For Honor Review – Knight Fight

Jim doesn’t have the time to review For Honor himself? I guess I’ll take up the mantle. Why? FOOOOOOOOOOOOR …….. HONOOOOOOOOOOOOOOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Developer: Ubisoft Montreal
Publisher: Ubisoft
Format: PC (reviewed), PS4, Xbox One
Released: February 14, 2017
Copy provided by publisher
Contains microtransactions

For Honor is a traditional fighting game masquerading as a 3D action title. On the surface, it looks like a Dynasty Warriors style experience where you take big cool weapons, smash through countless armies of idiotic AI enemies and feel like an unstoppable badass. At its heart, it’s a far more slow and methodical fighting game themed around careful reading of your enemies, forcing openings, and piling on the pressure only when the time is right.

At its best, For Honor pits two human players against each other in one on one combat and tests their wits. At its worst, For Honor forces you to try and brute force your way past AI enemies that seemingly read player inputs enough to feel more like a soulless roadblock than an engaging challenge.

For Honor’s heart is a 3D interpretation of 2D competitive fighting game combat (Jim’s Note: Anyone remember Cardinal Syn? Great days).

Playing as one of three distinct warrior types – Samurai, Viking, or Knight – you can attack or defend in three directions: left, right or up. Launching an attack in any one of these directions will trigger a notification for your opponent, giving them a small window of time in which to block the incoming attack or attempt to dodge it. Dodges are far faster than blocks, but have to be completed with much more precise timing to avoid opening the player up to damage.

Beyond that basic set of core attacks and defenses, you can also launch a feint attack in any of those directions, starting and then canceling an attack. If your enemy attempts to block a feint, they will often be left open for a sudden unexpected attack from a different direction.

Throw in a parrying system, a stamina meter that causes extreme vulnerability when depleted, throws, combos, guard breaks, environmental hazards and unique specials for each class, you’re left with a combat system that’s easily mechanically executed while containing enough depth to give serious players room to grow and improve.

Each of these sets of systems is then layered onto classes and factions of heroes to play as with variable stats and different ratios of power versus speed. Knights are the jack-of-all-trades faction, Samurai generally trade a drop in defense for an increase in speed, and the Vikings trade a drop in speed for a hefty boost in attack.

The three factions offer three Vanguard class heroes to play – an adaptable “easy” fighter class, an Assassin class which trades crowd control for increased dueling proficiency, and a heavy unit trading speed for power, alongside a handful of combination class units.

When battling against human players there’s a tension to knowing you are locked into a single shared moment of tense combat. Will you make the first move? Will you be on the offense or the defense? Are they confident? Are they testing the waters? Are they going to jump straight for a feint or lull me into a false sense of security first?

The game shines when pitting two human players against each other and letting them try to read each other’s intentions. It doesn’t work nearly as well in single-player.

E3 2016 made me think For Honor was about three historically distinct factions fighting for thousands of years over a single tiny puddle of water. I thought this game was going to be some kind of Mad Max hellscape where water was such a rare resource that time and space crumpled in on themselves to culminate in a fight over a puddle.

The realisation that For Honor’s three classes were fighting over an entire continent was infinitely less exciting. In fact it was a fairly bland, uninteresting, and soulless excuse for combat to take place. This pretty well sums up my thoughts on the single-player campaign. The combat mechanics were still simple to execute with impressive depth available, but there was no soul to playing through AI matches with bots who could seemingly read my inputs for advanced techniques and anticipate feinting.

Single player matches were frustratingly difficult fights with vapid enemies who repeated the same phrases and didn’t feel nearly as interestingly fallible in combat as actual human players. Fighting a human player adds this dance to the proceedings, a back-and-forth mind game of bluffing and countering that just can’t exist against a computer.

The AI is competent but some of the boss fights are fucking infuriating. They know reliably when I’m going to feint, which just pisses me off to no end.

Pair this with uninteresting cutscenes building towards a plot that’s tough to care about, and For Honor’s single player feels like it has very few redeeming points besides giving you a low risk place to practice move execution.

For Honor’s online mode features multiple match types, including 2v2 and 4v4 match types, but 1v1 matches are where the game feels at its most skill based. When For Honor reaches a point where everything is working as it should, and you’re just staring down another human player trying to read them without being read yourself, there’s a tension to be found that feels like a mix of Dark Souls PVP crossed with a traditional competitive 2D fighter.

When it works…

It’s impossible to talk about For Honor’s online multiplayer without acknowledging how unreliable it can be. The game uses Peer-to-Peer networks for online, rather than a centralized network, meaning that one player hosts the match on their machine and all other players connect to the match through that player.

The problem with this in For Honor is that the game seems to be very unreliable at selecting accurately the best host player. This can at times leave players with variable connection speeds hosting matches that either induce unfair levels of lag, or just cause the match to end part way through.

The number of matches I have had fail on me due to network issues in the first few days since launch has been staggering. As someone with a business-level fibre internet connection, there’s no reason I should be paired with a host player with slow or unreliable internet.

