game. But with melee, it might take skill in real life, but in game it's just a bunch of button mashing as fast as possible.

Fruhstuck:

*Posh british accent* I hear that suggestion good sah! and heartily suggest that this could even show DMC4 a thing or too about "Stylish" combat

Aaii

Precisely my man. Hyper realistic combat with controls crossed between DMC and Soul Caliber. This would be really fun as far as I am concerned.

axia777:

While this is true of two or more people who are untrained, a trained swordsman would shred a novice like cheese in any sword fight. Highly trained knights and samurai were the special forces of their time. They common public was simply no match in combat against these men. It is like trying to say that any man who can swing his fists can get in the ring with a veteran MMA fighter like Houston Alexander, Chuck Liddell or Brock Lesnar. The simple fact is that the average guy would get devastated in ways that are embarrassing to think about.

Hence why i used the word 'unskilled'. In a modern gunfight, i'd personally bet on the person that'd had training in how to handle the gun, how to aim, how to draw, how to duck, weave, take cover and so on. Yes, a complete novice could, by luck or natural talent, kill that trained gunmen. Likewise with swords or anything else though. The common public devestated knights on many occasions, often with simple pitchforks. The fact of the matter is any combat is dangerous, no matter how much training you've had. No man is invincible, and no one can fully understand that which would make him invincible.

From your absoloute comments about a skilled swordsman 100% of the time trouncing an unskilled one, i apologise. I've never been in or witnessed a dozen or more to the death sword fights between novices and masters, what with having been born in the later part of the 20th century. It sounds like you have though so i'll defer to your superior experience.

I realise you don't want any guns, but don't lose faith in 'The Crossing'. I can honestly say the stuido made a superb close combat game in DMOMM single player, and as far as i know, this is likly as close as you're going to get to what you orginally asked for. Just stick to the medieval parts and don't play in multiplayer matches that're modern.

ZakuII:

axia777:

While this is true of two or more people who are untrained, a trained swordsman would shred a novice like cheese in any sword fight. Highly trained knights and samurai were the special forces of their time. They common public was simply no match in combat against these men. It is like trying to say that any man who can swing his fists can get in the ring with a veteran MMA fighter like Houston Alexander, Chuck Liddell or Brock Lesnar. The simple fact is that the average guy would get devastated in ways that are embarrassing to think about.

Hence why I used the word 'unskilled'. In a modern gunfight, I'd personally bet on the person that would had training in how to handle the gun, how to aim, how to draw, how to duck, weave, take cover and so on. Yes, a complete novice could, by luck or natural talent, kill that trained gunmen. Likewise with swords or anything else though. The common public devastated knights on many occasions, often with simple pitchforks. The fact of the matter is any combat is dangerous, no matter how much training you've had. No man is invincible, and no one can fully understand that which would make him invincible.

Sure a unskilled villagers could kill just about anyone with pitchforks. I never denied that one. I must have missed you saying "unskilled". But, on average, unskilled villagers often got killed by the dozens by skills knights or Samurai.

ZakuII:
From your absolute comments about a skilled swordsman 100% of the time trouncing an unskilled one, i apology. I've never been in or witnessed a dozen or more to the death sword fights between novices and masters, what with having been born in the later part of the 20th century. It sounds like you have though so I'll defer to your superior experience.

No, I just read a lot of history books.

ZakuII:
I realize you don't want any guns, but don't lose faith in 'The Crossing'. I can honestly say the studio made a superb close combat game in DMOMM single player, and as far as I know, this is likely as close as you're going to get to what you originally asked for. Just stick to the medieval parts and don't play in multiplayer matches that are modern.

It seems like a cool game, maybe. What is DMOMM though? I have no idea what it is.

What of Olympic Fencing?

fepayton:

I imagine that it will take something like a force feedback Wii / DDR pad combination before melee feels truly satisfying.

If something like that ever comes into existence, I would have to get one...realistic melee combat that I actually have to move for sounds so much more interesting than sitting around pushing a button to swing something.

Yegargeburble:

fepayton:

I imagine that it will take something like a force feedback Wii / DDR pad combination before melee feels truly satisfying.

