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.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
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.
- 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.
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.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
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.
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).
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
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).
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)
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. ;-)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
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.
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.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
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.
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.
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.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Comments
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.
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.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
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.
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.
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.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
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)
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).
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
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).
---------------------------
Corpus Callosum
---------------------------
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)
Oh..what is the difference between Darfall and FPS/TPS combat system?
I could, but I used "WoW" as a term because more people know it and are aware on how this system works.
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.
'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.
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.
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.
Agreed.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
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.
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.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
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.
Devil May Cry
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.
Every game automates things. It's just a question of what's automated and whether a sufficient amount of interesting decisions are left over.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver