No in an action game you can move freely and use strategies..
Which action game? TERA, Raiderz, Dragon Nest, DCUO, Vindictus are all action combat games that have rooted mechanics. Please don't name GW2 as that's not action combat. neither is DDO.
That's the problem with GW2 fans, nothing came before GW2 LOL. The OP make a silly thread complaining about how action combat should work without realizing that it's actually GW2 that is not normal action combat.
Imagine the uproar if you went to there forum and moaned about the GW2 combat lol, you would be hung out to dry.
You guys have got to be kidding me, have you not ever played some of the old DOS games lol there were many many action games where you could attack while moving.
lmao
Prince of Persia comes to my mind. It had rooted combat (you couldn't cancel your attack moves IIRC).
I dont care if it is realistic or not. It breaks the fluidity of the combat. It feels like turn based combat with the rooting. We were promised action combat.
Bring back the non-rooted combat I played at PAX. That was massive fun before nerf bat hit the combat with realism.
Really ranncore are you telling me there were no action games before these ones lol Street fighter came out in 87 and Mortal Kombat came out in 92 and was an arcade game.
You guys have got to be kidding me, have you not ever played some of the old DOS games lol there were many many action games where you could attack while moving.
lmao
Modern classics my behind, they are only classic if your like 25 or so which in the scheme of things is still kind of young, it's like 12 year olds claiming stuff is OLD SKOOL BABY
But w/e floats your boat. Be sure I will TL; DR your next posts myself.
PC was not the platform for innovative action games back in the day, certainly not DOS - the arcades were with companies like (in no particular order): Capcom (Final Fight, SF1), Sega (Golden Axe), Taito & Technos (Double Dragon), and Data East (Renegade) all making beat-em-ups/fighters and defining the action genre. No, they were not the first action games, but they were the ones that defined the genre into what we know as action combat today. Can you guess what the one thing they all had in common was? ROOTING. So please, enough with your hollow opinions and provide some evidence if you're going to be so belligerent about it.
I'll add that it's okay to just not like rooted combat. Everybody's taste is different. Some people prefer to eat McDonald's rather than a meal at a decent restaurant, and that's totally their preference and nothing can change that. However, you can't try to convince the general population that your choice is the best because there's no evidence to support that and the whole industry is has been going in the complete opposite direction of what you "prefer".
Really ranncore are you telling me there were no action games before these ones lol Street fighter came out in 87 and Mortal Kombat came out in 92 and was an arcade game.
You guys have got to be kidding me, have you not ever played some of the old DOS games lol there were many many action games where you could attack while moving.
lmao
Modern classics my behind, they are only classic if your like 25 or so which in the scheme of things is still kind of young, it's like 12 year olds claiming stuff is OLD SKOOL BABY
But w/e floats your boat. Be sure I will TL; DR your next posts myself.
PC was not the platform for innovative action games back in the day, certainly not DOS - the arcades were with companies like (in no particular order): Capcom (Final Fight, SF1), Sega (Golden Axe), Taito & Technos (Double Dragon), and Data East (Renegade) all making beat-em-ups/fighters and defining the action genre. No, they were not the first action games, but they were the ones that defined the genre into what we know as action combat today. Can you guess what the one thing they all had in common was? ROOTING. So please, enough with your hollow opinions and provide some evidence if you're going to be so belligerent about it.
I'll add that it's okay to just not like rooted combat. Everybody's taste is different. Some people prefer to eat McDonald's rather than a meal at a decent restaurant, and that's totally their preference and nothing can change that. However, you can't try to convince the general population that your choice is the best because there's no evidence to support that and the whole industry is has been going in the complete opposite direction of what you "prefer".
Rooting is a technique some old action games used that was shoddy, saying it defines the genre is asinine and sure as hell more of a step backwards than forwards.
You guys are you taking the example of some games but ignoring the rest of them just to try and prove you a right. You guys are taking just action "combat" and forgeting all the rest of the "action" games.