The frequency of issues being caused by this has put a real damper on my online experience. I’ve certainly played a decent number of matches that worked as intended, but every match that decides to fail part way through kills off a little of my love.

Ultimately, For Honor doesn’t focus on making sense or being historically accurate, it just puts cool stuff in a field and tells it to go out and fight. Everything outside of playing online sucks, like microtransactions, customization options and single-player. Hell, the multiplayer itself sometimes sucks when it pairs you with a badly selected host player.

However, when the game is working and you’re murdering a single human player while screaming “FOOOOOOOOOOOR HOOOOOOOOOOOONOOOOOOOOOOOR” at their corpse, it’s pretty damn rewarding.

It’s just a shame the single player couldn’t capture the soul of playing online.

7/10
Good

  • galactix100

    The game can’t even spell honour, 1/10.

    • Vaughan MacDonald

      Damned Americans and their special snow flake spellings.

      • MJC

        Can you even read? “Developer: Ubisoft Montreal”

        Funny how you’re sitting here shitting on Americans when you’re too goddamn stupid to know that Montreal is in Canada.

        • Vaughan MacDonald

          Dude, chill out. It was a joke. Meaning, ‘it was not meant to be taken deadly seriously’. Calm down.

  • Nikita Kress

    Love the online game, but I do feel for all the things it does wrong, 7 out of 10 is a bit much. Here is hoping Ubisoft will support it like Siege.

  • Morgoth

    So, can I make Ragnar Lothbrok fight against Gregor Clegane?

    • galactix100

      If that was a thing I would throw so much money at this game.

  • Shadow

    Nothing quite like fighting a boss and hearing him shout “I will defeat you!” about a hundred times over the course of a ten minute fight. Which is only that long due to said boss having ridiculous levels of health and is capable of countering the guard break 99% of the time.

    The game definitely only shines when you can get some 1v1s, or sometimes even 1v2s in during the multiplayer.

  • To chip in – I mostly agree, except for the fact that I hate duels. I’m not a fighting game player, and this game was marketed as something else, something much more my speed. Part of why I outsourced this review was because I am not a fighting game player, and with three other major reviews on the go, I couldn’t devote time to learning.

    Outside of that, I recognize it’s a well-made game with a battle system that works when it works. It needs the players to buy into the concept, which is what undermined games like Evolve and Gears of War, where the premise was replaced with less… civilized… gameplay.

    I think I like what was best said by Laura on the podcast – they made a great battle system and then struggled to frame an equally great game around it.

    • diamond

      Just curious, how come nether you nor Laura commented on the micro-transactions in this game? For Honor’s MTs are even worse then Overwatch’s.

      • InfamousDS

        See his response to me above.

    • Helmic

      I’m a bit disappointed to not see you rip into this, because despite loving dueling, the game’s microtransactions are a perfect example of how “cosmetic-only” microtransactions can still greatly harm a game.

      See, the game’s Steel requirements for a lot of stuff is absurdly high. Ubisoft either wants you to spend an extra $100 or they want you bootcamping the game enough that your value as a playmate to the whales well exceeds $100.

      So the only way to even attempt to get the requisite Steel is to do daily quests, called “orders.” These orders demand you play in a speciifc game mode with a specific character archetype and grind that out for most of your free day.

      The result? Instead of playing the game modes you want, you’re instead told to play the shitty modes if you want to hope to progress in the game. Dueling is fantastic for any Souls PvP lover (and it would be better if they’d do proper matchmaking), but rarely can I ever have time for that as I’m instead forced into the umpteenth Elimination mission where the host always disconnects and everyone else runs the entire time because collecting powerups and dragging the match out is more effective than actually sword fighting in a sword fighting game.

      You’re expected to slave away at these shitty modes to ensure they always have a population of players for matchmaking, and the only reason you listen is because there’s no other way to get the stuff you want. And the only reason that stuff is behind such a massive grindwall is because of microtransactions.

      Like your street’s sewage system, it all comes together to make something toxic; players in these matches are frequently unhappy and letting others know they’re only doing this for the orders. Everyone’s always complaining, no one is really playing to have fun. If you want to have fun, you go duel, you go do brawls, you at least play Dominion. But no, everyone’s stuck doing endless Eliminations because Ubisoft *needs* that extra money to cover those P2P server costs.

  • Polishfury5000

    Feels like they missed a real opportunity by going peer2peer. How cool would it have been to have dedicated servers where the host chooses a setting, like a castle courtyard or mead hall, and people can queue up to fight each other in different rings while others cheer them on?

    Why not allow for actual fight clubs? Some of the most fun I’ve had in World of Warcraft and Dark Souls is coming across random fight clubs set up in unique parts of the game world.

    Why hasn’t anyone made a game dedicated to those types of dueling events?

    • Xyra

      Peer to peer is a commonly expected, if not demanded, method of connecting players in a fighting game, and For Honor has considerable fighting game DNA. You could have spectators in a peer to peer setting as well, so long as they did not exist as a physical asset on the playing field. All they need to do is read inputs.