If something like that ever comes into existence, I would have to get one...realistic melee combat that I actually have to move for sounds so much more interesting than sitting around pushing a button to swing something.

Except for the fact that after a 4+ hour gaming session you arm would damn tired. But on the flip side it would be great exercise.

Mr_Powers:

Solo508:
It still leaves me wondering why nobody has really tried to launch a skill based melee game though.

Can't believe I am the first one to say this but: Mount & Blade.
That game has the hands down best skill based combat system of any game out there.

That said however, I don't know how well it would stand up to multipayer, my guess is not very well as the combat is a bit repetitive, but is is still the best melee combat game.

There is actually no multiplayer (which is a plus in my book). But, yup, there's really no comparison. For realism and depth in melee combat, without the insane technical complexity of 3D fighting games, M&B is the big winner. Mounted combat, mounted archer, lance charges, commanding your own small armies, recruiting special companions, sieging castles, fighting with axes, swords, spears or even thrown weapons and shields...this is the game a realist is looking for. It's essentially Pirates! set in a fictional middle ages but instead of commanding a ship you're leading a company of soldiers. Pick a side or roam alone, capture towns, join the tourney circuit, or even get involved with trade and caravans.

While the combat is fairly simple, left click to strike and right click to block, the complexity comes in timing and maneuver. You have to be swinging in the right direction or blocking in it and timing your attacks to get through a defense or just hope to beat it down. Of course if you're a cavalry man your effectiveness has more to do with speed and inertia rather than duelling finesse. Rip through footmen with a lance, hew from side to side with a broadsword as you break free of a mob, circle around your enemies with a horsebow. But if you get too far out on your own and dismounted and you will get mobbed.

Nothing else like it yet on the market and I bet someone will rip the concept off soon for a much bigger budget title.

I didn't see anyone mention God of War. It was almost all Melee, except for some magic. Same goes for the Gauntlet games. Maybe if you could clarify what your idea of an ideal melee game is, it would be easier see what your talking about.

Man does any remember Condemned both the first and second were melee based games, with some guns thrown in but their not really the focus. The multiplayer in the second one isn't bad and nothings more satisfying than beating your opponent to death with a pipe.

Rakion is exactly that. Check it out, Softnyx.net

It has some flaws, but I'm sure it'll keep your attention for a while, just don't expect it to be flawless. If you're really into the whole skilled player > noobie, then it's great.

You mean like Streets of Rage, Golden Axe and Sengoku? Or are you thinking more along the likes of Condemned and Manhunt?

...oh wait. =]

Phoenix Arrow:
You mean like Streets of Rage, Golden Axe and Sengoku?

You named off games that are almost 20 years old, just now.

Phoenix Arrow:

Or are you thinking more along the likes of Condemned and Manhunt?

...oh wait. =]

Then you named off Condemned and Manhunt which are both Single-player games.

Soooo..... what are we waiting for?

Waiting for someone to reply to my post, right?

Basically, the big game developers that could do something like a game you're talking about...won't. Tweaking an existing genre is a lot easier than trying to start from scratch and create a unique experience. Effort must be less than or equal to the value of fiscal profit.

This is why the Wii is happily tearing down Nintendo's classic gamer reputation. They put more casual games out there (which are typically easy to make and have a much smaller development cost than, say, a Zelda game), price them around the same price as a blockbuster hit game (again, Zelda), and laugh as the money rolls in. It's a very pessimistic view, but watching commentary of Miyamoto praising the Wii as "the perfect system" and "just what he wanted it to be", I find myself believing it more and more. Also, Miyamoto has said that "while Zelda is not dead, expect it to head in a different direction". Zelda Party anyone? A mini-game Zelda would break my childhood affections to the Zelda series.

After all, gaming companies design games with a profit in mind. As long as they are getting that, as long as they can muffle the cries of gamers by stuffing wads of cash in their ears, why should they care if someone wants something cool and unique. They're too busy making generic shooter X's sequel which will somehow involve quicktime events and minigames.

