I don't mind avoiding an AE spell or, as a cleric, moving away from a mob that is beating on me. But I also have no interest in micromanaging every swing and step of my character during combat. That belongs in the realm of FPS.
I don't mind avoiding an AE spell or, as a cleric, moving away from a mob that is beating on me. But I also have no interest in micromanaging every swing and step of my character during combat. That belongs in the realm of FPS.
How about aiming?
In D3, Wiz has a "laser" type attack (sure, it is called a fantasy name), and it is extremely fun trying to line up mobs so you can laser as many as possible, and see all of them burn to a crisp.
Originally posted by AlBQuirky In D3 (I have not played it), does *my* ability to click and aim factor in at all, no matter what gear I have for my character? If my character has the best gear in the game, does my "fat fingering", hitting the wrong key/button, making any jerking movements with my mouse factor in at all?
The factor changes.If you have weak armor and resist, if you stay in a pool of acid for a second, you are dead. So at weak armor, you ability to click and react (say moving out of acid, dodge projectile ...) is a BIG factor.However, at top of the line gear with high defense and life steal/(or life on hit), some character can stand in acid and face tank a boss. So in this case, you ability to move & aim matter a lot less, or not at all.Thus, this game ranges from "player skill" to "character skill" and your combat effectiveness is a combination fo the two ... and it is not black & white. Most characters are between the two extremes.
Thanks for the explanation
Originally posted by nariusseldon As a side note, even tab targetting system needs some player skill. Have you played wow? Do you knwo that you need to move out of acid/fire and other bad stuff during boss fight?
Yes. There is a point that this becomes too much for me, though. There is a major difference between EQ1 combat and WoW combat. Between WoW combat and GW2 combat. All 3 use tab targeting (to a degree). I know GW2 uses aiming, also, but I hope you get my point. All 3 have auto-attack mode. The amount of actions each uses is also very different, adding to the actiony feel.
Did that make sense?
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Action-combat all the way, ever after few years in Neocron, i never could really get into the tab-target button mashers again (MMOs) altho i played alot of them after NC
Saying "tab-targeting is more tactical" is just utter bull**** or those that claim so just suck at reticle/shooter style combat and try to turn the blame from themselves to a mechanic.
Being and MMO-vet since the mid 90's (and gaming vet since mid to late 80's) my conclusion on the subject is that action/reticle combat is much more satisfying on a 'rewarding experience' level, than a tab target / target lock button masher, where only things you need to consider is placing and resource management, where as action based games have all the previous topped with skill requirement of the actual targeting.
What I would like to see most would be turn-based combat, with D&D 3.5e rules (Usable under Open Game License), but since that would get "boring" (slow, even with time restrictions on turns - as in, slow for mass audience) and too hardcore for mainstream, it will never be a success and would prove to be too much hassle in an MMO.
So! I certainly do not want everquest 2-like tab combat, nor do I want boring console-action combat (GW2 got some things right, but the lack of customization, choises and the casualization ruin it for me, not to mention the setting too...), so, I must cling to my memories of DDO. It has had the best MMO combat for me. A hybrid between "tab combat" and action combat.
DDO really shined with the following points:
First of all: A heavily modified ruleset of D&D (Which is, quite ironically, both a pro and a con. It lacks many tactical combat related things from P&P, but it's still better than anything else available, from my point of view.)
Second: It still uses D20 for every action. From attacking to taunting, sneaking and disabling traps. Fixed damage numbers are -rare-, instead everything is rolled.
Third: Action combat plays it's part in giving the player the ability to dodge projectiles (fireballs, arrows, ray spells) and forces the player to for example, take lead while firing projectiles. Many traps can also be avoided with deft footwork which is completely dependant on player skill. Sadly it does not feature friendly fire, but at least spells react to each other properly (webs are not suitable to be used with fire, unless you want to recast web after every fire spell...)
Fourth: Did I mention it's D&D? -Freedom-. Character customization. Multiclassing done the best way while keeping to a level-based system.
Now, I must admit that Witcher 2 like action combat (with that silly shield sign implemented properly) would be awesome, but I would certainly go for the hardcore approach of Mount & Blade too. No, not War of the Roses (M&B's bastard child) or Chivalry, but Mount & Blade: Warband.
I'm a tab-targetting person myself. I don't feel like action targeting is really adding anything to the experience of combat aside from making sure I am facing my target. There really isn't any merit to action targeting for me. Yes, I can shoot the ground full of arrows. No, I'd much rather not target the ground because my mouse ran out of batteries.
I played WoW up until WotLK, played RoM for 2 years and now Rift. I am F2P player. I support games when I feel they deserve my money and I want the items enough. I don't troll, and I don't take kindly to trolls.
Yes. There is a point that this becomes too much for me, though. There is a major difference between EQ1 combat and WoW combat. Between WoW combat and GW2 combat. All 3 use tab targeting (to a degree). I know GW2 uses aiming, also, but I hope you get my point. All 3 have auto-attack mode. The amount of actions each uses is also very different, adding to the actiony feel.
Did that make sense?
Yes. Tab-targetting itself does not make combat more or less actiony.
Another example is STO. In ship combat, you can tab target .. but facing is important (for example you need to keep enemy ships at your broadside if you go with a all phaser build). Thus, some skill to do maneuvers is important .. and that part feels a little actiony.
Originally posted by Metanol What I would like to see most would be turn-based combat, with D&D 3.5e rules (Usable under Open Game License), but since that would get "boring" (slow, even with time restrictions on turns - as in, slow for mass audience) and too hardcore for mainstream, it will never be a success and would prove to be too much hassle in an MMO.
Turn-based combat does not fit MMO. I don't even think it fits online gaming very well.
However, i do like turned-based tactical RPG ... but only single player. I have yet to see it done well in multiplayer.
You would think the users here all hated tab target systems from the noise generated by the vocal yellers, but it seems it is actually a 50/50 split (with tab inching out in front).
Like Sub vs F2P poll that showed overwhelming supprt for the sub amongst the site users here, this result goes some way towards proving that the apparent feeling of the overall community can be... wrong.
Originally posted by Metanol What I would like to see most would be turn-based combat, with D&D 3.5e rules (Usable under Open Game License), but since that would get "boring" (slow, even with time restrictions on turns - as in, slow for mass audience) and too hardcore for mainstream, it will never be a success and would prove to be too much hassle in an MMO.
So! I certainly do not want everquest 2-like tab combat, nor do I want boring console-action combat (GW2 got some things right, but the lack of customization, choises and the casualization ruin it for me, not to mention the setting too...), so, I must cling to my memories of DDO. It has had the best MMO combat for me. A hybrid between "tab combat" and action combat.
DDO really shined with the following points:
First of all: A heavily modified ruleset of D&D (Which is, quite ironically, both a pro and a con. It lacks many tactical combat related things from P&P, but it's still better than anything else available, from my point of view.)
Second: It still uses D20 for every action. From attacking to taunting, sneaking and disabling traps. Fixed damage numbers are -rare-, instead everything is rolled.
Third: Action combat plays it's part in giving the player the ability to dodge projectiles (fireballs, arrows, ray spells) and forces the player to for example, take lead while firing projectiles. Many traps can also be avoided with deft footwork which is completely dependant on player skill. Sadly it does not feature friendly fire, but at least spells react to each other properly (webs are not suitable to be used with fire, unless you want to recast web after every fire spell...)
Fourth: Did I mention it's D&D? -Freedom-. Character customization. Multiclassing done the best way while keeping to a level-based system.
Now, I must admit that Witcher 2 like action combat (with that silly shield sign implemented properly) would be awesome, but I would certainly go for the hardcore approach of Mount & Blade too. No, not War of the Roses (M&B's bastard child) or Chivalry, but Mount & Blade: Warband.
I too would love to see a turn based tactical MMO using 3.5 rules. I was just playing the ToEE the other day and was wondering how that would do in a MMO setting. I would definetly play it, but it would be a really niche game. About DDO, one of the things that bugs me about the game is the setting of Eberron. I do love their combat mechanics though. I also wish they would have chosen Greyhawk instead of Eberron and I'm so tired of seeing Forgotten Realms. Thanks R.A. Salvatore.
Surprisingly, I have found that once I've got into action combat in MMOs it's been difficult to go back to tab targeting. Mind you, I used to be pretty adamant about prefering tab targeting and felt action combat didn't belong in RPGs. But I have had a change of heart and really taken a liking to action combat. I still prefer the trinity though because I enjoy coordinated roles in dungeons. Now if someone could just make an action MMO with big seamless world combined with cool non-combat features they will have me for quite a long time.
I too would love to see a turn based tactical MMO using 3.5 rules. I was just playing the ToEE the other day and was wondering how that would do in a MMO setting. I would definetly play it, but it would be a really niche game. About DDO, one of the things that bugs me about the game is the setting of Eberron. I do love their combat mechanics though. I also wish they would have chosen Greyhawk instead of Eberron and I'm so tired of seeing Forgotten Realms. Thanks R.A. Salvatore.
Amen, Eberron is the worst part of DDO. A terrible setting. Though, Eberron has some unique things what we don't see in any other fantasy settings (necromancy obsessed elves & "barbarian" drow)
Greyhawk I'm neutral with, but I do still enjoy Forgotten Realms (The old one) and I absolutely love ToEE as a game. I'm so cheap that I would even be fine with a Neverwinter Nights-MMO, with just improved NwN 2 engine or anything.
Originally posted by AlBQuirky And this all comes back to "player skill" or knowledge vs. "character skill" or knowledge. Did you gain your knowledge from in game experience, or did you "google it" and learn outside of the game play? Did your characters know these facts, or you?Again, it is separation between "player" and character."
How do you make that distiction in a game like League of Legends?
That is silly. Are we talking about League of Legends? Does this NOT apply to that one, specific game? Is LoL even an RPG?
I brought it up because it has emphasis on both player skill and character skill - not only that, but character choice and items too. Whether LoL is an RPG is somewhat debatable, but it does have character development.If character abilities include many "immeasurable effects" (setting up a temporary impassable wall, short range blink etc.) - the effectiveness of that particular build is largely determined by how well that character is played. You cannot put a theoretical number on how powerful that character is. Still it is a character, and it gains levels and abilities throughout the match, but player skill has a strong effect on how that character performs.Oh, and it doesn't matter how you acquire your game knowledge: if you googled it, its fine - knowledge is knowledge.
Did you "create" your LoL character? Did you name it (them?) and build it?
The dividing line between tab targeting and action combat is the amount of player/character skill involved.
Why do you NOT like tab targeting? I believe it is because you don't have the amount of input you like, ie: player skill. I could be mistaken.
I dislike action combat because of the amount "player" skill required. This creates a dividing line. A black and white, as it may be. 2 preferences dictated by one aspect, player skill. Or character skill, if you would prefer.
I don't play games to be "the best." That is a lofty goal in a game of millions of players. I play them to have fun. When I break down games into numbers and abilities alone, the game loses its "shine" for me. I guess you could say I feel sometimes a little ignorance is bliss If a 2-handed sword does more damage than a dagger, I personally don't care. My thief type character will use the dagger. It is how I envision him. When I played my Ranger in GW2, I chose skills and abilities based on how they fit in with my concept of my character, not how they stood up to the other skills and abilities I did not choose. I am sorry I "gimped" myself in your eyes, but that is how *I* play games. Yes, I want to be good with my character, but there is a huge gap between "good" and "the best."
You can list any game and talk about the "gray area" it has with player/character skill, but it really has no bearing on a preferred play style, does it? Am I missing something here? Should I run out and download LoL because there is character skill involved? Is that what you're tying to say by bringing it up? I don't get it.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Originally posted by Metanol What I would like to see most would be turn-based combat, with D&D 3.5e rules (Usable under Open Game License), but since that would get "boring" (slow, even with time restrictions on turns - as in, slow for mass audience) and too hardcore for mainstream, it will never be a success and would prove to be too much hassle in an MMO.
Turn-based combat does not fit MMO. I don't even think it fits online gaming very well.However, i do like turned-based tactical RPG ... but only single player. I have yet to see it done well in multiplayer.
I agree with both here.
Wizard101 handled turn based combat very well, in my eyes. BUT... Every player was a magic user and you used spell decks, choosing 1 spell per turn to cast. There was no movement involved. I tried Pirate101 and with the addition of other kinds of combat and movement, it did not work so well, in my eyes. I have tried other turn based combat MMOs and felt the same as Pirate101. It was interesting, but fell very short.
I, like Metanol, prefer turn based combat. I do not know how it can be well implemented into an MMO setting. Time stoppage in any multi-player setting is tricky.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Originally posted by Metanol What I would like to see most would be turn-based combat, with D&D 3.5e rules (Usable under Open Game License), but since that would get "boring" (slow, even with time restrictions on turns - as in, slow for mass audience) and too hardcore for mainstream, it will never be a success and would prove to be too much hassle in an MMO.
Turn-based combat does not fit MMO. I don't even think it fits online gaming very well.
However, i do like turned-based tactical RPG ... but only single player. I have yet to see it done well in multiplayer.
I agree with both here.
Wizard101 handled turn based combat very well, in my eyes. BUT... Every player was a magic user and you used spell decks, choosing 1 spell per turn to cast. There was no movement involved. I tried Pirate101 and with the addition of other kinds of combat and movement, it did not work so well, in my eyes. I have tried other turn based combat MMOs and felt the same as Pirate101. It was interesting, but fell very short.
I, like Metanol, prefer turn based combat. I do not know how it can be well implemented into an MMO setting. Time stoppage in any multi-player setting is tricky.
Unless it is like speed chess where you are timed and if you do not select something it could do a default attack when the timer ended.
Originally posted by Metanol What I would like to see most would be turn-based combat, with D&D 3.5e rules (Usable under Open Game License), but since that would get "boring" (slow, even with time restrictions on turns - as in, slow for mass audience) and too hardcore for mainstream, it will never be a success and would prove to be too much hassle in an MMO.
Turn-based combat does not fit MMO. I don't even think it fits online gaming very well.
However, i do like turned-based tactical RPG ... but only single player. I have yet to see it done well in multiplayer.
Sadly I have mostly given up hope on MMOs, but to say that it does not fit into online gaming? What? You must be mad!
We've put hundreds of hours into Civilization IV and games like Age of Wonders: Shadow Magic or even Heroes of Might and Magic III. Of course those are all on a greater scale than what a tactical RPG would be, but the point remains the same. There's even thousands of people playing that warhammer Bloodbowl game even. We even play Arkham Horror online, turn based awesomeness.
Now some games what I mentioned above clearly aren't RPGs, of course not, but there's a larger market for turn-based goodness than people would believe. Look at that new XCOM, even though it was stripped of everything what made XCOM - X-COM earlier in the days, it was a major success.
None of those compare to the depth of character advancement/creation of D&D of course, so, as earlier mentioned, ToEE with multiplayer would've been a godsend. Now we are looking forward to Chaos Chronicles - which sadly will not launch with multiplayer... but there's hope of it being added into the game.
PS. I actually tried that HOMM mmo very briefly at it's beta. It had the combat nailed down pretty good, for heroes mechanics, that is. Of course it had a huge list of flaws and the community didn't seem to do it any good back then. Maybe I'll give it another go... check how the whole multiplayer stuff is done.
Originally posted by Horusra
Unless it is like speed chess where you are timed and if you do not select something it could do a default attack when the timer ended.
It dosn't even need such a strict system/timer, 30 seconds to a minute should be enough for -anyone- to take their turn in combat. Also, why skip the turn completely if you dont select anything, instead pass it to the next creature with highest initiative and move you to the end of the queue, if you still don't play when it comes back to you, default action should be like: Total defense.
Originally posted by Metanol What I would like to see most would be turn-based combat, with D&D 3.5e rules (Usable under Open Game License), but since that would get "boring" (slow, even with time restrictions on turns - as in, slow for mass audience) and too hardcore for mainstream, it will never be a success and would prove to be too much hassle in an MMO.
Turn-based combat does not fit MMO. I don't even think it fits online gaming very well.However, i do like turned-based tactical RPG ... but only single player. I have yet to see it done well in multiplayer.
I agree with both here.Wizard101 handled turn based combat very well, in my eyes. BUT... Every player was a magic user and you used spell decks, choosing 1 spell per turn to cast. There was no movement involved. I tried Pirate101 and with the addition of other kinds of combat and movement, it did not work so well, in my eyes. I have tried other turn based combat MMOs and felt the same as Pirate101. It was interesting, but fell very short.I, like Metanol, prefer turn based combat. I do not know how it can be well implemented into an MMO setting. Time stoppage in any multi-player setting is tricky.
Unless it is like speed chess where you are timed and if you do not select something it could do a default attack when the timer ended.
Wizard101 and Pirate101 had a 30 second timer. If a spell/action was not chosen in that time, your character did nothing that round. This was not always bad as spells and actions cost points and every round a player received 1 point, so saving a point for a higher costing action was part of the strategy.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Unless it is like speed chess where you are timed and if you do not select something it could do a default attack when the timer ended.
This ^^
If you set the time to be too short, some people may not have enough time to think & make their move. If the time is too long, it will be boring for some.
Originally posted by Horusra I do not like Action combat for a few reasons:1) prone to hacking2) tends to limit abilities due to movement control3) twitch base really means internet connection based
1 - all MMOs have hacking not just action MMOs
2 - Id rather have 10 universally useful abilities than 50 situational abilities
3 - tab target MMOs require low ping as well, kinda hard to interrupt a 2 second cast time when you 600ms latency
Originally posted by Horusra I do not like Action combat for a few reasons:1) prone to hacking2) tends to limit abilities due to movement control3) twitch base really means internet connection based
Very excellent points. To those here who say they have come to prefer action combat; I would say that is more a product of the deteriorating social element in MMOs.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon. In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
Originally posted by Horusra I do not like Action combat for a few reasons:
1) prone to hacking
2) tends to limit abilities due to movement control
3) twitch base really means internet connection based
Very excellent points. To those here who say they have come to prefer action combat; I would say that is more a product of the deteriorating social element in MMOs.
What does action combat have to do with how social or well designed a game is?
The reason we don't have successful action combat MMORPGs is because one hasn't been created with all the top-notch elements yet, not because action combat is incompatible with good MMORPGs.
Heck, if anything, the current state of MMORPG with action combat is a statement to how action combat can make games better. Pretty sure without the action combat no one would play games like Terra.
If action combat can make bad games good, then it can certainly make good games better.
To those here who say they have come to prefer action combat; I would say that is more a product of the deteriorating social element in MMOs.
Lol
That makes no sense whatsoever.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
Comments
same feelings
How about aiming?
In D3, Wiz has a "laser" type attack (sure, it is called a fantasy name), and it is extremely fun trying to line up mobs so you can laser as many as possible, and see all of them burn to a crisp.
Did that make sense?
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Action-combat all the way, ever after few years in Neocron, i never could really get into the tab-target button mashers again (MMOs) altho i played alot of them after NC
Saying "tab-targeting is more tactical" is just utter bull**** or those that claim so just suck at reticle/shooter style combat and try to turn the blame from themselves to a mechanic.
Being and MMO-vet since the mid 90's (and gaming vet since mid to late 80's) my conclusion on the subject is that action/reticle combat is much more satisfying on a 'rewarding experience' level, than a tab target / target lock button masher, where only things you need to consider is placing and resource management, where as action based games have all the previous topped with skill requirement of the actual targeting.
So! I certainly do not want everquest 2-like tab combat, nor do I want boring console-action combat (GW2 got some things right, but the lack of customization, choises and the casualization ruin it for me, not to mention the setting too...), so, I must cling to my memories of DDO. It has had the best MMO combat for me. A hybrid between "tab combat" and action combat.
DDO really shined with the following points:
First of all: A heavily modified ruleset of D&D (Which is, quite ironically, both a pro and a con. It lacks many tactical combat related things from P&P, but it's still better than anything else available, from my point of view.)
Second: It still uses D20 for every action. From attacking to taunting, sneaking and disabling traps. Fixed damage numbers are -rare-, instead everything is rolled.
Third: Action combat plays it's part in giving the player the ability to dodge projectiles (fireballs, arrows, ray spells) and forces the player to for example, take lead while firing projectiles. Many traps can also be avoided with deft footwork which is completely dependant on player skill. Sadly it does not feature friendly fire, but at least spells react to each other properly (webs are not suitable to be used with fire, unless you want to recast web after every fire spell...)
Fourth: Did I mention it's D&D? -Freedom-. Character customization. Multiclassing done the best way while keeping to a level-based system.
Now, I must admit that Witcher 2 like action combat (with that silly shield sign implemented properly) would be awesome, but I would certainly go for the hardcore approach of Mount & Blade too. No, not War of the Roses (M&B's bastard child) or Chivalry, but Mount & Blade: Warband.
We?re all dead, just say it.
I played WoW up until WotLK, played RoM for 2 years and now Rift.
I am F2P player. I support games when I feel they deserve my money and I want the items enough.
I don't troll, and I don't take kindly to trolls.
Yes. Tab-targetting itself does not make combat more or less actiony.
Another example is STO. In ship combat, you can tab target .. but facing is important (for example you need to keep enemy ships at your broadside if you go with a all phaser build). Thus, some skill to do maneuvers is important .. and that part feels a little actiony.
Turn-based combat does not fit MMO. I don't even think it fits online gaming very well.
However, i do like turned-based tactical RPG ... but only single player. I have yet to see it done well in multiplayer.
Once again a poll here reveals a suprising truth.
You would think the users here all hated tab target systems from the noise generated by the vocal yellers, but it seems it is actually a 50/50 split (with tab inching out in front).
Like Sub vs F2P poll that showed overwhelming supprt for the sub amongst the site users here, this result goes some way towards proving that the apparent feeling of the overall community can be... wrong.
I too would love to see a turn based tactical MMO using 3.5 rules. I was just playing the ToEE the other day and was wondering how that would do in a MMO setting. I would definetly play it, but it would be a really niche game. About DDO, one of the things that bugs me about the game is the setting of Eberron. I do love their combat mechanics though. I also wish they would have chosen Greyhawk instead of Eberron and I'm so tired of seeing Forgotten Realms. Thanks R.A. Salvatore.
"If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor
Amen, Eberron is the worst part of DDO. A terrible setting. Though, Eberron has some unique things what we don't see in any other fantasy settings (necromancy obsessed elves & "barbarian" drow)
Greyhawk I'm neutral with, but I do still enjoy Forgotten Realms (The old one) and I absolutely love ToEE as a game. I'm so cheap that I would even be fine with a Neverwinter Nights-MMO, with just improved NwN 2 engine or anything.
We?re all dead, just say it.
The dividing line between tab targeting and action combat is the amount of player/character skill involved.
Why do you NOT like tab targeting?
I believe it is because you don't have the amount of input you like, ie: player skill. I could be mistaken.
I dislike action combat because of the amount "player" skill required. This creates a dividing line. A black and white, as it may be. 2 preferences dictated by one aspect, player skill. Or character skill, if you would prefer.