      The real issue is that the netcode for the game right now is horrendous. It should be prioritizing more stable hosts and has issues populating teams despite the large number of players to pull from.

      • Anton

        Who the hell would demand p2p?

        • InfamousDS

          It might make a difference at the actual FGC events and the high-level play where literal milliseconds decide wins, but for us lowly casuals it just hampers the experience.

          • MJC

            Nope. In actual FGC events, they don’t play online at all. Why would two people in the same room connect two consoles/PCs through the internet when they can play together on the same device?

        • Xyra

          With good netcode, p2p offers the lowest latency possible as you take out a middleman service that players would have to connect to. When you rely on frame perfect inputs you want the players to have total parity with each other.

          Skullgirls has excellent online play, and it’s all because they put serious effort into their p2p netcode.

          However the 4v4 mode should probably use a server. P2P is great for intimate duelling but becomes exponentially more miserable the more people become peers.

        • MJC

          Only stupid people.

  • 09philj

    I think the fundamental question is whether the combat system is the best one for the game they want to make, as opposed to something more like Souls.

  • I agree with Laura’s review on the aspect of peer-to-peer connection, it has been a great source of my frustration as well. I do find however that that the 2v2 battles, by and large, also represent the game in a positive light.

    Many combatants do follow the “honor code” of 1v1’s in these scenario’s and it makes for an incredibly tense time, both when you know you have a second opponent in the wings to battle as well as trying to not let your teammate down in your fight on the other side of the map.

    I will say however that the single player can be a bit frustrating at its drastically shifting AI skill, where you can 4v1 against “warriors” who are essentially just chaff, then run into a 1v1 where you have to pull out all the stops.

    Regardless, great review Laura!

  • Terriosaurus Hex

    Puddle chronicles; ever-observing, eternally inept yet forever reflecting the brutal demise of all who willingly perish within.

    DLC COMING SOON! PRE-ORDER NOW…GET FROZEN WINTER PUDDLE EXCLUSIVE SKIN!!

  • Kyle Pierce

    You didn’t mention how the game is built around MicroTransactions.

  • Shui Gor

    I just realized it’s Laura reviewing……not that there’s a problem with that: the beta more-or-less told me what the whole game would be like.

  • Aaron B

    Great review, Laura! Glad to see you writing for the site again.

    I feel like you all should add another tag at the top that reads “Always Online”, alongside the usual “Contains MicroTransactions”, etc.

    • MJC

      Yep. Once I read about always online DRM, I was out regardless of the quality of the game. Fortunately, it sounds like I’m not missing anything. Just a microtransaction platform with connection problems due to a lack of servers. How cheap can you get, Ubisoft? We have to have a connection to one of your servers to play single player, but when it comes to mulitplayer, suddenly connecting to a server is too much? Has to be peer to peer? What a crock of shit.

    • guy smiley

      Now I feel bad. Didn’t notice Laura wrote it until you said so.

  • diamond

    This game looks pretty fucking bad, definitely a pass for me.

    • Austin_sj

      King contrarian has spoken

      • InfamousDS

        All hail him with the contrarian salute, flinging copies of Homefront and Pixels at your closest critic (but not the good ones who said these were good things).

        • diamond

          Nah I don’t give a shit if people dislike those or not, i’m not out to convert people to share my opinions.

          • Chris Schwartz-Brown

            No, you’re just out to call them fanboys, insult them, use homophobic slurs, and then declare you like it when they suffer.

          • diamond

            not really no you brain-dead piece of fucking dogshit, also never used any slurs moron.

          • Chris Schwartz-Brown

            Really? So you haven’t called me, or anyone else here ‘cocksuckers’ or called them ‘cocksucking’ as an insult? Since you only use that term on people who seem to be guys, the only way that’s an insult is if you’re attempting to imply that them being gay or bisexual would be an insult.

            Kind of strange for someone who claims to be such a fan of Jim Fucking Sterling, a man who ‘loves the color of money and the taste of cock’ to throw that around like a child on a schoolyard who calls anything he doesn’t like ‘gay’ or ‘queer’. What you’re doing is no different.

          • CX316

            Maybe for him “cocksucker” is a term of endearment

          • Chris Schwartz-Brown

            If it is then he must really like me. Maybe it’s Diamond’s idea of a come on.

        • Wolfie

          “the contrarian salute”

          So… flipping the bird, then?

        • CX316

          I had a guy on reddit who just last week had fought me tooth and nail to defend the reputation of both Battleborn and Aliens: Colonial Marines who then this week tried to claim that the release state of For Honor was “unacceptable from a AAA publisher”

      • diamond

        Wrong fool, it’s hardly contrarian considering a number of people are uninterested in this game.

      • Eon264

        That would be queen contrarian sir, Laura wrote this. Also how is a 7/10 based on the fact it has network issues contrarian in the slightest?

        • CX316

          Austin wasn’t talking about Jim or Laura, he was talking about diamond, who’s had a bee in his underwear about this game for a while now.