And it doesn't help that most unique games fail hardcore, discouraging developers from trying a new mold.

axia777:

Yegargeburble:

fepayton:

I imagine that it will take something like a force feedback Wii / DDR pad combination before melee feels truly satisfying.

If something like that ever comes into existence, I would have to get one...realistic melee combat that I actually have to move for sounds so much more interesting than sitting around pushing a button to swing something.

Except for the fact that after a 4+ hour gaming session you arm would damn tired. But on the flip side it would be great exercise.

It would be extremely tiring, but I would still play the game alot...having a tired arm is a small sacrifice to actually feeling like I am swinging anything ranging from a sword to a 2x4 with rusty nails at something.

axia777:
I agree with this one. I have always wanted a hardcore blood and guts Middle Ages/Medieval combat game. Nothing but combat. Live action combat too, none of this RPG stuff. Combat on the field, up on the siege tower, out on the ramparts, and down into the castle court yards. How many people can they fit into one game online these days? 256? That sounds like a good start for mass battle. Make it hyper realistic too. Losing arms and legs would be cool. Just have players respawn when they die of blood loss. have beadings with realistic blood fountains. Have maces, battle axes, bow/arrow, crossbows, lances, and claymores. It would be utterly ruthless.

The closest game to this I can think of is the Age of Chivlary mod for the HL2 Source engine.

It covers everything you mentioned except multi-player is limited to about 32 players if i remember right and you can't lose limbs.

I played it and enjoyed it.

Zac_Dai:

axia777:
I agree with this one. I have always wanted a hardcore blood and guts Middle Ages/Medieval combat game. Nothing but combat. Live action combat too, none of this RPG stuff. Combat on the field, up on the siege tower, out on the ramparts, and down into the castle court yards. How many people can they fit into one game online these days? 256? That sounds like a good start for mass battle. Make it hyper realistic too. Losing arms and legs would be cool. Just have players respawn when they die of blood loss. have beadings with realistic blood fountains. Have maces, battle axes, bow/arrow, crossbows, lances, and claymores. It would be utterly ruthless.

The closest game to this I can think of is the Age of Chivlary mod for the HL2 Source engine.

It covers everything you mentioned except multi-player is limited to about 32 players if i remember right and you can't lose limbs.

I played it and enjoyed it.

That looks really cool. I wish I still had HL2 on my PC.

You can lose your head, happens really often, also its hard to dodge and time attacks, even lighter weapons like daggers have a striketime that requires good timing, blocking happens with the middle mouse button and relies on reflexes.

It may be a con for you that there is an archer class in the game...

Straight up. Melee games don't work.

However Pirates, Vikings and Knights two is fun for exactly why you would think it be fun since it's a melee based game.

SirSchmoopy:
Straight up. Melee games don't work.

However Pirates, Vikings and Knights two is fun for exactly why you would think it be fun since it's a melee based game.

The only way this game could sound more appealing is if it had ninjas in it. Or was advertised by Hugh Jackman/attractive woman of your choice.

As others have said Dark messiah is an awesome game with lost of blood and chopping limps of.

axia777:

It seems like a cool game, maybe. What is DMOMM though? I have no idea what it is.

Dark Messiah of Might and Magic. Here's a video of single player combat with a sword.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWKRkhpFqhE

Phoenix Arrow:
Sengoku?

Oh, dear lord.

SNK might know how to make fighting games, but they know fuck all about doing beat 'em ups.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrgpVB9NcKI&feature=related

This is what your looking for but it only shows a fraction of the combat system; you also have blocks, shields, bows, and all the different weapons operate differently.

It's possible I missed someone mentioning Ninja Gaiden. Even so, it bears reiterating - Ninja Gaiden is a serious study in the melee genre.

Age of Chivalry, it's a free 3rd party mod on Valve's Steam. You just need to own a Valve game (Half Life 2, Day of Defeat, Counterstrike, etc...) and it's free.

Solo508:
As a passionate gamer i've explored just about every genre, from battling an MMO addiction to climbing competitive ladders in FPS and RTS. One thing I've always thought had potential, though, is melee combat games yet i've never found one that pulls it off well.

