Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

What sort of combat system do you prefer?

2

Comments

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member

    Wow style

    It is fun with so much depth

    - different types of resource managment

    - CD abilities

    - procs

    - buffs & debuffs

    - different form of CCs (admitted used less in PvE than pvP)

    ....

  • Garvon3Garvon3 Worcester, MAPosts: 2,898Member

    Originally posted by nariusseldon



    Wow style

    It is fun with so much depth

    - different types of resource managment

    - CD abilities

    - procs

    - buffs & debuffs

    - different form of CCs (admitted used less in PvE than pvP)

    ....

    How is that WoW style? That's the same combat that's been used in MMOs since 1999. 

    And WoW's version of it is far from deep. 

     

    I prefer DAoC style, turn based, but feels kinetic with good animations, sound effects, and a huge depth of skills to use. 

    Second to that, Darkfall. 

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Houston, TXPosts: 5,348Member

    There are two types of game 'experiences' I like.

    1. is basically a virtual world experience. Looking over the sholder of my toon is not a virtual world. I perfer 1st person, FPS type interaction when it comes to that type of game.

    2. stradegy turnbased experience. Top down view (turned based perfered). Slient Storm is the only turned based top down game that I feel was done exactly how old pen and paper RPG's did combat and I love it.

     

    Correlation does not imply causation

  • ButtermilchButtermilch FlensburgPosts: 208Member

    Originally posted by Axehilt

    Ragdoll is local and takes up zero bandwidth.  Only bad implementations would require significant amounts of server traffic.

    Wrong. As seen in "Badman: Arkham Asylum" the enemies just stand up where they fell. So you would need to have synchronised positions for all "kicked away" enemies -> takes up a lot of traffic.

    If they only fall ragdoll wise when they die? Yes, it is possible, as already seen in Mortal Online.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member

    Originally posted by Garvon3



    Originally posted by nariusseldon



    Wow style

    It is fun with so much depth

    - different types of resource managment

    - CD abilities

    - procs

    - buffs & debuffs

    - different form of CCs (admitted used less in PvE than pvP)

    ....

    How is that WoW style? That's the same combat that's been used in MMOs since 1999. 

    And WoW's version of it is far from deep. 

     

    I prefer DAoC style, turn based, but feels kinetic with good animations, sound effects, and a huge depth of skills to use. 

    Second to that, Darkfall. 

    it is way deeper than say EQ. Just take resource management. Wow has mana (which every game has), rage, energy, runes, combo points .. and all act differently and encourage different style of gameplay.

  • AxehiltAxehilt San Francisco, CAPosts: 8,765Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by Buttermilch

    Originally posted by Axehilt

    Ragdoll is local and takes up zero bandwidth.  Only bad implementations would require significant amounts of server traffic.

    Wrong. As seen in "Badman: Arkham Asylum" the enemies just stand up where they fell. So you would need to have synchronised positions for all "kicked away" enemies -> takes up a lot of traffic.

    If they only fall ragdoll wise when they die? Yes, it is possible, as already seen in Mortal Online.

    And if ragdoll-to-standup-pose was any significant part of why Batman's combat is awesome, you might have a point.  But you could remove that from Batman entirely (and have canned or simplified knockback animations) and the game would still have amazing combat.

    "Joe stated his case logically and passionately, but his perceived effeminate voice only drew big gales of stupid laughter..." -Idiocracy
    "There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance." -Socrates

  • majimaji ColognePosts: 2,005Member Uncommon























    WoW-style: Autoattacking and some abilities to fire - 22.4%

    The good thing about that one is, that it's very easy and comfortable. The bad one is that it's also very boring. If you are in some kind of boss fight that takes a long time, or in easier smaller fights, then you just have to spam the same buttons over and over, and you don't have to aim. It really invites you to have a movie running on the second monitor, or phone, or stop paying attention in general, because... well there is not really any interaction. If I keep pressing "1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2" for half an hour, then it's for me not that entertaining.

