Howdy, Stranger!

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

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

"The holy trinity came about because of primitive MMO AI. Vastly improved AI means a new dynamic is

13468917

Comments

  • wsmarwsmar Nashville, TNPosts: 122Member
    Originally posted by r0guy
    Originally posted by wsmar
    Originally posted by r0guy
    Originally posted by wsmar
    Originally posted by Aceshighhhh

    Brian Green of Storybricks tweeted this today:

    "The holy trinity came about because of primitive MMO AI. Vastly improved AI means a new dynamic is needed. Wait before you despair." 

     

    Before everyone touts GW2 references or cries about the end of the world, consider that the system SOE is building for EQN requires the removal of the holy trinity. Guild Wars 2 didn't have near the AI fidelity that EQN will have. Let's wait until we can actually see the system in context before making huge assumptions.

     

    I'd really like to know what will differentiate EQN from the "primitive" AI we've seen in the past.

     

    There is nothing more dynamic than PvP, and the trinity works wonders. I have a hard time understanding why they believe the trinity system is "primitive" because it was used in old games. That's like saying Quantum Mechanics is "primitive" because we discovered it back in the 20s, yet we are constantly finding new ways to use it.

     

    Can anyone honestly give a good counter response to that? I'd love to hear it. I'm not trying to sound cocky or arrogant, I'm actually very intrigued.

     

    I'll bite.

    What they've said so far about the AI is pretty darn different to what we've seen. The orcs not spawning in camps, but making choices about where they go depending on likes/dislikes is radical. But it's just words for now so I'll skip that point.

    In the MMOs I've played like WOW/SWTOR/WAR/EVE the PVP never relied on the trinity to work. So I'd love to know what you meant by that. Rogue/MAGE/Priest was almost always the best setup for 3V3 WoW arenas and i don't see a tank in it, for example.

    You guys seriously need to stop with the misquotes here, the devs never said it was primitive because it was old. There are lots of "old" things that'll still be in the the game.

    You honestly believe that these Orcs are actually going to have likes and dislikes? Apparently SOE has surpassed the AI the leading scientists in the world use when they try to create "smart" robots. It's programmed that way. Just like GW2's "dynamic" events were programmed to look "dynamic". The fact that the even use the word Artificial Intelligence continuely bothers me.

     

    You don't think WAR's PvP was dependent on the holy trinity? Are you serious? If that was truly the case, WAR would have been the ranged cluster fuck that GW2 was. That's silly. I'm talking about open world pvp, not instanced battlegrounds and scenarios. Even then, having a good healer, a good tank, and a good dps in PvP battlegrounds and scenarios made the world of difference.

     

    Errrm, this isn't Science fiction, this is 10 year old stuff at least. What's funny is that MMOs have been so far behind the curve that people actually think this is hard stuff to do. "Likes" and "dislikes" is a simplified term.

     

    Having an Orc AI, wandering off somewhere where there are X amount less guards but requires Y amount of players if Z amounts of orcs die in their current vicinity, isn't hard to do at all....

    Or if target didnt die after 5 minutes of hitting it, go for highest damage dealer if X, go for healer if Y or try your luck with low health target Z...

    As it is now, at least in wow, it's spot player > run to player coordinates > rotate given abilities.Without exagerating, this isn't even a step above Pacman ghosts...

     

    To your second point. Perhaps because examples from OW PVP are irrelevant? If we're talking trinity, we're talking dungeons and raids wich are closed, controlled environments just like battlegrounds and arenas. Unless I'm missing something?

     

    You pretty much answered my question the way I expected you too. What you described is not under any circumstances artificial intelligence. The program is basically shooting values through a function, and then based on what those values are determine where the orc goes. The Orc is not actually making an intelligent decision, it is merely going to the only places it is programmed to go to. That isn't AI. That word is misused in the gaming industry.

     

    If you think OW PvP is irrelevant then we can talk strictly about battlegrounds. Let me answer this differently then, since we are specifically talking about battlegrounds. No, the scenarios, and battlegrounds did not require the holy trinity per say to work, but if the point is to just make them work, then what's the point of making a game. Something that works doesn't necessarily equate to being fun. I personally along with many other people didn't enjoy GW2's battlegrounds at all. Unlike WAR's scenarios, your allies in GW2 couldn't aid you in the same effect. You might as well just be doing 1 v 1's in GW2 because there was no dependence on the rest of your team. At their core, every class was the same. I realize we are dealing with a different game and with limited knowledge of said game, but the possibility it still there.

     

     

  • grimjakkgrimjakk Tumwater, WAPosts: 192Member
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by whiteoak21

    well if i guess right in eqn maybe there will be taunt like many mmorpg but

    i don't think it will work against intelligent monster.

    if the ai is done correctly monsters will try to kill the healer first and the tank last

     

    That sounds like what he's hinting at, at least that's what I'd assume. If done right this could result in a better more strategic type of system. Instead of learning scripted behavior, we'll have to learn habitual behavior. Who does a goblin like to go after, what angers him, what stuns him etc...

     

    How predictable the AI becomes depends an awful lot on what the AI decision engine looks like under the hood.  I have no idea what algorithms Storybricks uses, but there are algorithms that can shift patterns over time. 

  • wsmarwsmar Nashville, TNPosts: 122Member
    Originally posted by Apraxis
    Originally posted by wsmar

    There's one statement that really sticks out to me though.  "We are saying that no one specific role or pair of roles is required in unlocking the strategy to defeating an encounter."

    That sounds exactly like something we've heard before from ANet. That is a scary statement. Even if we don't have the full trinity, I really hope there is a healing class. The fact that they'd make a statement like that though, almost makes it sound as if there isn't a healer.