Hollow opinions my arse I mean unless you think MMOs are going in such a GREAT direction, so deep and invovled if you will, the truth is the whole industry is making games for peeps with ADD.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
Really ranncore are you telling me there were no action games before these ones lol Street fighter came out in 87 and Mortal Kombat came out in 92 and was an arcade game.
You guys have got to be kidding me, have you not ever played some of the old DOS games lol there were many many action games where you could attack while moving.
lmao
Modern classics my behind, they are only classic if your like 25 or so which in the scheme of things is still kind of young, it's like 12 year olds claiming stuff is OLD SKOOL BABY
But w/e floats your boat. Be sure I will TL; DR your next posts myself.
PC was not the platform for innovative action games back in the day, certainly not DOS - the arcades were with companies like (in no particular order): Capcom (Final Fight, SF1), Sega (Golden Axe), Taito & Technos (Double Dragon), and Data East (Renegade) all making beat-em-ups/fighters and defining the action genre. No, they were not the first action games, but they were the ones that defined the genre into what we know as action combat today. Can you guess what the one thing they all had in common was? ROOTING. So please, enough with your hollow opinions and provide some evidence if you're going to be so belligerent about it.
I'll add that it's okay to just not like rooted combat. Everybody's taste is different. Some people prefer to eat McDonald's rather than a meal at a decent restaurant, and that's totally their preference and nothing can change that. However, you can't try to convince the general population that your choice is the best because there's no evidence to support that and the whole industry is has been going in the complete opposite direction of what you "prefer".
Rooting is a technique some old action games used that was shoddy, saying it defines the genre is asinine and sure as hell more of a step backwards than forwards.
You guys are you taking the example of some games but ignoring the rest of them just to try and prove you a right. You guys are taking just action "combat" and forgeting all the rest of the "action" games.
Hollow opinions my arse I mean unless you think MMOs are going in such a GREAT direction, so deep and invovled if you will, the truth is the whole industry is making games for peeps with ADD.
L2read, I said those action games were the heyday games that defined the genre, and rooting is a common denominator in those action game.
So why keep dodging the question? What are these "other" action games you are getting at that are sooooooo good that only you seem to recall?
IMO you're spewing garbage, you have nothing to back up your opinion on the matter other than "I hate what you guys like, therefore I am right".
Rooted "action" combat was really a transition step between turn based combat and fully realized action combat. Rooting doesn't "need to go" because that's the way GW2 does combat, GW2 just proved that fluid, non-rooted combat is now fully achievable and rooted combat is thus now an archaic throwback to a thankfully now dead era.
A lot of concessions need to be made in game design due to technical and design limitations. One of the major elements marking the end of one generation of games and the beginning of the next is some significant progress towards eliminating one or more of those concessions.
The era of rooted combat in MMOs has passed and MMO developers who don't adapt to the new reality are doing themselves, their game and their fans a huge dis-service.
Rooted "action" combat was really a transition step between turn based combat and fully realized action combat. Rooting doesn't "need to go" because that's the way GW2 does combat, GW2 just proved that fluid, non-rooted combat is now fully achievable and rooted combat is thus now an archaic throwback to a thankfully now dead era.
A lot of concessions need to be made in game design due to technical and design limitations. One of the major elements marking the end of one generation of games and the beginning of the next is some significant progress towards eliminating one or more of those concessions.
The era of rooted combat in MMOs has passed and MMO developers who don't adapt to the new reality are doing themselves, their game and their fans a huge dis-service.
Yay someone that can use his brain and see rooting for what it was/is !
Btw I don't play GW2 as I am not a fan of how gear works in that game but it IS a step in the right direction, a proper step forwards.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
GW2 combat is NOT "action combat". So many face palms in this thread. People bringing up DOS games as a comparison and actually thinking GW2 is "action combat". I cringed. GW2 is a clunky tab/target type of game with a aimbot mechanic.
It is easy to make games spammy and mindless. It is harder to make games with thought and actual action combat. There is a reason GW2 is a virtually dead game, because it offered no depth in terms of combat or gameplay. It was mindless.
The future does not belong to lazy developers who take the easy way out with spammy and mindless combat.
The problem with Neverwinter is the crappy animations.