    At the same time there are certain playstyles with this combat system, where you actually have to pay attention. But that requires than focusing on your hotbar, and that makes the fight boring again for me, since I want to have a good look at the enemy.



     FPS-style: Very twitch playstyle aiming with a crosshair - 18.4%

    I prefer that one, especially when there are zones to target at (ie headshot, legshot and whatnot). You have to pay attention, different enemies are different to fight because of the targeting alone (depending on their size and speed). And especially: paying attention rewards you a lot. It's far more involving than the WoW style.



    Final Fantasy-style: Combat is separated into rounds, not real-time - 8.2%

    It's cute but not really my thing.



     Strategy-game-style: You command several units and give them orders - 8.2%

    Well good for RTS and the like obviously, I wouldn't want it in an MMORPG.


     


     

     

    Let's play Fallen Earth (blind, 300 episodes)

    Let's play Guild Wars 2 (blind, 45 episodes)

  • djazzydjazzy louisville, COPosts: 3,578Member

    AoC's melee combat is great, probably the best I've played in an mmo game setting. For a total combat system in an mmo I really like Guild War's skill system. It combines a lot of tactical knowledge and creativity (if you don't rely on PvX for all of your builds).

  • eLdritchZeLdritchZ DarmstadtPosts: 83Member

    Originally posted by Varny

    The kind that is good.

    Gears of War has good shooting mechanics but Tabula Rasa and all the others did not.

    World of Warcraft has the best combat for that traditional style but Everquest 2 does not.

     

    Not really the type of combat but just one that is well made.

     

    Tabula Rasa was not FPS combat... it was much closer to standard tab-targeting Auto Attack+ Styles combat... or Soft-lock Console Action game combat if you will...

     

    Also that is YOUR opinion... I actually liked the TR combat... and I prefer the rotational Style System in EQ/EQ2 to the 1 Button Mash "Frostbolt, Frostbolt, Frostbolt" Experience that WoW offers...

    and I bet there's quite a few others that agree...

    @ OP

    Could you please call the "WoW Style" combat the "Everquest Style" Combat? It's basically the same and EQ was there first so it has dibs :P

     

    I personally prefer the EverQuest Style... Just feels right for me... But I can pretty much adept to and enjoy other styles as well as long as they require a certain level of skill in both PvE and PvP...

    <S.T.E.A.L.T.H>
    An Agency that kicks so much ass it has to be written in all capital letters... divided by dots!
    www.stealth-industries.de

  • corpusccorpusc Chattanooga, TNPosts: 1,330Member

    wow, i'm shocked that around %46 on this RPG forum chose FPS type combat (combine Spellborn and Darkfall in with the "FPS" choice, as should have been done).

    The End
    ---------------------------
    i don't expect to like Darkfall, altho i may like it MORE than other MMOs. i know it is gonna have a very frustrating level of grind to it, even if its significantly less than most. waiting for a pure FAST action virtual world. dice rolling & character levels (even "skills") IN COMBAT should have never carried over from pencil & paper to a computer that can reasonably model 3D spaces and objects

  • ruonimruonim DGPosts: 251Member

    Eve isnt autoatack only. Some people are ignorant i see.(unless they play missile boats with passive shield recharge thats indeed no skill and autoatack mostly)

  • GdemamiGdemami Beau VallonPosts: 7,871Member Uncommon


    Oh..what is the difference between Darfall and FPS/TPS combat system?

  • ButtermilchButtermilch FlensburgPosts: 208Member

    Originally posted by eLdritchZ

    @ OP

    Could you please call the "WoW Style" combat the "Everquest Style" Combat? It's basically the same and EQ was there first so it has dibs :P

    I could, but I used "WoW" as a term because more people know it and are aware on how this system works.

     


    Originally posted by Gdemami



    Oh..what is the difference between Darfall and FPS/TPS combat system?