Maybe its because i've just watched a Kung Fu movie, but I don't understand why there is such a lack of such games. As it stands, melee combat games are bad. You have the choice of either MMORPG, in which time spent and the roll of a dice are the main factors in deciding a win, or simple modifications of first person shooters in which the combat can be easily compared to rock, paper, scissors... without the scissors. There are a couple games that try to pull it off but nothing stands out.

The best melee combat in a game i've seen was Shadow of Rome except that was just singleplayer and its easy to see how it could fall flat on its face in multiplayer. It still leaves me wondering why nobody has really tried to launch a skill based melee game though. A giant chunk of skill was taken out of combat when guns arrived, since then, anybody with a finger could kill somebody. In games it doesn't have to be this way though, you don't have to be sitting prone firing at a spec in the distance when you could be looking at your enemy face-to-face and I agree that it would be tricky to pull it off in a game but wouldn't it be damn fun to play a melee game in which the skill gap was just as big if not more than modern FPS's like Call of Duty and Counter Strike?

I'd also like to know what the best melee based games you have ever played are :)

i have the [erfect answer. Many games tried this but they would be to complicated if it were skill base. THe combos would be to hard to master, their would be to many combos and for the lack of learning the combos you will never win in single player onless you pay chap (the mortal comat approac) mortal ocmbat did this. But another problem is because of that you can spend years mastering the combos to be betten by a seven year old who knows that one cheap combo and button mashes

GenHellspawn:
Apparently you've never been to an arcade.

I second that notion

I don't think that I understand what the qualifications of this discussion are. Does the game have to be in 2D or 3D, First or third person, does it have to be a pure fighting game or do you achieve victory by getting from point A to point B or fulfilling some other objective and can it have RPG or strategy elements or is it just action.

Hmmm. Bushido Blade was fairly realistic. Virtual Fighter IV or any of the Tekken games are good options for skill and technicality. I'd even say that games like Fight Night have something to offer here. Ninja Gaiden too. But, since I see so many PC games listed as a point of reference, I suppose my console-centric suggestions won't carry much weight around here.

If you're going for more of a wartime feel, Dynasty Warriors or Kindgom Under Fire should be points of reference (although there is much debate over the quality of these games).

I seriously think I either don't understand your observation about melee games, or you underestimate the fighting game genre in it's ability to deliver what you're looking for.

There are a good number games with good melee combat. The problem is that it's neither effective nor efficient and often too hard to do.

The basic "Move in the direction of the attack you are wanting to do" is straight up Oblivion, and it had one of the worst combat systems in a game of all time. So boring and drab. Dark Messiah of Might and Magic had one of the best combat systems of all time, despite being a terrible multiplayer game.

Fallout 3 has the same melee mechanics that Oblivion had. Hold down left strafe and you do an attack that attacks to the left. It works really poorly, although the game is more about VATS and shooting stuff.

There's another game out there that does melee combat decently. Mount and Blade. It sucks that the game lacks any story (waaaaaaaaaaaaay too open world for my tastes) and is won mainly by the existence of horses. Maybe these things have been changed from the last version I played, but I'm completely unsure.

I would really like to see a game that doesn't suck come out and be all about the melee combat. Stylized, over the top, 300 style action focused entirely on killing things. Load in different types of characters that are fundamentally different. Have one character rely on momentum and speed to win (think Mirrors Edge movement), have another rely on tactics and timing, another on long range fighting, and another on brute force bashing. Just have them all play completely different and you're good to go.

Woe Is You:

Phoenix Arrow:
Sengoku?

Oh, dear lord.

SNK might know how to make fighting games, but they know fuck all about doing beat 'em ups.

I loved Sengoku 3, I'm going to play it now just to spite you.

I'll stick to Tekken, thanks.

Has someone mentioned Elveon yet?

That looks like a fairly decent melee combat game with strong emphasis on tactical one-on-one/two/three/four humanoid fights - unlike God of War and Ninja Gaiden.

Still I haven't heard anything about that game in a while. It could well be dead.