Has this been officially confirmed? It seems SOE is promoting "freedom to play your way" yet force you to use specific weapons for skills? I don't mind 8 skills but being forced to use a certain weapon is what broke GW2 for me, that and the lack of trinity and the zerg fest that followed.
Would be nice if there is a way around this. I enjoy playing a necromancer with a staff and don't like the idea of being forced to use a dagger just to get the "best" spells. Anyone else feel this way or is it just me?
You mind skills tied to weapons and don't like how GW2 was a console-like dumbed down crapfest for soloists but you're ok with 8 skills up at once (which is even fewer than you get in GW2)? 8 skills up at once isn't an MMORPG. 8 skills at once is even beyond the simplistic lameness of consoles.
WoW clones have generally failed (most don't really fail but they fail to live up to expectations or the longevity of earlier MMORPGs) due to trying to be everything to everybody and especially due to too much focus on solo ez-mode and not nearly enough on grouping and challenge.
So along comes GW2, which isn't even really an MMORPG, it's a solo game with social elements. TESO will be the same sewage and it looks like EQN is going the same way along with starting out F2P, which is like admitting your game sucks and is fail right out the door. I guess we can call this POS style the "GW2 Clone" and try not to throw up.
WFT happened to real MMORPGs? There was nothing wrong with the style of the original games that established the genre - the group focus and emphasis on actually doing something (challenge) for your rewards was good. The games has a bit too much brutality in gameplay but that can be smoothed over. There never was a need to shift the genre into solo ez-mode and to dumb it down further and further until MMORPGs aren't even MMORPGs anymore.
You can still have a successful MMORPG without having tons of soloists around because those are the people who bail out first - as soon as the single player campaign mode is done (the solo ez-mode 1-cap leveling). Then they're off to help ruin "the next big thing" How about someone create an MMORPG for people who actually LIKE the genre - people that want challenge, want to group, and want to have a good game worth playing for years on end? Constantly trying to design MMORPGs for people who don't actually like the genre, don't want to level, don't have time to play, don't want to group - seems utterly moronic.
Whilst I dont disagree with your comments on the general direction of games and how this has killed the social dynamic that kept people playing EQ (and even WoW, which was not always 100% solo friendly) for so long.
I dont agree that solo = easy
The designers of many games have made EASY SOLO content
Nothing stops them from making hard solo content, they just choose not to.
This goes hand in hand with the often stated but incorrect idea that casual players want easy mode.
not having 12 hours of uninterupted time 3-5 days a week made you casual in the eyes of some EQ guilds, even if you averaged 50 hours a week in the game
Along with the other great myth... RAIDing is hard and thats why its the end game and gets the best candy.
Well design small group content can be crazy hard and unlike a 40,36,60 man raids there is no where to hide in a small group, do your job perfectly of the group fails and they KNOW IT WAS YOU.
So.. Skills on weapons
Not totally different to ...must have TH axe to use this skill
as long as they include LOTS OF WEAPONS then it will be ok.
i.e warrior can use, dagger/s shortsword/s longsword/s TH sword, axe small large battle and so on and so forth
IF they just have a few weapon combinations per class it will be too simple (for me)
Please don't let this game have combat like Neverwinter Online.
I can take 8 buttons, but don't take away my ability to click on stuff, or make it so I have to point my screen at a target. Locking my first 4 to weapons kind of sucks, but I guess its better than locking me in to one weapon period.
I dont know if you guys remember in EQ2 when they introduced the AA system, the skill line were based on weapon skill, if you took the piercing line and used a sword, your aa's were useless, this failed so hard that they removed it, it would be very dumb from SOE to repeat that in EQNext in my opinion.
Originally posted by TaliskerDev These 4 abilities are earned over the progression of the class.
Whaat??? So you're saying there will be a time we don't even have all our 8 abilities? What are you people thinking?
Um...what are YOU thinking? I have played these games for about 15 years now, and always begin with 1, maybe 2 abilities. Nobody gives players all their abilities at character creation, not even MOBAs. I can think of several reasons why doing so would be a bad idea; they all seem quite obvious.
I enjoy playing a necromancer with a staff and don't like the idea of being forced to use a dagger just to get the "best" spells. Anyone else feel this way or is it just me?
I think it makes perfect sense that the weapon you are wielding should have an effect on how you fight, at least for weapon-based abilities. It's being able to wield any equipment you want and still fight the same way that seems odd to me.