    In Darkfall melee combat you don't have a crosshair. You just need to roughly aim. It's a slight difference, but it is one. ;-)

  • GdemamiGdemami Beau VallonPosts: 7,871Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by Buttermilch
    In Darkfall melee combat you don't have a crosshair. You just need to roughly aim. It's a slight difference, but it is one. ;-)

    Dot on screen is just a cosmetics.

  • ButtermilchButtermilch FlensburgPosts: 208Member

    Originally posted by Gdemami

     




    Originally posted by Buttermilch

    In Darkfall melee combat you don't have a crosshair. You just need to roughly aim. It's a slight difference, but it is one. ;-)

     



    Dot on screen is just a cosmetics.

    I don't think so. With a crosshair I would expect melee combat to be able to hit zones on the enemy's body. So that I can perform a "headhit" with a sword or so. In Darkfall all that matters is hitting, there are no hitboxes.

  • GdemamiGdemami Beau VallonPosts: 7,871Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by Buttermilch
    I don't think so. With a crosshair I would expect melee combat to be able to hit zones on the enemy's body. So that I can perform a "headhit" with a sword or so. In Darkfall all that matters is hitting, there are no hitboxes.

    'Crosshair' has absolutely nothing to do with hitboxes.

    If I take a pen and make a dot on my screen or in vice versa turn the crosshair off, it does not change how the game works - it is only cosmetics.

  • mCalvertmCalvert Tallahassee, FLPosts: 1,283Member

    I prefer a FPS type system, but would like to see a more fluid combat system with varying attacks, parrying, dodges, blocks, etc. Something like Assasins Creed, where you may fight one or many enemies, and no one actually strikes a blow due to technique, but when you do, it hurts bad. Less jumping, strafing, running in circles, sprinting. This is not realistic melee combat. Realistic melee combat is more like fencing or boxing. Slowly circling each other. One doesnt jump with full plate armor on.

  • EvasiaEvasia rotterdamPosts: 2,827Member

    I loved how they implement the combat in Asherons call 2 and it was almost copy to WoW.

    But i prefer most Darkfall fps and aim style with crossair best so far!

    Games played:AC1-Darktide'99-2000-AC2-Darktide/dawnsong2003-2005,Lineage2-2005-2006 and now Darkfall-2009.....
    In between WoW few months AoC few months and some f2p also all very short few weeks.

  • AxehiltAxehilt San Francisco, CAPosts: 8,765Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by Gdemami

     




    Originally posted by Buttermilch

     

    I don't think so. With a crosshair I would expect melee combat to be able to hit zones on the enemy's body. So that I can perform a "headhit" with a sword or so. In Darkfall all that matters is hitting, there are no hitboxes.

     



     

    'Crosshair' has absolutely nothing to do with hitboxes.

    If I take a pen and make a dot on my screen or in vice versa turn the crosshair off, it does not change how the game works - it is only cosmetics.

    Agreed.

    "Joe stated his case logically and passionately, but his perceived effeminate voice only drew big gales of stupid laughter..." -Idiocracy
    "There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance." -Socrates

  • devilisciousdeviliscious dallas, TXPosts: 6,906Member

    I prefer FPS, I do not see the point in " auto attack" who wants to "play" a game that plays itself? If I am playing the game I want to actually be playing it.

  • WizardryWizardry Ontario, CanadaPosts: 8,467Member Uncommon

    No question i prefer FFXI's combat,that is the main selling point of the game,that and it's sub class system.

    You howeever left out the fact that FFXI's combat ALSO involves team work and not solo like most games.Geesh even a game like WOW a player can cheat by using add ons and take on instances by himself,how sad is that for MMO gaming?

    This is why i prefer FFXI's combat it stands for what MMO gaming SHOULD be, playing alongside other players.I might also add that it is not turn based,it is real time,it uses delays for weapons,with different gear you can up your attack speed 10x if you wanted utilizing Haste and Multi attack weapons,it is possible to hit a mob 7-8 times to his one attack,so that is nothing close to turn based.