     

    Maybe there are different variations of healers and that's why they were able to make that statement, I don't know. However, the whole point of the argument I'm trying to make is that they are being very careful with their words, and they are being very careful with the information they are releasing. I assume they are doing it for a reason. I'm trying to entertain the other side of the argument, because there is a possibility that it is there. We don't know anything for sure, and to bank on something now and get our hopes up later would be sad. People do it with every game.

    Truth is.. we don't know enough to make any assumptions. And yeap.. there could be different solutions for a target.. but all that does not mean that there is no healer. Like in DAoC it was entirely possible, and even effective in some circumstances to just run with Paladins. (the paladin in DAoC don't got a heal, but could trigger a healing aura.. small heal every 6 sec.)

    Or to use some Pets as Tank (Kabalist was very well known for that in DAoC). But as long as we have all thinkable roles (like healer, crowd control, and more) it is just an advantage to have more options. And we as player will have to find out works best.. and maybe it will come down to the god old trinity in most cases. But to assume it is like GW2 is really jumping to conclusion.

    I'm not saying there isn't a healer, I'm saying there is a possibility that there won't be. I was playing the devil's advocate. I get what you are saying, and I think there is one side that is better than the other. I just wouldn't rule it out. 

  • DullahanDullahan Posts: 2,053Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by Rydeson
     

    True.. but sometimes engineers just need to reinvent the wheel.. LOL   There are only two options, 1) controlled combat or 2) chaos (zerg).. I'm curious what their version of "controlled combat" is, since the insist and promise that it's not action zerg..

    Now wait, this is some very linear thinking here. I don't think it has to be so black and white. There are ways to handle Zerg without a trinity, yet it requires smarter AI. Zerging is essentially throwing yourself at a wall until you break through. Try that in a game with great AI though... You're in for a rude awakening.

    IF they pull off the AI they're advertising, there are a lot of ways Zerging could be discouraged. As well as a need for strategy. IF AI has behavior rather than scripts, you have something similar to what a trinity creates (mob control). Yet different motivations behind that control. It would also add a different type of acquired knowledge from an encounter. How does a mob react, rather than how is it scripted.

    You should think it through.

    This reason the combat system they are proposing is flawed from the start, is that all the classes occupy preexisting roles that do not comply with what they are purposing.  The fact that some classes are designed to take damage, and then are denied the role because "mobs are too smart", is a flawed premise for combat from the very beginning.  

    You now must make one of two decisions from your logic flowchart.  A) you must changes classes so that everyone is capable of taking a hit, or b) make combat all about twitch where everyone is either avoiding the mob when they have aggro, or zerging the mob.  Its just as simple as that.  There is no in between when you take threat management out of the picture, and introduce action combat.  The physically weaker, less armored classes simply have to keep moving (kiting) should they get aggro, because, by design they have less armor, lower hp and lower defensive skills.

    You see, you have to either throw out the entire preexisting class system so that every mob can take a hit (tank) regardless of their class or armor type (cloth robes), or you have to equip every class with abilities to evade being killed, while everyone else takes advantage of their aggro (zerg).

    Its just that simple.


  • grimjakkgrimjakk Tumwater, WAPosts: 192Member
    Originally posted by wsmar
    Originally posted by r0guy
    Originally posted by wsmar
    Originally posted by r0guy
    Originally posted by wsmar
    Originally posted by Aceshighhhh

    Brian Green of Storybricks tweeted this today:

    "The holy trinity came about because of primitive MMO AI. Vastly improved AI means a new dynamic is needed. Wait before you despair." 

     

    Before everyone touts GW2 references or cries about the end of the world, consider that the system SOE is building for EQN requires the removal of the holy trinity. Guild Wars 2 didn't have near the AI fidelity that EQN will have. Let's wait until we can actually see the system in context before making huge assumptions.

     

    I'd really like to know what will differentiate EQN from the "primitive" AI we've seen in the past.

     

    There is nothing more dynamic than PvP, and the trinity works wonders. I have a hard time understanding why they believe the trinity system is "primitive" because it was used in old games. That's like saying Quantum Mechanics is "primitive" because we discovered it back in the 20s, yet we are constantly finding new ways to use it.

     

    Can anyone honestly give a good counter response to that? I'd love to hear it. I'm not trying to sound cocky or arrogant, I'm actually very intrigued.

     

    I'll bite.

    What they've said so far about the AI is pretty darn different to what we've seen. The orcs not spawning in camps, but making choices about where they go depending on likes/dislikes is radical. But it's just words for now so I'll skip that point.

    In the MMOs I've played like WOW/SWTOR/WAR/EVE the PVP never relied on the trinity to work. So I'd love to know what you meant by that. Rogue/MAGE/Priest was almost always the best setup for 3V3 WoW arenas and i don't see a tank in it, for example.

    You guys seriously need to stop with the misquotes here, the devs never said it was primitive because it was old. There are lots of "old" things that'll still be in the the game.

    You honestly believe that these Orcs are actually going to have likes and dislikes? Apparently SOE has surpassed the AI the leading scientists in the world use when they try to create "smart" robots. It's programmed that way. Just like GW2's "dynamic" events were programmed to look "dynamic". The fact that the even use the word Artificial Intelligence continuely bothers me.

     

    You don't think WAR's PvP was dependent on the holy trinity? Are you serious? If that was truly the case, WAR would have been the ranged cluster fuck that GW2 was. That's silly. I'm talking about open world pvp, not instanced battlegrounds and scenarios. Even then, having a good healer, a good tank, and a good dps in PvP battlegrounds and scenarios made the world of difference.

     

    Errrm, this isn't Science fiction, this is 10 year old stuff at least. What's funny is that MMOs have been so far behind the curve that people actually think this is hard stuff to do. "Likes" and "dislikes" is a simplified term.

     

    Having an Orc AI, wandering off somewhere where there are X amount less guards but requires Y amount of players if Z amounts of orcs die in their current vicinity, isn't hard to do at all....

    Or if target didnt die after 5 minutes of hitting it, go for highest damage dealer if X, go for healer if Y or try your luck with low health target Z...

    As it is now, at least in wow, it's spot player > run to player coordinates > rotate given abilities.Without exagerating, this isn't even a step above Pacman ghosts...

     

    To your second point. Perhaps because examples from OW PVP are irrelevant? If we're talking trinity, we're talking dungeons and raids wich are closed, controlled environments just like battlegrounds and arenas. Unless I'm missing something?

     

    You pretty much answered my question the way I expected you too. What you described is not under any circumstances artificial intelligence. The program is basically shooting values through a function, and then based on what those values are determine where the orc goes. The Orc is not actually making an intelligent decision, it is merely going to the only places it is programmed to go to. That isn't AI. That word is misused in the gaming industry.

     

    If you think OW PvP is irrelevant then we can talk strictly about battlegrounds. Let me answer this differently then, since we are specifically talking about battlegrounds. No, the scenarios, and battlegrounds did not require the holy trinity per say to work, but if the point is to just make them work, then what's the point of making a game. Something that works doesn't necessarily equate to being fun. I personally along with many other people didn't enjoy GW2's battlegrounds at all. Unlike WAR's scenarios, your allies in GW2 couldn't aid you in the same effect. You might as well just be doing 1 v 1's in GW2 because there was no dependence on the rest of your team. At their core, every class was the same. I realize we are dealing with a different game and with limited knowledge of said game, but the possibility it still there.

     

     

     

    This is pretty much spot-on correct.  I'm no expert, but I've done decision tree and simple neural network programming in class, and a REAL 'intelligent agent' is something that has NOT EXISTED in any MMO outside of PvP. 

    Triggers and scripts only simulate an intelligent agent.

    And frankly, I can't wait to see how this all pans out.

  • PAL-18PAL-18 AnachronoxPosts: 802Member
    Originally posted by grimjakk

     

    This is pretty much spot-on correct.  I'm no expert, but I've done decision tree and simple neural network programming in class, and a REAL 'intelligent agent' is something that has NOT EXISTED in any MMO outside of PvP. 

    Triggers and scripts only simulate an intelligent agent.

    And frankly, I can't wait to see how this all pans out.

    Problem with this AI thing is.

    If i kick someone in the nuts ,he gets mad at me most likely and then  comes my friend who pulls one of his teeths out.

    He might get bit more mad to my friend.

    Or if i show The Ring to the Sauron and walk a way ,he might get bit mad at me.

    How are they going to explain that taunting doesnt exists.

     

     

    So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.
    By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
    **On the radar:http://cyberpunk.net/**

  • r0guyr0guy ParisPosts: 115Member
    Originally posted by wsmar
    Originally posted by r0guy
    Originally posted by wsmar
    Originally posted by r0guy
    Originally posted by wsmar
    Originally posted by Aceshighhhh

    Brian Green of Storybricks tweeted this today:

    "The holy trinity came about because of primitive MMO AI. Vastly improved AI means a new dynamic is needed. Wait before you despair." 

     

    Before everyone touts GW2 references or cries about the end of the world, consider that the system SOE is building for EQN requires the removal of the holy trinity. Guild Wars 2 didn't have near the AI fidelity that EQN will have. Let's wait until we can actually see the system in context before making huge assumptions.

     

    I'd really like to know what will differentiate EQN from the "primitive" AI we've seen in the past.

     

    There is nothing more dynamic than PvP, and the trinity works wonders. I have a hard time understanding why they believe the trinity system is "primitive" because it was used in old games. That's like saying Quantum Mechanics is "primitive" because we discovered it back in the 20s, yet we are constantly finding new ways to use it.

     

    Can anyone honestly give a good counter response to that? I'd love to hear it. I'm not trying to sound cocky or arrogant, I'm actually very intrigued.

     

    I'll bite.

    What they've said so far about the AI is pretty darn different to what we've seen. The orcs not spawning in camps, but making choices about where they go depending on likes/dislikes is radical. But it's just words for now so I'll skip that point.

    In the MMOs I've played like WOW/SWTOR/WAR/EVE the PVP never relied on the trinity to work. So I'd love to know what you meant by that. Rogue/MAGE/Priest was almost always the best setup for 3V3 WoW arenas and i don't see a tank in it, for example.

    You guys seriously need to stop with the misquotes here, the devs never said it was primitive because it was old. There are lots of "old" things that'll still be in the the game.

    You honestly believe that these Orcs are actually going to have likes and dislikes? Apparently SOE has surpassed the AI the leading scientists in the world use when they try to create "smart" robots. It's programmed that way. Just like GW2's "dynamic" events were programmed to look "dynamic". The fact that the even use the word Artificial Intelligence continuely bothers me.

     

    You don't think WAR's PvP was dependent on the holy trinity? Are you serious? If that was truly the case, WAR would have been the ranged cluster fuck that GW2 was. That's silly. I'm talking about open world pvp, not instanced battlegrounds and scenarios. Even then, having a good healer, a good tank, and a good dps in PvP battlegrounds and scenarios made the world of difference.

     

    Errrm, this isn't Science fiction, this is 10 year old stuff at least. What's funny is that MMOs have been so far behind the curve that people actually think this is hard stuff to do. "Likes" and "dislikes" is a simplified term.