          • Eon264

            Ooooh, I misunderstood. To be fair, it would sadly be very believable that someone would say that in regards to Jim/Laura down here.

        • Austin_sj

          I wasn’t talking about the review.

    • UGL| WILDFANG Beast

      same

    • Lars Anderson

      Ok hipster.

      • diamond

        not a hipster dumbfuck

  • nikolas orava

    not for honor, but fooooooor yooooou

  • InfamousDS

    I… am a little baffled. This is the second time both Laura and Jim have discussed For Honor in their shared spaces, and neither of them mention that the game has an arguably shitty MT system. Granted, they both dislike MTs to the point of probably never buying them, but… still.

    I’ll run it down, based on what I’ve been told and observed:
    The fake currency is called Steel (there may or may not be a throwaway currency that is practically valueless). Steel is earned by completing daily objectives, weekly objectives, doing the single-player campaign, and from breaking down equipment earned through play. It is exasperatingly slow to earn after you exhaust the larger gain methods, but is available in pretty enticing amounts with the payment of real money.
    Steel can be used to purchase Overwatch-style Crates, which grant cosmetic items. It can also be used to buy loot packs which contain less than cosmetic enhancements like weapon and armor pieces that are scaled to your level and provide tangible stat bonuses. It was not explained to me if this an overall player level or the levels of specific warriors, and it was also not explained to me if these crates are one and the same.
    Steel can also be used to purchase playable characters, with all of the associated bonuses to both versatility and power it grants a player. Once unlocked, a character can purchase class-specific skills with Steel. These skills range from passive bonuses to new attacks and also have innate features like the ability to circumvent an opposing player’s block or a faster animation to catch them while dodging.

    In short, I’ve been having to listen to someone yell about all the “Pay-to-Win bullshit” for 3 days while I casually observe from another room and occasionally watch and ask questions and now I find myself asking why the King of calling out MT nonsense and his dear friend made no mention of it.

    • Kevin Wilson

      Strange they left out such a massive part of this full price game. Need to know info for me, if I was going to buy it that is….which I’m not

      • InfamousDS

        I just re-read the comments on Jim’s screenshot article, and 6 hours ago there was a guy going around telling everyone how their impressions of the MTs and the loot grind were wrong. I fully expect him to appear here now, and tell us both off for it being “not as bad as I’ve made it”.

        • CX316

          There was more than one of us pointing out that it’s not pay2win, you know.

        • Karl O’ Toole

          You do realise All characters are playable and DO NOT need to be unlocked.. Unlocking a character with steel unlocks customization for that character.. If all future DLC is gonna be free I can live with micro transactions for cosmetics..

          Nobody is forcing you to spend real money or grind for days to buy a fancy looking hat, if you want it that’s your choice.

    • Definitely something I am going to look into. The trouble with For Honor is its so overwhelming when you start it, it just piles info onto you. With how busy I am, I haven’t properly dug into the MTs, but once I see the scope of then, I’ll see if they’re worth covering in extra detail.

      • InfamousDS

        That’s actually a relief to hear. It would be nice if it wasn’t necessary to research just how shitty Ubisoft is being, and they just weren’t shitty at all. I won’t wait with baited breath, but I am looking forward to it when you have the time.

      • Chris N

        Thank you.

      • Helmic

        How earning Steel actually works should be a good place to start. The daily system forces you to grind game modes you don’t like (particularly 4v4 where the P2P issues make things almost unbearable). Promotional tie-ins with Twitch also make it so those that pony up cash for Ubisoft’s partner, Amazon, grind away faster for a while.

        People will mention that items will get more extreme in their strengths and weaknesses rather than one item just being straight better than another; however, some of these stats are absolutely useless (Orochi has no use for throw distance because he can hardly throw at all to begin with) and can be tanked to max out something useful like attack damage or revenge mode build-up or duration. Higher level items also have a larger increase in the favored stats than they have a decrease in the unfavored stats, so the higher the level the more raw stat points you have.

        The effect is quite noticeable with some stuff; revive speed in particular can get a teammate up and going almost before they hit the ground, making it almost impossible to lose teamfights.

    • Helmic

      What’s worse is how you earn that Steel. The daily order system is the only way to really make reasonable progress in anything, but it’s also what forces you to play shitty game modes, particularly 4v4 where the P2P system acts up the worst. Elimination conceptually is a bad game mode that features lots of running away and unfair powerup placements and generally takes fucking forever while never having a good fight.

      So the microtransactions incentivize you to play the game in the worst way possible. It makes playing the game a chore and you’ll often see people mentioning that during games.

    • Kyle Pierce

      To verify a few of your questions about MT’s in the game.