    FFXI combat is also thought provoking,this was a big deal with the RDM class,making it possible to solo mobs that were not meant to be soloed,but using all the tools that a RDM has it is possible.The added Dancer class and Ninja to boot also make for thoughtful combat,heck even Ranger could utilize thought by loading up tons of early damage then binding him for another go.

    Big damage in FFXI is a waiting game for your abilities to load up from timers/TP guages,so it is VERY important to not mess up and miss that golden opportunity,many other games you just button mash the same 1/2/3 icons on the hotbar with no real thought what so ever.


    Samoan Diamond

  • takayitakayi HelsinkiPosts: 158Member

    FPS style is what I enjoy, and I really aint a big fan of autoattack and the combat styled used in e.g. WoW.

    Mount & Blade has quite enjoyable combat style, quite fastpaced in my opinion, and takes a bit practice before you excel in it perfectly. However, in the Mount & Blade (havent played Warband), it gets quite annoying as most of the enemies die in one hit if you ride with a horse. This could ofcourse be fixed in a mmo setting.

    image

  • PinkerlPinkerl osakaPosts: 123Member

    Devil May Cry

  • VarnyVarny ggghPosts: 765Member

    Originally posted by eLdritchZ

    Originally posted by Varny

    The kind that is good.

    Gears of War has good shooting mechanics but Tabula Rasa and all the others did not.

    World of Warcraft has the best combat for that traditional style but Everquest 2 does not.

     

    Not really the type of combat but just one that is well made.

     

    Tabula Rasa was not FPS combat... it was much closer to standard tab-targeting Auto Attack+ Styles combat... or Soft-lock Console Action game combat if you will...

     

    Also that is YOUR opinion... I actually liked the TR combat... and I prefer the rotational Style System in EQ/EQ2 to the 1 Button Mash "Frostbolt, Frostbolt, Frostbolt" Experience that WoW offers...

    and I bet there's quite a few others that agree...

    @ OP

    Could you please call the "WoW Style" combat the "Everquest Style" Combat? It's basically the same and EQ was there first so it has dibs :P

     

    I personally prefer the EverQuest Style... Just feels right for me... But I can pretty much adept to and enjoy other styles as well as long as they require a certain level of skill in both PvE and PvP...

     

    1. I never said FPS, Gears is Third Person and TR was trying to emulate that and it didn't work out.

    2. Everquest and WoW have very different combat, it never worked in PVP because it was just too slow and boring for it. Basically you stood still and pressed hot keys and watched the lamest auto attack animation ever. 

    WoW came along and made MMO combat so good, it was fast and there was no auto facing so you could run round eachother so they couldn't hit you. Every spell and special attack you hit happened instantly and just felt so right. The combat is amazing in PVP and it is just the best MMO combat I've come across. This is why WoW has done so well because they got the combat and the classes right. Games like EQ2 and WAR have like 20+ classes but they're all watered down,  boring and generic. Where WoW only did 9 but they were all so unique and fun to play. The Tank for Chaos played exactly the same as the tank for the Orcs in WAR for example. Where you couldn't mistake any classes like that in WoW and that is because it doesn't do that stupid 4 archetype thing that EQ2 and WAR did. Where you get 4 kinds of healers but they all feel like they should be molded into one class. The beauty of WoW aswell is you can play 3 different roles with the talent tree system. I could be a healing priest or a Damage priest or a survival one.

  • AxehiltAxehilt San Francisco, CAPosts: 8,765Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by deviliscious

    I prefer FPS, I do not see the point in " auto attack" who wants to "play" a game that plays itself? If I am playing the game I want to actually be playing it.

    Every game automates things.  It's just a question of what's automated and whether a sufficient amount of interesting decisions are left over.

    "Joe stated his case logically and passionately, but his perceived effeminate voice only drew big gales of stupid laughter..." -Idiocracy
    "There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance." -Socrates

2
Sign In or Register to comment.