     

    Having an Orc AI, wandering off somewhere where there are X amount less guards but requires Y amount of players if Z amounts of orcs die in their current vicinity, isn't hard to do at all....

    Or if target didnt die after 5 minutes of hitting it, go for highest damage dealer if X, go for healer if Y or try your luck with low health target Z...

    As it is now, at least in wow, it's spot player > run to player coordinates > rotate given abilities.Without exagerating, this isn't even a step above Pacman ghosts...

     

    To your second point. Perhaps because examples from OW PVP are irrelevant? If we're talking trinity, we're talking dungeons and raids wich are closed, controlled environments just like battlegrounds and arenas. Unless I'm missing something?

     

    You pretty much answered my question the way I expected you too. What you described is not under any circumstances artificial intelligence. The program is basically shooting values through a function, and then based on what those values are determine where the orc goes. The Orc is not actually making an intelligent decision, it is merely going to the only places it is programmed to go to. That isn't AI. That word is misused in the gaming industry.

     

    If you think OW PvP is irrelevant then we can talk strictly about battlegrounds. Let me answer this differently then, since we are specifically talking about battlegrounds. No, the scenarios, and battlegrounds did not require the holy trinity per say to work, but if the point is to just make them work, then what's the point of making a game. Something that works doesn't necessarily equate to being fun. I personally along with many other people didn't enjoy GW2's battlegrounds at all. Unlike WAR's scenarios, your allies in GW2 couldn't aid you in the same effect. You might as well just be doing 1 v 1's in GW2 because there was no dependence on the rest of your team.

     

     

    First paragraph:

    Semantics. Why ask what's different about the AI if you define it as non-existant in any game then? What was the point of your question? I thought you were asking how the way the NPCs are programmed changed the game, I answered. They act more like real creatures/people now.

     

    Moving on...

     

    Second paragraph:

    You said PVP was dependent on the trinity, I said it wasn't, and I gave an explanation. If you meant that pvp is more fun with the trinity, that's your opinion, I respect it and I have nothing to say to that.

    I have never played GW2, because i thought it looked terrible and chaotic from the videos i saw of it and I also love playing healers and when I heard that it didn't have any, I didn't bother. But just because another game was badly designed doesn't mean that the concept doesn't work, doesn't mean that it can in the future or that it hasn't worked somewhere else before.

    Like MOBAs for example. You get to heal, you get to tank, you can make up a full DPS team if you want and go all the way up into international championships with it. But you're not suddenly screwed if you're healer goes to bed, and you now have a variety of setups and strategies other than tank+healer+dps and only one viable strategy. Trinity setups are only there if you want them.

  • NephelaiNephelai SydneyPosts: 182Member Uncommon

    Ignoring human nature will fail or at least only attract a small following. If you throw 1000 people onto a desert island only a hand full will take initiative an lead, a few less will want to help coordinate and the rest of the mass will be happy to follow. This behavior runs thru everything in life including games and is what the holy trinity mirrors.

     

    Making it so "everyone" can do "everything" just goes against human nature and will only attract a small population. It doesn't even fit realistically. Imagine if I was that boss and I had five people attacking me what would I do? I would kill the high threat to my life first and then move on. I wouldn't stop or randomly change my target for no reason.

     

    Under the trinity system the boss or mobs attacking the "highest threat" to their life (albeit a mechanic) at least makes sense in the real world. I've said it before that tanks threat mechanic should be pure dps to make it even more realistic i.e tanks do the highest damage hence attract the most attention as that are the highest threat ot life. As a bonus would create more tanks.

     

     

     

  • AceshighhhhAceshighhhh Gainesville, FLPosts: 185Member
    Originally posted by Nephelai

    Ignoring human nature will fail or at least only attract a small following. If you throw 1000 people onto a desert island only a hand full will take initiative an lead, a few less will want to help coordinate and the rest of the mass will be happy to follow. This behavior runs thru everything in life including games and is what the holy trinity mirrors.

     

    Making it so "everyone" can do "everything" just goes against human nature and will only attract a small population. It doesn't even fit realistically. Imagine if I was that boss and I had five people attacking me what would I do? I would kill the high threat to my life first and then move on. I wouldn't stop or randomly change my target for no reason.

     

    Under the trinity system the boss or mobs attacking the "highest threat" to their life (albeit a mechanic) at least makes sense in the real world. I've said it before that tanks threat mechanic should be pure dps to make it even more realistic i.e tanks do the highest damage hence attract the most attention as that are the highest threat ot life. As a bonus would create more tanks. 

    EQN isn't getting rid of roles though, just the strict holy-trinity roles. They've stated multiple times in the SOE Live panels that they don't want to get rid of roles in EQN.

    The problem with the trinity system is that it just wouldn't work with the robust AI system they have in place. An intelligent mob won't just focus a single party member while 10 other guys are bashing it - that is predictable and primitive AI. Think of it like PvP, a real player will be constantly changing his targets based on his situation. Storybricks wants to make npc AI much more lifelike. Traditional threat/aggro mechanics just won't work in this game.

  • DullahanDullahan Posts: 2,053Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Aceshighhhh
    Originally posted by Nephelai

    Ignoring human nature will fail or at least only attract a small following. If you throw 1000 people onto a desert island only a hand full will take initiative an lead, a few less will want to help coordinate and the rest of the mass will be happy to follow. This behavior runs thru everything in life including games and is what the holy trinity mirrors.

     

    Making it so "everyone" can do "everything" just goes against human nature and will only attract a small population. It doesn't even fit realistically. Imagine if I was that boss and I had five people attacking me what would I do? I would kill the high threat to my life first and then move on. I wouldn't stop or randomly change my target for no reason.

     

    Under the trinity system the boss or mobs attacking the "highest threat" to their life (albeit a mechanic) at least makes sense in the real world. I've said it before that tanks threat mechanic should be pure dps to make it even more realistic i.e tanks do the highest damage hence attract the most attention as that are the highest threat ot life. As a bonus would create more tanks. 

    EQN isn't getting rid of roles though, just the strict holy-trinity roles. They've stated multiple times in the SOE Live panels that they don't want to get rid of roles in EQN.

    The problem with the trinity system is that it just wouldn't work with the robust AI system they have in place. An intelligent mob won't just focus a single party member while 10 other guys are bashing it - that is predictable and primitive AI. Think of it like PvP, a real player will be constantly changing his targets based on his situation. Storybricks wants to make npc AI much more lifelike. Traditional threat/aggro mechanics just won't work in this game.

    Yes, the new roles will dps.


  • kruluxkrulux Atlanta - South, GAPosts: 229Member

     

    For anyone that has read any of my post - clearly knows I am pro EQN - fanboi even.  That said, I think it would do everyone here in mmorpg land, and any that is actively following EQN a world of good to see the AI in action.

     

    SOE needs to make their next video/Q&A release about the AI exclusively. 

     

    I know would I love to see the AI in action... (so would the military, truth be told)  It would go a long ways toward easing our fears about how the new system works. 

     

  • HorusraHorusra maryland, MDPosts: 2,579Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Aceshighhhh
    Originally posted by Nephelai

    Ignoring human nature will fail or at least only attract a small following. If you throw 1000 people onto a desert island only a hand full will take initiative an lead, a few less will want to help coordinate and the rest of the mass will be happy to follow. This behavior runs thru everything in life including games and is what the holy trinity mirrors.

     

    Making it so "everyone" can do "everything" just goes against human nature and will only attract a small population. It doesn't even fit realistically. Imagine if I was that boss and I had five people attacking me what would I do? I would kill the high threat to my life first and then move on. I wouldn't stop or randomly change my target for no reason.

     

    Under the trinity system the boss or mobs attacking the "highest threat" to their life (albeit a mechanic) at least makes sense in the real world. I've said it before that tanks threat mechanic should be pure dps to make it even more realistic i.e tanks do the highest damage hence attract the most attention as that are the highest threat ot life. As a bonus would create more tanks. 

    EQN isn't getting rid of roles though, just the strict holy-trinity roles. They've stated multiple times in the SOE Live panels that they don't want to get rid of roles in EQN.

    The problem with the trinity system is that it just wouldn't work with the robust AI system they have in place. An intelligent mob won't just focus a single party member while 10 other guys are bashing it - that is predictable and primitive AI. Think of it like PvP, a real player will be constantly changing his targets based on his situation. Storybricks wants to make npc AI much more lifelike. Traditional threat/aggro mechanics just won't work in this game.

    Constantly changing targets is a good way to fail.  You do a little damage to everyone, but kill no one. 

  • IneveraskforthisIneveraskforthis Macros 7Posts: 374Member

    Big talk from SOE again

     

     

  • VentlusVentlus spanaway, WAPosts: 96Member
    Originally posted by Aceshighhhh
    Originally posted by Nephelai

    Ignoring human nature will fail or at least only attract a small following. If you throw 1000 people onto a desert island only a hand full will take initiative an lead, a few less will want to help coordinate and the rest of the mass will be happy to follow. This behavior runs thru everything in life including games and is what the holy trinity mirrors.

     

    Making it so "everyone" can do "everything" just goes against human nature and will only attract a small population. It doesn't even fit realistically. Imagine if I was that boss and I had five people attacking me what would I do? I would kill the high threat to my life first and then move on. I wouldn't stop or randomly change my target for no reason.

     

    Under the trinity system the boss or mobs attacking the "highest threat" to their life (albeit a mechanic) at least makes sense in the real world. I've said it before that tanks threat mechanic should be pure dps to make it even more realistic i.e tanks do the highest damage hence attract the most attention as that are the highest threat ot life. As a bonus would create more tanks. 

    EQN isn't getting rid of roles though, just the strict holy-trinity roles. They've stated multiple times in the SOE Live panels that they don't want to get rid of roles in EQN.

    The problem with the trinity system is that it just wouldn't work with the robust AI system they have in place. An intelligent mob won't just focus a single party member while 10 other guys are bashing it - that is predictable and primitive AI. Think of it like PvP, a real player will be constantly changing his targets based on his situation. Storybricks wants to make npc AI much more lifelike. Traditional threat/aggro mechanics just won't work in this game.

    sounds niffty and all but then you removed a role, a tank. If the boss is gonna jump around to everyone y bother building for full defense when you can just have a ton of dps/heal peeps and do some kiting etc. I just don't see the answer for that problem

    Basically say fuck everyone that enjoys tanking for people, and i just feel as if they would cater to more casual type fan, then those that want a challenge by forming raids if it is how it sounds but i guess i will find out 

  • TimothyTierlessTimothyTierless Columnist M, ORPosts: 2,163Member Uncommon

    Could swear it stared in pen and paper games...could also swear it made for co-dependent SOCIAL gameplay...

  • NephelaiNephelai SydneyPosts: 182Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Aceshighhhh

    EQN isn't getting rid of roles though, just the strict holy-trinity roles. They've stated multiple times in the SOE Live panels that they don't want to get rid of roles in EQN.

    The problem with the trinity system is that it just wouldn't work with the robust AI system they have in place. An intelligent mob won't just focus a single party member while 10 other guys are bashing it - that is predictable and primitive AI. Think of it like PvP, a real player will be constantly changing his targets based on his situation. Storybricks wants to make npc AI much more lifelike. Traditional threat/aggro mechanics just won't work in this game.