      -The game’s only currency is Steel. You do earn it from dailies & by playing the game, but yes it is very unwilling to give you a decent amount. Each game played gives around 20-40 steel, & Dailies give around 100-300 steel each. Dailies can take several matches to complete, usually 2 or 3 but sometimes up to 10 or more. On average, if you spend a whole day doing orders you can probably net around 1200 steel or so.
      -Items in the game cost between 500-65000 steel. Items that you can “buy” with steel are as follows.
      -Playable Classes (only 4 are available when you buy the game, rest have to be unlocked at 500 steel each)
      -Cosmetics (These range from wearables that do nothing & fancy light animations around your character costing between 1000-15000+ Steel a piece),
      -Boosters that increase experience gained & loot earned after matches
      -Executions to be used in multiplayer (it costs 5000 steel just to be able to decapitate someone in multiplayer)
      -Pay to Skip (You can use Steel to unlock all of a classes abilities for MP right away).
      -Loot chests which cost up to 500 steel for an RNG crate containing up to 7 pieces of gear. Gear can be cosmetic, but they do also offer variable, slight stat changes such as damage, defense, revenge gain/length, etc. These stat changes are minor & do also lower/raise stats respectively. Some stats are more helpful than others, though.
      -Steel is the only currency in the game but there is also Salvage, which is used to upgrade gear for your particular class. Salvage is gained by breaking down equipment & is used in conjunction with Steel to upgrade gear. Basically, you need both to upgrade a piece of gear. The cost of each goes up with each upgrade. Salvage as far as I can tell, cannot be bought but you can buy loot chests for more items to salvage.

      So far, after around 20 or so hours of game time I can say that the MT’s in For Honor are very similar to any normal F2P game. It’s like, Ubisoft is planning on making this game F2P in the future because that’s basically how the entire game is designed. MT’s do not really hinder gameplay nor progression, and I don’t feel like the game is pay2win but if you’re someone who thinks every little stat matters you may feel bothered by the MT presence in this game.

      • MrInx

        Just a minor note, all classes are playable.

        Those that are not recruited do not gain levels/prestige and cannot be customised. The game does not make this clear at any point and I thought you had to recruit before play as well.

  • A Roast Beef Sandwich

    Me after watching the pre-rendered trailers: Interesting, a Souls-like multiplayer with sub-themes about the futility and brutality of war
    After watching Jim’s gameplay video: Noooope this is a power fantasy for jackoffs

  • Benj

    Although this doesn’t look like it’s worth buying it does seem like it has a really great mechanical base to improve on.

    Hopefully it’ll go the Watch Dogs and Titanfall route and have a much better sequel that I might actually buy.

    • CX316

      I’m hoping for more the Rainbow Six Siege route and just… fix the actual game.

  • Austin_sj

    The only thing starting with HO that I now shout in a fantasy world is “HOLD THE DOOR”

    • Sperium3000

      Is your arm tired from that reach?

      • Benj

        No, because he already broke it from jerking himself off.

    • Anton

      What about “Hoedown”?

    • CX316

      That gets shouted in the first single player mission by an NPC.

  • Nitrium

    P2P seems like a terrible idea. So terrible, that I wouldn’t have thought it would EVER be used by a AAA studio for a full-priced game. The key issue would be that if the host machine player rage quits or has dodgy internet, then all the other players are instantly dumped ruining their experience. I assume the host knows (s)he’s the host, so if they’re losing bad they can just stick it to the other players out of pure spite? Also I bet it makes adding cheats much easier. Sounds like a great way to have zero fun.
    P2P is obviously much cheaper (and I can see why indie’s would go down that route), but surely Ubisoft can afford their own servers???

    • Spencer

      The P2P used in For Honor is weird. It essentially pools all the hosts’ machines to manage the game, which is why anytime someone leaves, it has to re-synch. This can also mean that if someone has a particularly wonky connection, it can scrap the whole match.

  • HaveSomeOatmeal

    I also think it’s worth mentioning the game’s unspoken honor system, if we’re likening it to Dark Souls PVP.

    In Brawl and Elimination, each player is initially placed in front of their own opposing player – similar to Red Dead Redemption’s Mexican standoff beginning to multiplayer matches. If you kill your opponent, it’s generally good etiquette to wait for the other 1v1 matchups to finish rather than stepping in and doubling up against someone.

    The Revenge system exists to counter getting doubled up on, but against disciplined players fighting more than one is usually a guaranteed death.

    If you break this “honor” rule, then you can sometimes see the match devolve into chaos as players are more likely to gang up on each other, throw each other into and off of environmental traps, rage quit, taunt, and use other tactics some might consider “cheap.”

    These things are in the game, and I’m not saying it’s bad when it happens, it’s just interesting how a new player’s intent to assist a teammate could inadvertently change the tone of the entire match.

    Other thoughts?

    • BAH!

      Your example reminds me of Gears of War. The thing to do there was melee the air with your Gnasher to indicate to someone you wanted to duel- usually after the match has turned to 1v1. It was considered “honorable” to engage, and “dishonorable” to gun the fool down while he was exposed and vulnerable.

      You can probably guess which side I fell on.