You guys have got to be kidding me, have you not ever played some of the old DOS games lol there were many many action games where you could attack while moving.
imho rooting or not doesn't really matter overall(even though I do like the run and gun style) it's all about how it feels and plays.. if animations and skill transitions feel off or clunky then it brings down combat as a whole... for me all i think is they need to clean up a couple of the animations and smooth out skill to skill transitions and people will have much less issues with the "rooted" aspects of the game
I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg
I don't care about past games. I think rooting sucks. It is possible to balance games without rooting ranged classes. Most games have the mobs run a bit quicker than the player or a ranged attack.
I think TERA destroyed me for self rooting. It had a freaking root on instant spells. I understand rooting in channeled spells, but it is not necessary for "balance" on instant spells. We have some pretty smart people involved in the developement of games and I'm sure they can figure out ways to balance games without jerky stop start attacks.
I won't be playing ranged classes in NWN, which is fine. Melee has rooting but it's more tolerable.
GW2 combat is NOT "action combat". So many face palms in this thread. People bringing up DOS games as a comparison and actually thinking GW2 is "action combat". I cringed. GW2 is a clunky tab/target type of game with a aimbot mechanic.
It is easy to make games spammy and mindless. It is harder to make games with thought and actual action combat. There is a reason GW2 is a virtually dead game, because it offered no depth in terms of combat or gameplay. It was mindless.
The future does not belong to lazy developers who take the easy way out with spammy and mindless combat.
The problem with Neverwinter is the crappy animations.
+1
Good to see there are some people that know what's up. I also don't like NW's combat, it is amateurish. But the problem does not stem from rooted animations, it's just overall lackluster in design, mechanics wise.
GW2 combat is NOT "action combat". So many face palms in this thread. People bringing up DOS games as a comparison and actually thinking GW2 is "action combat". I cringed. GW2 is a clunky tab/target type of game with a aimbot mechanic.
It is easy to make games spammy and mindless. It is harder to make games with thought and actual action combat. There is a reason GW2 is a virtually dead game, because it offered no depth in terms of combat or gameplay. It was mindless.
The future does not belong to lazy developers who take the easy way out with spammy and mindless combat.
The problem with Neverwinter is the crappy animations.
Facepalms ? Your the one that brought up GW2 with the assumption I was a GW2 fanatic. For the rest of your post it's funny because rooting IS what lazy developers do.
GW2 is dead because of many many reasons and it's combat isn't the biggest reason but thats another subject altogether.
Rooting does not equate into better or smarter, like you say the future does not belong to developers that take the lazy, easy way to do something and that is what rooting is no matter how much they con you into thinking it provides more strategy. *snicker*
I will agree that better animations could make the issues with rooting much less problematic though yet this is Cryptic, do you really expect such a "lazy" developper to clean up its act?
Cryptics idea of solving a problem integrating 4E into a mmo format is simple, hey it's too much work and we are not competant enough so lets just cut that all out and avoid the issues or likewise in this case hey lets just root everyone and claim it's to make strategy more important !!!!
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
Originally posted by evilastro I didn't have any issues evading mid-attack in this beta round, so I am fine with the rooting. I can see how wizards and clerics reverse strafing while casting would end up being rediculous. The main issue I had with it last beta weekend was that my rogue would get locked in an animation and then get blasted by an AE that was completely avoidable. Now that is fixed I am fine with it.
As was stated in a Dev replu on the official forums back during BWE1, using your avoidance move is supposed to break what ever animation regardless and the teleport/dodge/sprint will automatically take precidence. In BWE1 this was a huge issue for me on my Rogue as well. In BWE2 it appears they did work on it as it worled a bit more fluidly but still 100% where I wanted it or where it needs to be.