    Ok lets take a 1 v 5 PvP scenario. What would I do?

     

    First try to reduce the odds to my favor i.e cc some, based on threat to my life.

    Next, do something about the person damaging me the most because left unchecked I'm going to die quickly.  If that person is being healed and nullifying my actions then do something about that i.e kill or disable the healer

    Rinse and repeat x whatever necessary.

     

    PvP isnt complicated and it would be easy to make a boss do that and he would smash any group. Instead they make non trinity some randomised rule set to give players the "feel" that its dynamic. i.e they make the boss do dumb things.

     

     

  • VentlusVentlus spanaway, WAPosts: 96Member
    Originally posted by Nephelai
    Originally posted by Aceshighhhh

    EQN isn't getting rid of roles though, just the strict holy-trinity roles. They've stated multiple times in the SOE Live panels that they don't want to get rid of roles in EQN.

    The problem with the trinity system is that it just wouldn't work with the robust AI system they have in place. An intelligent mob won't just focus a single party member while 10 other guys are bashing it - that is predictable and primitive AI. Think of it like PvP, a real player will be constantly changing his targets based on his situation. Storybricks wants to make npc AI much more lifelike. Traditional threat/aggro mechanics just won't work in this game.

    Ok lets take a 1 v 5 PvP scenario. What would I do?

     

    First try to reduce the odds to my favor i.e cc some, based on threat to my life.

    Next, do something about the person damaging me the most because left unchecked I'm going to die quickly.  If that person is being healed and nullifying my actions then do something about that i.e kill or disable the healer

    Rinse and repeat x whatever necessary.

     

    PvP isnt complicated and it would be easy to make a boss do that and he would smash any group. Instead they make non trinity some randomised rule set to give players the "feel" that its dynamic. i.e they make the boss do dumb things.

     

     

    this is a pretty spot on example, this is what i don't see a non trinity system creating a fix for 

  • RydesonRydeson Canton, OHPosts: 3,858Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nephelai

    Ignoring human nature will fail or at least only attract a small following. If you throw 1000 people onto a desert island only a hand full will take initiative an lead, a few less will want to help coordinate and the rest of the mass will be happy to follow. This behavior runs thru everything in life including games and is what the holy trinity mirrors.

     

    Making it so "everyone" can do "everything" just goes against human nature and will only attract a small population. It doesn't even fit realistically. Imagine if I was that boss and I had five people attacking me what would I do? I would kill the high threat to my life first and then move on. I wouldn't stop or randomly change my target for no reason.

     

    Under the trinity system the boss or mobs attacking the "highest threat" to their life (albeit a mechanic) at least makes sense in the real world. I've said it before that tanks threat mechanic should be pure dps to make it even more realistic i.e tanks do the highest damage hence attract the most attention as that are the highest threat ot life. As a bonus would create more tanks.

    I could live with that reasoning..  The man stabbing me the most that is close to me gets MY attention..  His buddy might be throwing rocks at me, but in the heat of a fight, that man with the knife is my primary focus.. Range DPS would carry less threat, and other melee dps like a rogue has to select his attack moments.. Healers carry on as usual, no change..  And I really get tired hearing smart AI's.. Smart AI's should only apply to intelligent humanoids, not a pack of wolves or a bear.. I personally would like to see the trinity (role system) expanded to include  more CC, better buffing and debuffing.. and utility support

  • KiyorisKiyoris BejingPosts: 965Member Uncommon

    I don't know what to think anymore.

    I guess I am biased because I like trinity. But I have also noticed that very few action games work. They work in a console setting, not so much MMO setting, unless of course you are ok with MMO being Single Player Combo Fest.

    ]

  • VentlusVentlus spanaway, WAPosts: 96Member
    Originally posted by Rydeson
    Originally posted by Nephelai

    Ignoring human nature will fail or at least only attract a small following. If you throw 1000 people onto a desert island only a hand full will take initiative an lead, a few less will want to help coordinate and the rest of the mass will be happy to follow. This behavior runs thru everything in life including games and is what the holy trinity mirrors.

     

    Making it so "everyone" can do "everything" just goes against human nature and will only attract a small population. It doesn't even fit realistically. Imagine if I was that boss and I had five people attacking me what would I do? I would kill the high threat to my life first and then move on. I wouldn't stop or randomly change my target for no reason.

     

    Under the trinity system the boss or mobs attacking the "highest threat" to their life (albeit a mechanic) at least makes sense in the real world. I've said it before that tanks threat mechanic should be pure dps to make it even more realistic i.e tanks do the highest damage hence attract the most attention as that are the highest threat ot life. As a bonus would create more tanks.

    I could live with that reasoning..  The man stabbing me the most that is close to me gets MY attention..  His buddy might be throwing rocks at me, but in the heat of a fight, that man with the knife is my primary focus.. Range DPS would carry less threat, and other melee dps like a rogue has to select his attack moments.. Healers carry on as usual, no change..  And I really get tired hearing smart AI's.. Smart AI's should only apply to intelligent humanoids, not a pack of wolves or a bear.. I personally would like to see the trinity (role system) expanded to include  more CC, better buffing and debuffing.. and utility support

    They had that in FFXI :<, plenty of utility support 

  • AceshighhhhAceshighhhh Gainesville, FLPosts: 185Member
    Originally posted by Nephelai
    Originally posted by Aceshighhhh

    EQN isn't getting rid of roles though, just the strict holy-trinity roles. They've stated multiple times in the SOE Live panels that they don't want to get rid of roles in EQN.

