I personally don't mind if we end up with an only female lead. I mean hell, look at the literally dozens of games out there that force you to play with a male lead.

There is a reason why there was not much movement in old times, you would definitely not want to prance around in heavy armor or circle someone on a horse a lot When survival is the most important thing, you want to preserve your strength for your attacks.

Having said that, while I see how movement could be fun, the way combat mechanics work, there would be little to no effect in moving around. I think combat strategy makes up for this.

Regarding being politically correct, I really think that society has a tendency to overdo it these days. For example, there is a type of candy in Hungary called Negro. Someone coming from the US had a dislike to it, thinking that it is disrespectful towards black Americans. In actuality, Negro is the last name of the person who invented this candy, and absolutely no disrespect was meant.

What people tend to forget these days is that language is a tool to communicate, to share known or unknown information with each other. If you look at language use, shorter words become longer, because people have this notion that they communicate respect via longer words. Blind vs visually impaired, deaf vs hearing impaired, shellshock vs post-traumatic stress disorder, etc.

The dreaded swastika comes from swastik, which, among many things means auspicious, and going further, swasti is the root, the stem, which was used as a greeting. Even in Hinduism, swastik can represent luck, prosperity and success.

The easy way out is to forget words that had a negative connotation, and more often than not, the pragmatic meaning, i.e. what the speaker means, is disregarded.

"Describe it for me," is a bit problematic, I personally would not ask anyone to describe something this way, I would rather ask, "What can you see?", but that's just nitpicking on my part.

Even if you are familiar with someone, because they are family, there are times when the information they give you is just not enough, so you want to ask for more. The uncle could not always know how much information you need. I don't really see harm in this. His tone is also acceptable, he wants you to be ready when you need to be, and you can't really do that kindly all the time. This is something like martial arts vs street fights, or learning to ride a bike or to swim. Others can't really share experiences with you. This is why you can't learn to write from a text book, or learn to play an instrument, you have to read books and listen to music alongside your studies.

The shepherd, being a simple person, should not have elegant manners, in his environment, being direct is what counts. He simply wants to be tactful, because in his mind, telling you that you see something means disrespect. If we must mirror this to our own world, something similar is going on in many sighted person's head.

Being politically correct and respecting each other is a must, but we should really draw the line when people don't know how to talk to you, because they don't know what would be politically correct to you. We are unfortunately heading this way.

We are all human beings, and honest mistakes can be and will be made, no matter what. In the end, I think we are all capable of deciding on word use or meaning, and focus on what was meant, rather than find insult or disrespect. Tactfulness goes both ways.

Ironically, if Shepherd doesn't have particularly good manners, having him say "Have a look around" actually makes -more sense, as he's not being gentle or very considerate; he's just saying what he thinks, and what he'd probably think for any average person is that phrase, "have a look around". So him tiptoing this way and retreading what he said feels out of character. It is precisely this sort of doubling back that may make listeners feel as if too much attention is being paid to stuff. Again, huge huge deal? No. But thanks for inadvertently proving my point for me, Robjoi.

@Jayde, I am not exactly sure what the developers wanted to achieve with the shepherd's word correction, and I agree, he is indeed out of character with this line. On the other hand, a lot of people could look at this as being disrespectful, when the writers meant exactly the opposite. This is why I said that overdoing political correctness is a trend, to a point that nobody dares to say anything in fear of being politically incorrect. We pay too much attention to the social connotations of words, rather than the actual meaning of a speaker. As an example, your previous message, just relying on textuality alone, could be interpreted as slightly sarcastic, even though I am sure nobody will do so.

My previous message, perhaps a bit clumsily, tried to shed light on both sides.

I thought parts of the demo mentioned certain features, like weapon swapping, was something in the works. I know the heavy attack tutorial mentioned it regarding heavy blunted weapons.

Also I feel as if somehow, mor eoptions to force the pace of battle to adapt to you should be implemented in some way. I think the hesitation thing some enemies have in combat should be used more for regrouping. Stand there and just wait and everyone will just back away to ranged, or attack rapidly from multiple directions because you didn't attack first. Hrad raiders seem to do this if you stand there while they shift around. I had one prepare a heavy attack while two quickly shifted to two variations of the quick strikes after a bit of a pause. Normally when I use heavy attacks, they seem a lot less organized with the response to my attack. However, it is also possible to flub the attempt, and have a situation where multiple attacks are launched at once. It also seems some enemies are missing their ability to do what Alex can do, and quickly block after a failed strike. I notice the shield raise sound played at times from the knights, sometimes occuring right after they wiffed a strike. Though I don't think it properly blocks. The motion I'm sort of referencing is the advice you get if a heavy attack is blocked, and the enemy quickly strikes back.

Also odd, I can't seem to get the demo to run now. As well, when I played the bow/hunting demos last night, I lost the ability to move about with a bow.