On another topic, why do I like rooting in this game but not in Tera? Well its as simple as the combat animations themselves being failry quick. For example in Tera it might take .75 to 1.5 sec or longer to get off an ability but in NWO I have yet to see an animation take longer then .5 secs to complete (barring channel spells of course). This is where the ac tion comes in, being able to fire off 2-3 abilities in the same time frame as 1 ability in Tera is a huge deal and goes a long way to speeding up the combat and giving it the appearance of action. Whereas Tera I felt was not action'y at all.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
GW2 combat is NOT "action combat". So many face palms in this thread. People bringing up DOS games as a comparison and actually thinking GW2 is "action combat". I cringed. GW2 is a clunky tab/target type of game with a aimbot mechanic.
It is easy to make games spammy and mindless. It is harder to make games with thought and actual action combat. There is a reason GW2 is a virtually dead game, because it offered no depth in terms of combat or gameplay. It was mindless.
The future does not belong to lazy developers who take the easy way out with spammy and mindless combat.
The problem with Neverwinter is the crappy animations.
Facepalms ? Your the one that brought up GW2 with the assumption I was a GW2 fanatic. For the rest of your post it's funny because rooting IS what lazy developers do.
GW2 is dead because of many many reasons and it's combat isn't the biggest reason but thats another subject altogether.
Rooting does not equate into better or smarter, like you say the future does not belong to developers that take the lazy, easy way to do something and that is what rooting is no matter how much they con you into thinking it provides more strategy. *snicker*
I will agree that better animations could make the issues with rooting much less problematic though yet this is Cryptic, do you really expect such a "lazy" developper to clean up its act?
Cryptics idea of solving a problem integrating 4E into a mmo format is simple, hey it's too much work and we are not competant enough so lets just cut that all out and avoid the issues or likewise in this case hey lets just root everyone and claim it's to make strategy more important !!!!
Sorry to burst your bubble but GW2 is by far not dead. Far from it, and it continues to grow its playerbase every day. Check the Forums if you don't believe me.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
For melee it doesn't feel bad at all. But ya the Wizard feels off partly due to this and other things. I am normally a Clothie guy but I really fell in love with my Teifling Rogue so if I'm ok if Wizard doesn't end up working for me. I heard they are making some changes though so we will see how it goes.
GW2 combat is NOT "action combat". So many face palms in this thread. People bringing up DOS games as a comparison and actually thinking GW2 is "action combat". I cringed. GW2 is a clunky tab/target type of game with a aimbot mechanic.
It is easy to make games spammy and mindless. It is harder to make games with thought and actual action combat. There is a reason GW2 is a virtually dead game, because it offered no depth in terms of combat or gameplay. It was mindless.
The future does not belong to lazy developers who take the easy way out with spammy and mindless combat.
The problem with Neverwinter is the crappy animations.
+1
Good to see there are some people that know what's up. I also don't like NW's combat, it is amateurish. But the problem does not stem from rooted animations, it's just overall lackluster in design, mechanics wise.
GW2 combat is action combat. Reticle combat (you know, aiming) is a sub-genre of action combat. If anything, GW2 feels more action oriented than TERA, because the animation locks make movement useless aside from the most obvious telegraphed attacks.
Also virtually dead? Haha nice one, try getting into WvW and let me know how long it takes you. Takes me up to 3 hours, even on weeknights. That must be because noone is playing *rolls eyes*.
Originally posted by Fendel84M For melee it doesn't feel bad at all. But ya the Wizard feels off partly due to this and other things. I am normally a Clothie guy but I really fell in love with my Teifling Rogue so if I'm ok if Wizard doesn't end up working for me. I heard they are making some changes though so we will see how it goes.
For me it was the other way around. I felt that it was OK for ranged, but was slightly annoying for melee.
Personally I would prefer that At Will abilities were usable while moving, but Encounters and Dailys still root you.
GW2 combat is NOT "action combat". So many face palms in this thread. People bringing up DOS games as a comparison and actually thinking GW2 is "action combat". I cringed. GW2 is a clunky tab/target type of game with a aimbot mechanic.
It is easy to make games spammy and mindless. It is harder to make games with thought and actual action combat. There is a reason GW2 is a virtually dead game, because it offered no depth in terms of combat or gameplay. It was mindless.
The future does not belong to lazy developers who take the easy way out with spammy and mindless combat.
The problem with Neverwinter is the crappy animations.
