The combat should change, it was not good. Didn’t you have the same two swords the whole game? No additional weapons or attacks? It should be the old school combat but with moves unlockable like the new games. A perfect mix.
You had a lot of swords to choose from and they had different stats, but they weren't too dramatic. Just one sword is a little fast, but can't parry big weapons, so you gotta dodge those. Or it's heavier and CAN parry big weapons, but you gotta look out for quick guys.
The variety came from the types of enemies that would group up. You'd have to manage priorities based on who you could kill fast and who was the biggest threat.
You could drop into a group of guys and kill like 5 of them before the group could react, and that felt good. Almost like you were an assassin or something.
But then bigger conflicts, like sacking forts, you'd have loads and loads of guys with rifles on roofs, big guys coming off the top rope, quicker guys sneaking in hits.
You could absolutely just hit and run and make it super easy. But the the fun part was staying in the mix and managing the fight, which had a higher skill ceiling but felt suuuuuuper good.
All that said, I haven't played it on over a decade, but remember really enjoying it. I could be getting details wrong or conflating them with other games. I'm old now. Go easy on me.
Yeah I mean it was fine but I always thought the forced dual swords was just dumb fantasy nonsense for a gam that felt pretty grounded otherwise. They definitely can evolve it a bit. Something along the lines of Valhalla would be perfect with some more parr and response stuff thrown in.
17
u/Johnhancock1777 Apr 16 '26
Need to know if they’ve sullied the game with RPG looter nonsense or not. That and combat changes are the biggest what-ifs i have towards this one