Now, for purely magical abilities, I could see an argument that weapon shouldn't matter. But this seems fairly open to debate, as magic isn't real and how it would be casted is sort of up to the imagination.
But given the choice between "weapon doesn't matter" and "weapon determines abilities", the latter is far more intuitive to me.
Now, making sure the different weapon choices are roughly equal in power and cool factor, that's a different issue. But balance will never be perfect. If being the "best" is a player's top concern, they will necessarily be forced into certain specs and abilities. Whether those are determined by weapon choice or not is sort of irrelevant. (In other words, even if staff Necromancer gets the same abilities as dagger Necromancer, Necromancer may still not have the "best" spells for a certain task. The question then becomes, "how attached are you to the Necromancer vs. being the best?" With a weapon-based system it simply changes to "how attached are you to using a staff vs. being the best?")
Has this been officially confirmed? It seems SOE is promoting "freedom to play your way" yet force you to use specific weapons for skills? I don't mind 8 skills but being forced to use a certain weapon is what broke GW2 for me, that and the lack of trinity and the zerg fest that followed.
Would be nice if there is a way around this. I enjoy playing a necromancer with a staff and don't like the idea of being forced to use a dagger just to get the "best" spells. Anyone else feel this way or is it just me?
What if there were 50 kinds of daggers, each with skills that worked a little differently? Would that give you enough options?
As for the orange text, the developers continue to deny that will be the outcome. Please give them a chance to release the product before assuming the worst about the game.
We might very well get a chance to see how this works in landmark soon, with the Adventurer class they announced.
Comments
Whilst I dont disagree with your comments on the general direction of games and how this has killed the social dynamic that kept people playing EQ (and even WoW, which was not always 100% solo friendly) for so long.
I dont agree that solo = easy
The designers of many games have made EASY SOLO content
Nothing stops them from making hard solo content, they just choose not to.
This goes hand in hand with the often stated but incorrect idea that casual players want easy mode.
not having 12 hours of uninterupted time 3-5 days a week made you casual in the eyes of some EQ guilds, even if you averaged 50 hours a week in the game
Along with the other great myth... RAIDing is hard and thats why its the end game and gets the best candy.
Well design small group content can be crazy hard and unlike a 40,36,60 man raids there is no where to hide in a small group, do your job perfectly of the group fails and they KNOW IT WAS YOU.
So.. Skills on weapons
Not totally different to ...must have TH axe to use this skill
as long as they include LOTS OF WEAPONS then it will be ok.
i.e warrior can use, dagger/s shortsword/s longsword/s TH sword, axe small large battle and so on and so forth
IF they just have a few weapon combinations per class it will be too simple (for me)
Please don't let this game have combat like Neverwinter Online.
I can take 8 buttons, but don't take away my ability to click on stuff, or make it so I have to point my screen at a target. Locking my first 4 to weapons kind of sucks, but I guess its better than locking me in to one weapon period.
Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011
Um...what are YOU thinking? I have played these games for about 15 years now, and always begin with 1, maybe 2 abilities. Nobody gives players all their abilities at character creation, not even MOBAs. I can think of several reasons why doing so would be a bad idea; they all seem quite obvious.
I think it makes perfect sense that the weapon you are wielding should have an effect on how you fight, at least for weapon-based abilities. It's being able to wield any equipment you want and still fight the same way that seems odd to me.
Now, for purely magical abilities, I could see an argument that weapon shouldn't matter. But this seems fairly open to debate, as magic isn't real and how it would be casted is sort of up to the imagination.
But given the choice between "weapon doesn't matter" and "weapon determines abilities", the latter is far more intuitive to me.
Now, making sure the different weapon choices are roughly equal in power and cool factor, that's a different issue. But balance will never be perfect. If being the "best" is a player's top concern, they will necessarily be forced into certain specs and abilities. Whether those are determined by weapon choice or not is sort of irrelevant. (In other words, even if staff Necromancer gets the same abilities as dagger Necromancer, Necromancer may still not have the "best" spells for a certain task. The question then becomes, "how attached are you to the Necromancer vs. being the best?" With a weapon-based system it simply changes to "how attached are you to using a staff vs. being the best?")
What if there were 50 kinds of daggers, each with skills that worked a little differently? Would that give you enough options?
As for the orange text, the developers continue to deny that will be the outcome. Please give them a chance to release the product before assuming the worst about the game.
We might very well get a chance to see how this works in landmark soon, with the Adventurer class they announced.