Facepalms ? Your the one that brought up GW2 with the assumption I was a GW2 fanatic. For the rest of your post it's funny because rooting IS what lazy developers do.
GW2 is dead because of many many reasons and it's combat isn't the biggest reason but thats another subject altogether.
Rooting does not equate into better or smarter, like you say the future does not belong to developers that take the lazy, easy way to do something and that is what rooting is no matter how much they con you into thinking it provides more strategy. *snicker*
I will agree that better animations could make the issues with rooting much less problematic though yet this is Cryptic, do you really expect such a "lazy" developper to clean up its act?
Cryptics idea of solving a problem integrating 4E into a mmo format is simple, hey it's too much work and we are not competant enough so lets just cut that all out and avoid the issues or likewise in this case hey lets just root everyone and claim it's to make strategy more important !!!!
Sorry to burst your bubble but GW2 is by far not dead. Far from it, and it continues to grow its playerbase every day. Check the Forums if you don't believe me.
GW2 being dead wasn't really my words and I didn't want to argue a point about a game I don't play and I didn't want to bother to go see if he was correct even though last I read about the game it was doing fine even if there was some brouhaha about the new endgane dungeons.
It's good to know he's full of balony on this point too though.
The only persons bubble you are popping is SoMuchMass.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
Rooting dirupts fluidity of action combatness - I do not consider te game action combat with rooting. Many other players also do not consider that game is action combat with rooting - as it has been implemented now. It feels like a turn-based game, I usually get a feeling of Final Fantasy game while playing it.
hence devs should either remove rooting or use a wish spell to make a first of the kind game which does not look turn-based while rooting is implemented.
It make the combat have some power to it. Tera combat is horrible when it comes to running and fighting... all the attacks feel look weak and horrible. NW attacks feel strong and potent.
You just need to learn when to dodge and when not to, and remember that dodge breaks you out of all combat animations.
So many baddies and rabid GW2 fanboys citing misinformed opinions on Tera that didn't make it past level 10 to realize that there's progression in attack speed. You know, something you have to work towards, a key concept that is lost in this instant gratification generation. Rooting is fundamental to risk vs reward. Those people that say rooting is fine on melee but feels akward on range? Those are the tards that want to continue the bad trend from traditional MMOs where you havelinear warriors quadratic wizards. I mean if there's is any kind of compromise, it would be that melee gets to move around freely whereas ranged must be rooted. It just proves how stupid some people can be when they have no clue what they're talking about.
You can feel or prefer what you want, it doesn't make it right. Nobody here that is against rooted combat has given ANY critical evidence that non-rooted combat is more balanced (just blanket statements referring to GW2, which is not really action combat and also has A TON of rooted skills), whereas people that are for rooted combat have cited many different games, explaining the fundamental mechanic that is prevalent among action combat games. But yeah, keep up with the "I have an opinion, therefore I am right" mentality, that's the MMORPG forum way.
Watch the MMORPG interview just before beta weekend 2. They ask about rooting for the CW and the response was that the CWs at-will's had no roots to begin with. BUT GUESS WHAT!!! It turned into a kite fest that was UNFUN! So they changed it.... Rooting balances pvp. Risk vs reward combat. Real choices to be made. Real character progression. You don't like the delay, then customize which skills/items you use. Higher levels tend to speed up combat anyways, make it past lvl 10 for once.
Comments
That's the problem with GW2 fans, nothing came before GW2 LOL. The OP make a silly thread complaining about how action combat should work without realizing that it's actually GW2 that is not normal action combat.
Imagine the uproar if you went to there forum and moaned about the GW2 combat lol, you would be hung out to dry.
Prince of Persia comes to my mind. It had rooted combat (you couldn't cancel your attack moves IIRC).
DOWN with the rooting.
I dont care if it is realistic or not. It breaks the fluidity of the combat. It feels like turn based combat with the rooting. We were promised action combat.
Bring back the non-rooted combat I played at PAX. That was massive fun before nerf bat hit the combat with realism.