I don't play games to be "the best." That is a lofty goal in a game of millions of players. I play them to have fun. When I break down games into numbers and abilities alone, the game loses its "shine" for me. I guess you could say I feel sometimes a little ignorance is bliss
If a 2-handed sword does more damage than a dagger, I personally don't care. My thief type character will use the dagger. It is how I envision him. When I played my Ranger in GW2, I chose skills and abilities based on how they fit in with my concept of my character, not how they stood up to the other skills and abilities I did not choose. I am sorry I "gimped" myself in your eyes, but that is how *I* play games. Yes, I want to be good with my character, but there is a huge gap between "good" and "the best."
You can list any game and talk about the "gray area" it has with player/character skill, but it really has no bearing on a preferred play style, does it? Am I missing something here? Should I run out and download LoL because there is character skill involved? Is that what you're tying to say by bringing it up? I don't get it.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
I do not like Action combat for a few reasons:
1) prone to hacking
2) tends to limit abilities due to movement control
3) twitch base really means internet connection based
Wizard101 handled turn based combat very well, in my eyes. BUT... Every player was a magic user and you used spell decks, choosing 1 spell per turn to cast. There was no movement involved. I tried Pirate101 and with the addition of other kinds of combat and movement, it did not work so well, in my eyes. I have tried other turn based combat MMOs and felt the same as Pirate101. It was interesting, but fell very short.
I, like Metanol, prefer turn based combat. I do not know how it can be well implemented into an MMO setting. Time stoppage in any multi-player setting is tricky.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Unless it is like speed chess where you are timed and if you do not select something it could do a default attack when the timer ended.
Sadly I have mostly given up hope on MMOs, but to say that it does not fit into online gaming? What? You must be mad!
We've put hundreds of hours into Civilization IV and games like Age of Wonders: Shadow Magic or even Heroes of Might and Magic III. Of course those are all on a greater scale than what a tactical RPG would be, but the point remains the same. There's even thousands of people playing that warhammer Bloodbowl game even. We even play Arkham Horror online, turn based awesomeness.
Now some games what I mentioned above clearly aren't RPGs, of course not, but there's a larger market for turn-based goodness than people would believe. Look at that new XCOM, even though it was stripped of everything what made XCOM - X-COM earlier in the days, it was a major success.
None of those compare to the depth of character advancement/creation of D&D of course, so, as earlier mentioned, ToEE with multiplayer would've been a godsend. Now we are looking forward to Chaos Chronicles - which sadly will not launch with multiplayer... but there's hope of it being added into the game.
PS. I actually tried that HOMM mmo very briefly at it's beta. It had the combat nailed down pretty good, for heroes mechanics, that is. Of course it had a huge list of flaws and the community didn't seem to do it any good back then. Maybe I'll give it another go... check how the whole multiplayer stuff is done.
It dosn't even need such a strict system/timer, 30 seconds to a minute should be enough for -anyone- to take their turn in combat. Also, why skip the turn completely if you dont select anything, instead pass it to the next creature with highest initiative and move you to the end of the queue, if you still don't play when it comes back to you, default action should be like: Total defense.
We?re all dead, just say it.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
This ^^
If you set the time to be too short, some people may not have enough time to think & make their move. If the time is too long, it will be boring for some.
2 - Id rather have 10 universally useful abilities than 50 situational abilities
3 - tab target MMOs require low ping as well, kinda hard to interrupt a 2 second cast time when you 600ms latency
Very excellent points.
To those here who say they have come to prefer action combat; I would say that is more a product of the deteriorating social element in MMOs.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
Web & Graphic Design - www.xdrac.com
What does action combat have to do with how social or well designed a game is?
The reason we don't have successful action combat MMORPGs is because one hasn't been created with all the top-notch elements yet, not because action combat is incompatible with good MMORPGs.
Heck, if anything, the current state of MMORPG with action combat is a statement to how action combat can make games better. Pretty sure without the action combat no one would play games like Terra.
If action combat can make bad games good, then it can certainly make good games better.
Lol
That makes no sense whatsoever.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
Face the target and hit it with a projectile. It isn't rocket science.
Are you a Pavlovian Fish Biscuit Addict? Get Help Now!
I will play no more MMORPGs until somethign good comes out!