I think we're going way too deep down the rabbit hole of political correctness. I'm not quite sure what is meant by the term, "language correction", but if I say to someone that they can just use normal language around me, I don't see the problem with that. In fact, they think by saying words like look, see, watch, and so on, that they're being offensive to us, which I find not to be the case. If anything, using those words just reinforces the gap that already exists between the blind and sighted.

I do think a line where Alex tells the shepherd he can just use normal words could be OK, but then I don't see it being that big a deal. Either way, it's not that bad, and I've seen a lot worse.

Have to agree with 37 here. As someone who used to practice martial arts movement is vital whether your performing a hold, break, or strike. The other thing you have to consider is try to move in ways your enemy will not expect. As someone who's blind in that game that would be difficult to simulate maybe.

I don't play for Honor, because it would be next to impossible. Atleast, judging by what I know of the game, but if someone has been successful at doing so, I'd love to know about it. Different topic, however.

I think we're beating a dead horse here with the political correctness thing, as so often happens on this forum. Sorry about that... lol. I meant to say that listening would be considered more correct for more sighted people, hence why they would make that correction and why they do do it today. And yes, I would use watch because it's more inclusive. But I don't judge people who decide to use the word listen instead of visual words. But in the larger goal towards equality, such language only makes us stand out more. And sorry if I seemed to be contradicting myself, I'm not exactly articulate in the morning.

Nope, for honour is definitely not the most realistic game out there. I simply used it to demonstrate that even a game with a directionally based attack and defense system needs movement. And if modern games would be unimaginable without movement, why then does this game not have any? That's predominantly my question. Yes, I know the people you mentioned were known to fight mostly on foot. Realism aside, combatwithout movement isn't enjoyable in any sense, especially in a game. As for armour, movement would definitely be slower, and you're right. If you fell in armour, chances are you probably wouldn't be getting back up... unless you had trained to wear that armour and could handle the weight and if you couldn't, you would have no business wearing it. The combat system, both in thisgame and others similar, seems to be based around the principle that a blind fighter just has to stand there and wait for attacks to come then react, which is the part that bothers me. And yes, I know that medieval combat, from the limitted experience I have, is definitely less elegant, and more about, as a friend of mine put it, who could knock off more body parts first, or who could hit harder. But if game developers can o with unrealistic weight and combat physics, it doesn't always have to be that way. Take any hack n slash with a medieval theme and you can see that plainly. Characters in armour run around like it's weightless. lol But as you said, this discussion is for another topic and another day. No highjacking intended. Argument neither.

Couple of things here.

1. Alex doesn't appear to be wearing heavy armour, so the point about standing still is...a bit off. I mean, it is what it is at this point, but she's not in full mail or plate here. She does have a heavy-ish shield, and is generally unused to combat, so there's that. but reactionary combat is a good way to get your throat slit. lol

2. Regarding the correction or whatnot. See, I've never heard a blind person, even once, say something like, "Don't use "watch" or "see" or "look", because I can't see.". If this was a common complaint, then I'd forgive the devs for this slip very easily, since it would be reasonable to assume that many blind people might be offended by the phrase "have a look around". But in my admittedly limited experience (we're all limited, is my point) I have never once come across a blind person for whom that sort of phrasing is offensive. Conversely, while I know many blind people who don't care about "have a listen" or that sort of thing, I know many who don't particularly like it either, especially if, as in this case, Shepherd actually changes what he says. Goes from just saying what comes off his tongue to deliberately using phrasing that may offend some, at least a little. It is a deliberate choice to undo something that I've never seen as offensive, and never seen anyone else take offense to, in favour of wording that might under some circumstances constitute a microaggression. Would be easier to just use "have a look around", keep it that way, and either a) make Alex point out the mistaken term if she prefers it differently, or far better, B) just leave it alone, and then it becomes an unimportant part of the dialogue.
The main issue here that I'm pointing out is that this phrasing, regardless of your view on it, is arguably a bit controversial, but a simpler "have a look around" would truly not be, and I truly feel this conclusion would've been easily borne out if the devs had taken a fair sample size in mind when trying to work out their script. If there are blind people on the team and/or part of the consult process who would take offense to "have a look around", perhaps it is their opinions which shaped this choice, but if so, I hesitate to assume that their opinions represent the mainstream one.
Now, for those of you who'd be offended if I used visual verbs when talking to you, this is your moment to jump out of the woodwork and express how offended you'd be. Heh.

just wondering what controller this game is designed for? to start the game I have to press space, the trigger doesn't work. after that I can use one of the rite shoulder buttons to do the job of the rite trigger. also, I can attack left and rite with the rite stick on my controller but not forward so I hyave to use the up arrow. the controller I'm using is a playstation 2 pad on an adaptor. I've also tried it with a joystick with the same results.