Foundry Feedback | Foundry Tutorials
PC was not the platform for innovative action games back in the day, certainly not DOS - the arcades were with companies like (in no particular order): Capcom (Final Fight, SF1), Sega (Golden Axe), Taito & Technos (Double Dragon), and Data East (Renegade) all making beat-em-ups/fighters and defining the action genre. No, they were not the first action games, but they were the ones that defined the genre into what we know as action combat today. Can you guess what the one thing they all had in common was? ROOTING. So please, enough with your hollow opinions and provide some evidence if you're going to be so belligerent about it.
I'll add that it's okay to just not like rooted combat. Everybody's taste is different. Some people prefer to eat McDonald's rather than a meal at a decent restaurant, and that's totally their preference and nothing can change that. However, you can't try to convince the general population that your choice is the best because there's no evidence to support that and the whole industry is has been going in the complete opposite direction of what you "prefer".
Rooting is a technique some old action games used that was shoddy, saying it defines the genre is asinine and sure as hell more of a step backwards than forwards.
You guys are you taking the example of some games but ignoring the rest of them just to try and prove you a right. You guys are taking just action "combat" and forgeting all the rest of the "action" games.
Hollow opinions my arse I mean unless you think MMOs are going in such a GREAT direction, so deep and invovled if you will, the truth is the whole industry is making games for peeps with ADD.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
L2read, I said those action games were the heyday games that defined the genre, and rooting is a common denominator in those action game.
So why keep dodging the question? What are these "other" action games you are getting at that are sooooooo good that only you seem to recall?
IMO you're spewing garbage, you have nothing to back up your opinion on the matter other than "I hate what you guys like, therefore I am right".
Rooted "action" combat was really a transition step between turn based combat and fully realized action combat. Rooting doesn't "need to go" because that's the way GW2 does combat, GW2 just proved that fluid, non-rooted combat is now fully achievable and rooted combat is thus now an archaic throwback to a thankfully now dead era.
A lot of concessions need to be made in game design due to technical and design limitations. One of the major elements marking the end of one generation of games and the beginning of the next is some significant progress towards eliminating one or more of those concessions.
The era of rooted combat in MMOs has passed and MMO developers who don't adapt to the new reality are doing themselves, their game and their fans a huge dis-service.
Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
Yay someone that can use his brain and see rooting for what it was/is !
Btw I don't play GW2 as I am not a fan of how gear works in that game but it IS a step in the right direction, a proper step forwards.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
GW2 combat is NOT "action combat". So many face palms in this thread. People bringing up DOS games as a comparison and actually thinking GW2 is "action combat". I cringed. GW2 is a clunky tab/target type of game with a aimbot mechanic.
It is easy to make games spammy and mindless. It is harder to make games with thought and actual action combat. There is a reason GW2 is a virtually dead game, because it offered no depth in terms of combat or gameplay. It was mindless.
The future does not belong to lazy developers who take the easy way out with spammy and mindless combat.
The problem with Neverwinter is the crappy animations.
Name one.
I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg
I don't care about past games. I think rooting sucks. It is possible to balance games without rooting ranged classes. Most games have the mobs run a bit quicker than the player or a ranged attack.
I think TERA destroyed me for self rooting. It had a freaking root on instant spells. I understand rooting in channeled spells, but it is not necessary for "balance" on instant spells. We have some pretty smart people involved in the developement of games and I'm sure they can figure out ways to balance games without jerky stop start attacks.
I won't be playing ranged classes in NWN, which is fine. Melee has rooting but it's more tolerable.
+1
Good to see there are some people that know what's up. I also don't like NW's combat, it is amateurish. But the problem does not stem from rooted animations, it's just overall lackluster in design, mechanics wise.
Facepalms ? Your the one that brought up GW2 with the assumption I was a GW2 fanatic. For the rest of your post it's funny because rooting IS what lazy developers do.
GW2 is dead because of many many reasons and it's combat isn't the biggest reason but thats another subject altogether.