    • Clark Kent

      There is a 1v1 duel mode. If you want to duel, why would you play 4v4 matches? The interest of team games is seeing players teaming up and acting in a coordinated-fashion, not waiting for the other’s duel to end. I don’t see how it’s wrong to help a teammate in a team game. That’s not cheap, that the game, and if you don’t like that,you have other game options.

      • HaveSomeOatmeal

        Not sure if you’re speaking to me directly, but I actually agree with you. Some players view it differently though, and I’ve gotten reprimanded for stepping in on another person’s fight. So now I just default to letting 1v1s play out, unless the other team breaks the honor code first. Then it’s all off the table.

        I think it ultimately just comes down to who you’re playing with and what their play style is.

  • Derrek

    I really like this game but at times the “cheese” is unbearable. The campaign bosses on hard were so infuriating, blocking every attack and not even allowing me to hit at times. I have not been this mad at a game since mw3. Also mp has a lot annoyances too. I just hate when i’m about to kill a fast enemy and they just run away. I’ve learned not to chase them but it gets really annoying real fast when they then bring a friend and they gang up on me. This is why I stick to duels and even they can get frustrating with players are just trying to push each other off ledges.

  • drhalpinstein

    The main issue with customising is that it is married to your Level, you need to get 20 levels before you get gear with different models. If you like something you have well you will stop getting them once you reach a new Rep level and you can’t transfer Models to gear of a higher or lower tier which I find silly. Also my Nobushi has a goofy ass goggle-eyed, two face mask that… it just makes her look so stupid.

    I agree with pretty much everything else but at least the microtransactions don’t seem AS cloying and awful as other games… for now.

    Also Peacekeepers are literally unassailable. Each of their light hits is quicker than your stagger so they can just attack till you die and you can do nothing about it.

    • CX316

      you can’t change the appearance of a tier 2 armor piece into a tier 1 that you still have?

      • drhalpinstein

        nope. Grey models can only change to other greys, blues to blues, etc.

        • CX316

          huh, damn… I haven’t gotten anything up to prestige yet to find out

  • Jack Smith

    Personally I think the game is great, It does sadly have a few problems that keep it from being a Ubisoft showstopper, but what it does right is done really right!

    The campaign was pretty disappointing. It feels a bit disjointed and unfinished, characters come and go without any explanation. its was a bit of a grind aside from one very special part, Apollyon, Fantastic design with a intimidating presence whenever she is on screen. I love her cruel motives and just casual outlook on bloody genocide and war. Such a badass villain who kept me playing the story despite my thinning interest to finish it.

  • Chris N

    Honest, serious question here: I’ve got some friends who seem to be incapable of holding the major publishers accountable for their bullshit. They ask me to play the games that every week I hear and read Jim and others decrying as awful; I respond with awesome indies and they’ve never heard of them and aren’t interested (obligatory Invisigun Heroes nod). What do I do? I would feel really slimy giving Bethesda or Ubisoft money, but at the same time I don’t want to be sitting out every time they get a game together.

    • Chürz

      You need new friends. Easy.

      • Wolfie

        Kidnap them, strap them to a chair with their eyes wired open, in a room full of televisions each playing the many many bugs in AAA titles until they finally break down.

        • diamond

          Some people are pretty tolerant of that sort of thing.

      • Chris N

        Not helpful.

    • Kev’ Bryant

      Some people just chase the newest thing. I feel your pain.

    • florian

      Many multiplayer indies have a reduced price if you buy some number of copies at once (e.g. Duck game and Terraria both have a 4-pack).

      Alternatively, get some copies of genital jousting (it happens to be half-price at the moment). You should be able to get a buy number of copies to give to your friends!

      (the same holds for any indie, just select the right time to buy)

      • Chris N

        Thank you for the response. It doesn’t really address the “don’t seem to be interested” problem that I mentioned in my original comment, though. Money is thankfully not the problem, here. It’s the archetypal “can bring the horse to water (or, indeed, drown the damn horse) but can’t make it drink” problem.

        • Mauricio

          It seems that your friends want shiny graphics and smooth gameplay, even if it isn’t anything new.

          Try something on those lines.

        • florian

          Maybe try rocket league? If they aren’t interested in either genital jousting or rocket league they are a hopeless cause ^_^

    • Gaealiege

      I have this problem as well. Here’s how I address it.

      I tell them that I flatly will not support Triple A gaming. If they want to play a game with me they have to play one that has integrity.

      You’re not missing anything but maintaining your integrity. If they’re mindless consumer whores, so bet it. I wouldn’t lower myself to that level simply to appease my friends though.

      It really sounds like your friends are the cliche fad gamers.

    • CX316

      Admit that some people value spectacle and production value over innovation and cutesiness and stop trying to change your friends. If they’re not into indie games, they’re not going to change their mind due to you badgering them them harder than an orgy at Toad Hall.

    • La Chica Incognita

      Bethesda is a good company that produces games that are more likely then not worth the time you can invest into them…I wouldn’t decry them as a shitty Triple A company YET but their seeming desire to monetize mods is bringing them very close to being a “stop buying, start pirating” company.