    The problem with the trinity system is that it just wouldn't work with the robust AI system they have in place. An intelligent mob won't just focus a single party member while 10 other guys are bashing it - that is predictable and primitive AI. Think of it like PvP, a real player will be constantly changing his targets based on his situation. Storybricks wants to make npc AI much more lifelike. Traditional threat/aggro mechanics just won't work in this game.

    Ok lets take a 1 v 5 PvP scenario. What would I do?

     

    First try to reduce the odds to my favor i.e cc some, based on threat to my life.

    Next, do something about the person damaging me the most because left unchecked I'm going to die quickly.  If that person is being healed and nullifying my actions then do something about that i.e kill or disable the healer

    Rinse and repeat x whatever necessary.

     

    PvP isnt complicated and it would be easy to make a boss do that and he would smash any group. Instead they make non trinity some randomised rule set to give players the "feel" that its dynamic. i.e they make the boss do dumb things.

     

     

    What you described sounds like a much more interesting mechanic than traditional tank-heal-dps roles. You're making assumptions that these sort of encounters would only "smash groups" but how do we know that? I'm sure SOE is quite capable of designing intelligent mob encounters that are very possible to take down, you and many people seem to be stuck in the traditional mindset of only one design.

    We haven't seen this design in context so we don't know how well it will work.

  • wsmarwsmar Nashville, TNPosts: 122Member
    Originally posted by r0guy
    Originally posted by wsmar
    Originally posted by r0guy
    Originally posted by wsmar
    Originally posted by r0guy
    Originally posted by wsmar
    Originally posted by Aceshighhhh

    Brian Green of Storybricks tweeted this today:

    "The holy trinity came about because of primitive MMO AI. Vastly improved AI means a new dynamic is needed. Wait before you despair." 

     

    Before everyone touts GW2 references or cries about the end of the world, consider that the system SOE is building for EQN requires the removal of the holy trinity. Guild Wars 2 didn't have near the AI fidelity that EQN will have. Let's wait until we can actually see the system in context before making huge assumptions.

     

    I'd really like to know what will differentiate EQN from the "primitive" AI we've seen in the past.

     

    There is nothing more dynamic than PvP, and the trinity works wonders. I have a hard time understanding why they believe the trinity system is "primitive" because it was used in old games. That's like saying Quantum Mechanics is "primitive" because we discovered it back in the 20s, yet we are constantly finding new ways to use it.

     

    Can anyone honestly give a good counter response to that? I'd love to hear it. I'm not trying to sound cocky or arrogant, I'm actually very intrigued.

     

    I'll bite.

    What they've said so far about the AI is pretty darn different to what we've seen. The orcs not spawning in camps, but making choices about where they go depending on likes/dislikes is radical. But it's just words for now so I'll skip that point.

    In the MMOs I've played like WOW/SWTOR/WAR/EVE the PVP never relied on the trinity to work. So I'd love to know what you meant by that. Rogue/MAGE/Priest was almost always the best setup for 3V3 WoW arenas and i don't see a tank in it, for example.

    You guys seriously need to stop with the misquotes here, the devs never said it was primitive because it was old. There are lots of "old" things that'll still be in the the game.

    You honestly believe that these Orcs are actually going to have likes and dislikes? Apparently SOE has surpassed the AI the leading scientists in the world use when they try to create "smart" robots. It's programmed that way. Just like GW2's "dynamic" events were programmed to look "dynamic". The fact that the even use the word Artificial Intelligence continuely bothers me.

     

    You don't think WAR's PvP was dependent on the holy trinity? Are you serious? If that was truly the case, WAR would have been the ranged cluster fuck that GW2 was. That's silly. I'm talking about open world pvp, not instanced battlegrounds and scenarios. Even then, having a good healer, a good tank, and a good dps in PvP battlegrounds and scenarios made the world of difference.

     

    Errrm, this isn't Science fiction, this is 10 year old stuff at least. What's funny is that MMOs have been so far behind the curve that people actually think this is hard stuff to do. "Likes" and "dislikes" is a simplified term.

     

    Having an Orc AI, wandering off somewhere where there are X amount less guards but requires Y amount of players if Z amounts of orcs die in their current vicinity, isn't hard to do at all....

    Or if target didnt die after 5 minutes of hitting it, go for highest damage dealer if X, go for healer if Y or try your luck with low health target Z...

    As it is now, at least in wow, it's spot player > run to player coordinates > rotate given abilities.Without exagerating, this isn't even a step above Pacman ghosts...

     

    To your second point. Perhaps because examples from OW PVP are irrelevant? If we're talking trinity, we're talking dungeons and raids wich are closed, controlled environments just like battlegrounds and arenas. Unless I'm missing something?

     

    You pretty much answered my question the way I expected you too. What you described is not under any circumstances artificial intelligence. The program is basically shooting values through a function, and then based on what those values are determine where the orc goes. The Orc is not actually making an intelligent decision, it is merely going to the only places it is programmed to go to. That isn't AI. That word is misused in the gaming industry.

     

    If you think OW PvP is irrelevant then we can talk strictly about battlegrounds. Let me answer this differently then, since we are specifically talking about battlegrounds. No, the scenarios, and battlegrounds did not require the holy trinity per say to work, but if the point is to just make them work, then what's the point of making a game. Something that works doesn't necessarily equate to being fun. I personally along with many other people didn't enjoy GW2's battlegrounds at all. Unlike WAR's scenarios, your allies in GW2 couldn't aid you in the same effect. You might as well just be doing 1 v 1's in GW2 because there was no dependence on the rest of your team.

     

     

    First paragraph:

    Semantics. Why ask what's different about the AI if you define it as non-existant in any game then? What was the point of your question? I thought you were asking how the way the NPCs are programmed changed the game, I answered. They act more like real creatures/people now.