Rooting does not equate into better or smarter, like you say the future does not belong to developers that take the lazy, easy way to do something and that is what rooting is no matter how much they con you into thinking it provides more strategy. *snicker*
I will agree that better animations could make the issues with rooting much less problematic though yet this is Cryptic, do you really expect such a "lazy" developper to clean up its act?
Cryptics idea of solving a problem integrating 4E into a mmo format is simple, hey it's too much work and we are not competant enough so lets just cut that all out and avoid the issues or likewise in this case hey lets just root everyone and claim it's to make strategy more important !!!!
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
As was stated in a Dev replu on the official forums back during BWE1, using your avoidance move is supposed to break what ever animation regardless and the teleport/dodge/sprint will automatically take precidence. In BWE1 this was a huge issue for me on my Rogue as well. In BWE2 it appears they did work on it as it worled a bit more fluidly but still 100% where I wanted it or where it needs to be.
On another topic, why do I like rooting in this game but not in Tera? Well its as simple as the combat animations themselves being failry quick. For example in Tera it might take .75 to 1.5 sec or longer to get off an ability but in NWO I have yet to see an animation take longer then .5 secs to complete (barring channel spells of course). This is where the ac tion comes in, being able to fire off 2-3 abilities in the same time frame as 1 ability in Tera is a huge deal and goes a long way to speeding up the combat and giving it the appearance of action. Whereas Tera I felt was not action'y at all.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Sorry to burst your bubble but GW2 is by far not dead. Far from it, and it continues to grow its playerbase every day. Check the Forums if you don't believe me.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
GW2 combat is action combat. Reticle combat (you know, aiming) is a sub-genre of action combat. If anything, GW2 feels more action oriented than TERA, because the animation locks make movement useless aside from the most obvious telegraphed attacks.
Also virtually dead? Haha nice one, try getting into WvW and let me know how long it takes you. Takes me up to 3 hours, even on weeknights. That must be because noone is playing *rolls eyes*.
For me it was the other way around. I felt that it was OK for ranged, but was slightly annoying for melee.
Personally I would prefer that At Will abilities were usable while moving, but Encounters and Dailys still root you.
GW2 being dead wasn't really my words and I didn't want to argue a point about a game I don't play and I didn't want to bother to go see if he was correct even though last I read about the game it was doing fine even if there was some brouhaha about the new endgane dungeons.
It's good to know he's full of balony on this point too though.
The only persons bubble you are popping is SoMuchMass.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
This is action combat game.
This was always advertized as action combat game.
Rooting dirupts fluidity of action combatness - I do not consider te game action combat with rooting. Many other players also do not consider that game is action combat with rooting - as it has been implemented now. It feels like a turn-based game, I usually get a feeling of Final Fantasy game while playing it.
hence devs should either remove rooting or use a wish spell to make a first of the kind game which does not look turn-based while rooting is implemented.
Foundry Feedback | Foundry Tutorials
Rooting is a very good thing in NW.
It make the combat have some power to it. Tera combat is horrible when it comes to running and fighting... all the attacks feel look weak and horrible. NW attacks feel strong and potent.
You just need to learn when to dodge and when not to, and remember that dodge breaks you out of all combat animations.
So many baddies and rabid GW2 fanboys citing misinformed opinions on Tera that didn't make it past level 10 to realize that there's progression in attack speed. You know, something you have to work towards, a key concept that is lost in this instant gratification generation. Rooting is fundamental to risk vs reward. Those people that say rooting is fine on melee but feels akward on range? Those are the tards that want to continue the bad trend from traditional MMOs where you have linear warriors quadratic wizards. I mean if there's is any kind of compromise, it would be that melee gets to move around freely whereas ranged must be rooted. It just proves how stupid some people can be when they have no clue what they're talking about.
You can feel or prefer what you want, it doesn't make it right. Nobody here that is against rooted combat has given ANY critical evidence that non-rooted combat is more balanced (just blanket statements referring to GW2, which is not really action combat and also has A TON of rooted skills), whereas people that are for rooted combat have cited many different games, explaining the fundamental mechanic that is prevalent among action combat games. But yeah, keep up with the "I have an opinion, therefore I am right" mentality, that's the MMORPG forum way.