      HOWEVER with that said; refuse to game with them and play an indie game instead and point it out to them. If they won’t play frankly better made, more fun and less expensive indie games get yourself some new gaming friends and play with them instead. You can go out and do non-gaming stuff with them but to be painfully honest, as “gamer friends” they’re not really worth your time or effort if they won’t play GOOD games.

  • Chürz

    Yay! Laura review time!

  • EnricoIsPixelated

    Jim now has most liberal audience of any other video game YouTuber I wonder how long it will take one of his cult members to make some bizzare Trump analogy in the comment section

    • Wolfie

      The cult of Jim is a lot like the cult of Trump, but with intelligence and sexual proclivity. Or something, I don’t know.

      Penis.

      • George

        I agree…

        Penis.

    • George

      I don’t think Jim’s audience is more liberal at all. I would say that it is quite central if anything.

      My personal read of Jim’s body of work is that it carries a little bit of libertarian streak. He seems to highly value personal choice and autonomy with a “you do you attitude.” In Canada and the UK these are traditionally “right wing” values.

      He has also mentioned on a Podquision that patreon represents a more pure form of market transaction in that he offers his product and we the consumer pay what we think it is worth.

      He is a small business owner after all.

      Don’t get me wrong! I would not presume to call Jim right wing at all. But I will say that his work does appeal to both sides of the political spectrum.

      • Gaealiege

        Given that lolbertarians think that all regulations on business should be abolished, there’s about a 0% chance that Jim identifies as one.

        It would require some incredible mental gymnastics to assume Jim is anything other than liberal.

        • George

          I said a “Libertarian streak.” Jim is obviously not a full blown libertarian. Also, not all libertarian schools believe in lesse-fair capitalism.

          At it’s core it focuses more no minimal involvement by the state of society in people’s personal lives.

          • Otherhand

            I really don’t know where you get the idea that he’s even mildly libertarian. He might be, but if he is I’ll be surprised.

            Also don’t know where you get the idea that using Patreon and/or being a business owner is any kind of obstacle to being left-wing/liberal.

          • George

            Really? I said that? Why must all politics and political philosophy be seen as a diametric opposition to another philosophy?

            Also, low interface in people’s personal life and the freedom to do as one pleases and create what one wants while then the freedom to exercising the right to criticize said things done by other people is right wing/libertarian philosophy.

            Also, liberalism is not always associated with left wing economic or socially progressive ideology in all countries. Mine being one of them.

            Similarly, Centralism is a defined school of political thought in Canada.

          • Otherhand

            You heavily implied that, given that it was the only evidence you offered in support of your point.

          • Gaealiege

            Aye, not all. There are libertarian socialists. It’s just that the majority of libertarians are indistinguishable from anarcho-capitalists.

            That is to say, “Sentient sacks of living shit.”

    • La Chica Incognita

      Jim also has people commenting trying to pick random political fights completely out of context of anything and everything.

      Is your penis really this small or did I miss the joke?

    • Eon264

      Now that’s a swing and a miss if I’ve ever seen one. If you want my advice, maybe don’t all but tell people you’re trying to bait them when you want to bait them. Subtlety is kind of important.

    • YoDude

      Why do you bait broski? What do you get out of it? It doesn’t prove anything other than to make you calling us libtards and snowflakes hypocritical.

    • The Interloper

      When you start randomly talking about politics when there’s no reason to, you don’t get to then say that we’re going to make bizarre political points.

      Also, nice bait, it’s about an 8/10. It works but makes literally no sense and has no context whatsoever.

  • George

    Great review Laura!

  • Nice.

  • Knight_Blazer

    I am so glad you have a business level fiber line Laura. My only hope is that anytime you have to contact the business help line your first words are ‘My internet is down and I have important butt stuff to upload!’

  • Drake Warnock

    Of course I remember Cardinal Syn. My uncle Ted did the mocap work for Plague!

    • NotonFire

      Sweet. I think I used to run Finkster.
      Somehow I figure JIm was a Bimorphia kind of guy. 😉

  • Laura, Jim, do either of you (or anyone else in the comments) think this game presents a more realistic version of combat? This is one of my big gripes about video-gamey combat in a day and age when the Fallout V.A.T.S. system was able to lock onto specific body parts, yet all combat since has been continuous bashing through a health bar. For Honour looks like attacks actually do visual damage and are blocked with appropriate stagger. It doesn’t seem like it’s focused solely on reducing a health bar like most games.

    • Spencer

      Neither Jim nor Laura, but For Honor does, at its core, still revolve around depleting a health bar, though the mechanics and techniques involved are far more realistic than most titles.

      • YoDude

        You get three angles to block ir attack.

        But it’s not very realistic outside of that neat 3 stance system. There’s no penalty for being injured other than red edges on the screen and feeling in your stomach that you’re about to get decapitated and watch someone spam the emotefor twenty seconds.

        That said the animations for fighting are beautiful and really make you feel like you hit something.