     

    Moving on...

     

    Second paragraph:

    You said PVP was dependent on the trinity, I said it wasn't, and I gave an explanation. If you meant that pvp is more fun with the trinity, that's your opinion, I respect it and I have nothing to say to that.

    I have never played GW2, because i thought it looked terrible and chaotic from the videos i saw of it and I also love playing healers and when I heard that it didn't have any, I didn't bother. But just because another game was badly designed doesn't mean that the concept doesn't work, doesn't mean that it can in the future or that it hasn't worked somewhere else before.

    Like MOBAs for example. You get to heal, you get to tank, you can make up a full DPS team if you want and go all the way up into international championships with it. But you're not suddenly screwed if you're healer goes to bed, and you now have a variety of setups and strategies other than tank+healer+dps and only one viable strategy. Trinity setups are only there if you want them.

    I was questioning why they considered it "primitive" or in other words any different from what they are doing now. You answered my question, and I responded by saying that isn't AI. The point I was making is that they are saying it is "primitive" because it was used in older games or games that came before it. I think at this point based on the statements you made, that validated what I was saying. Nothing drastic has actually happened. It is the same old same old. If you want to call it an argument of semantics be my guest, even though that is definitely debateable, I was merely wondering what differentiated it from its "primitive" counterparts. Obviously not very much in the artificial intelligence department. It should be called game design.

     

    In order for the PvP battlegrounds to work as intended in the games you mentioned, having the trinity present works wonders. Obviously, that isn't always the case, the trinity isn't always present. However, it does change the experience. It didn't make the battles as long for instance because when you died, you respawned, instead of getting rezzed or healed. So battles would become more fragmented, which can clearly be seen often in GW2. You are right, as I stated earlier, the trinity doesn't have to be present for you to be able to play in a battleground. Not only that, but when there isn't any kind of class synergy, something that the holy trinity brings to the table, people tend to not work in a group. People solo more, even in PvP battlegrounds. It is not always the most intelligent choice to stick with your allies because they can't do that much for you in the sense of heals or buffs. It is up to you to decide whether that works or not. In my opinion it doesn't but that's just me. This can be applied to games that do have the holy trinity as well. When a healer or a dps or a tank isn't present in a battleground the balance is gone, and relying on oneself becomes more important. It still functions, but that doesn't mean it works as intended.

     

    I could even go on about WAR's RvR and why it wouldn't have worked if the holy trinity wasn't there. That isn't really open world PvP because you can only PvP within the boundaries of the PvP area.

     

    As I said earlier, I'm drawing from the fact that GW2 didn't have the trinity as well as roleless classes. I don't know what EQN will be like, for all I know they will have dedicated healers, but I don't. However, I do know that there hasn't been a game without the holy trinity that has had successful battlegrounds where balance is a key issue.

  • VoqarVoqar Phoenix, AZPosts: 498Member

    Disagree.

     

    Without trinity you have a bunch of soloists sharing space doing low grade whatever.

     

    Structured grouping = good.

     

    Soloists sharing a chat channel and location = lame.

    Premium MMORPGs do not feature built-in cheating via cash for gold pay 2 win. PLAY to win or don't play.

  • DemalisDemalis Drumheller, ABPosts: 134Member
    Originally posted by ste2000
    Originally posted by Foomerang

    I thought Holy Trinity came about because people enjoyed specialized roles in a group. Maybe thats not why it came about, but I think thats a big reason why it has stuck around for so long.

    It came about because of the RPG games (damn them!), I blame Baldurs Gate.

    Yes RPG, ROLE playing games, where a player plays a frikking ROLE!

    Players like to play Roles, that's why they play RPGs and MMORPGs

    But don't tell Arenanet and SoE devs, they might not cope with the news!

    I blame d&d, ad&d, robotech, tmnt, vampire the masquerade, call of cathulu, paranoid, rifts, marvel universe etc. etc. I am sure I played more of them just not at the top of my head. Just imagine if they made a call of cathulu MMORPG, I had a character who would have panic attacks at the site of blood from casting the clutch of nygotha spell to many times lmfao. Good times.

  • ElRenmazuoElRenmazuo Alexandria, VAPosts: 4,546Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by CalmOceans

    The thing that is primitive is action combat.

    It allows for no pulling, it has inferior CC, inferior tanking, inferior healing. The whole "action combat" is flawed from the get go. It also results in a lack of community and lack of interdependence.

    And unless you have a brilliant solution that doesn't result in a zergfest, please for love of God stick to Holy Trinity which has stood the test of time.

     

    So far, you've shown a combat video of a warrior zerging, more primitive gameplay and AI than I have ever seen in any MMO on the market.

     

    On the one hand you claim you don't want to see guilds or groups fall apart because they lose an essential element in the trinity. That is the point....the interdepence is what makes trinity combat so strong. The depence on groups, on tanks, on healers, on CC, on pullers is the point of the trinity systems. They create the challenging content, they create the dependency, they create the community.

     

    Action MMO have never managed to surpass Street Fighter on crack gameplay. So much for that "advanced AI"

    The current action mmos still use the same primitive AI thats in trinity based games, which is threat dependent.  In GW2 the mobs still attack the ones with the most threat which is still determined by whos doing the most damage or doing the most healing, its still no different from a trinity system.  Smart AI is when the mobs attack based on whats more strategic to their long term survival and what can they do with their abilities to make that happen all based on what kind of enemy(s) and surrounding environment.

    And there are mmos with action combat and smart AI that doesnt end up in zerg fest coming out like the Division for example.  GW2s mistake is that it was trying to be half and half. Theres lots of team work going on in that gameplay video against the AI.

     

13468917
Sign In or Register to comment.