        And let’s be honest if my Valhalla bound viking warrior got chopped in the leg and limped for the rest of the two minute long fight before dying of massive blood loss it wouldn’t be much fun.

        Compared to DS it’s realistic though. And it has good balance. Even being cornered by two or more people you still have a fighting chance.

    • Mauricio

      It’s all about depleting the enemies health.

      It’s as realistic as Street Fighter.

      • Well, health presents a stat, and in real life cuts and scrapes will deplete your health in battle. I wasn’t specifically talking about body parts like V.A.T.S., but the physicality of battle looks a lot more realistic. Hitting an opponent really staggers them and slices into them in a way that I haven’t seen in other games.

        • Mauricio

          Like i said, it is as realistic as Street Fighter.

          If this was really trying to be realistic, every strike you receive from your enemy should affect your effectiveness in battle, but nothing of the sort happpens.

          With 1 hp you fight just was well as with full hp.

    • Corac42

      Neo Scavenger has a realistic body-part-based combat system. An enemy won’t die from repeated blows to the leg (though they can be totally debilitated eventually, and could bleed out if you cut them), a cut can kill you days after a fight if it gets infected, etc. It’s very cool. (That spirit of hardcore realism carries over to the rest of the game, as well.)

      Dwarf Fortress is similar, but you probably don’t wanna get into Dwarf Fortress just for its combat system. I can’t think of any real-time games with a similar system.

      • George

        If your femoral artery is damaged you will be dead in minutes…although blood loss would be at the “point of no return” in about 30 seconds-1 minute.

  • creep

    Quick we …… Muust………..capture the flag

    • Jpkurihara

      FOR HONOOOOOOOOOOOOOR

  • Karl O’ Toole

    “The game uses Peer-to-Peer networks for online, rather than a centralized network, meaning that one player hosts the match on their machine and all other players connect to the match through that player.”

    This is slightly wrong, the game uses a new type of p2p where everybody in a match is connected to each other rather than connecting to a single host.
    I have not experienced any lag yet, but the game does randomly shit the bed when someone leaves.. Maybe 1 game in 10 ends that way.

    Hoping since its a new system they work out the kinks and maybe implement a temporary ban system for deserters over the next few weeks.

    • ClausGrimm

      I am lucky and have only had one match of actual lag. A good 15-20 dropped matches, but most of it has been pretty smooth.

    • Amer1ka

      So instead of a single point of failure there are now many points of potential failure…brilliant! I am being sarcastic and I’m sure they have their reasons for using this system over a more traditional p2p system but in the end it’s just a company being super cheap and not hosting servers.

      Of course, on the flipside, it means that if the game drops significantly in playerbase over the next year won’t get servers turned off quickly and will instead be able to play. Assuming Ubi keeps the matchmaking servers online.

  • Bum

    For the honour of Gallowmere!

    When I watched the now infamous three-brutes-fighting-over-a-puddle trailer, I thought it would have been pretty funny if, after a gruelling, bloody, exhausting battle, one of the warriors sank to his knees next to the puddle and let out a triumphant yell, only for the sun to come out from behind a cloud and instantly evaporate the puddle.

  • Matt Moran

    So this sounds similar to your (by that I mean the collective Laura/Jim/Even Gavin) opinions on the original Titanfall, i.e. worthless single-player “campaign” mode coupled with a multiplayer than runs decent-to-fun when connectivity isn’t being a shit.

    What do you think Ubi can learn from Titanfall 2 that they can implement in this game as people are still getting into it without getting into the mess Respawn had with the second game being critically adored, and a “bomb” through sales? Can it be salvaged to be made into a great game?

    • GoldenEngi

      In my opinion, with this gameplay style they’ve chosen it’ll be hard to massively improve and overhaul the gameplay without making it feel too different. The first Titanfall had rather generic but at the same time innovative gameplay which could be expanded on. For Honor (in my opinion at least) seemed to go all in on gameplay, leaving only weapons and speeds and health meters of various characters to be tweaked as they see fit for balance. This means that either the core gameplay will have to change completely or not at all. They won’t be able to compromise with an in-between improvement like Titanfall 2 managed near flawlessly. That said, a For Honor sequel could work. They would probably have to add in more factions, classes, and weapons, while also boasting a new gimmick as its selling point like Titanfall 2 did with its single player campaign. Those are my thoughts anyway. Sorry for the essay but I figured I’d share my opinion on this matter.

    • oh, For Honor beats Titanfall on “Single-Player Campaign” in that For Honor at least HAS a single-player campaign. the plot is pretty bland… but it IS a plot with an easy to follow narrative.

  • Meyneth

    Cardinal Syn? Christ, that’s going back a ways…great days indeed. Wish they’d bring that to the PSN or something…

  • titaniumforest

    An always online 3D fighting game with constant connection issues? Smart move Ubisoft.

  • seelefantman

    no mention of the fucking microtransactions? I am disappointed.

    • Amer1ka

      At the very end of the article it’s brought up and the article is also tagged with the “Microtransactions” tag.