I believe that crowd control and support will take a much bigger role in eqn. Because of the way the AI works and the way the environments can be manipulated players will need to use more strategy than they have traditionally. AI works? What we'll see is random chaos, or a predictable code.. I seriously doubt SOE will allow random chaos, because it will cause too much havoc.. I suspect we'll see predictable code that will be discovered and used against the mobs like ALL combat in the past to the current date..
They're using a new AI called Storybricks. Maybe do some research before you bash it. As for combat being chaotic, um...good. The last thing we need is yet another MMO where the combat resembles doing the hokey pokey more than it does actual combat. People need to learn to think on their feet again in MMO's. This reminds me of when they introduced Incursions in EVE and all of the mission runners took their nice shiny expensive ships in and promptly got melted. Man the whining on the forums was a sight to behold. The players who were successfull had learned to adapt and soon people were making bank on those missions. Even still that new AI was not on the level of Storybricks and I'm looking forward to seeing what it's capable of.
Want to protect the squishes from damage, put up a wall of stone between your group and the mob If the mob can't attack us, we can't attack him either thru that stone wall..so now what? Umm use your brain. Maybe there's another Mob you can still see. Attack him instead? Or maybe the mobs you just los LOS on are now healing their comrades or have started attacking the wall to remove it and have your warrior attack any mobs that get through, So we are back to the tank tanking again.. lol Maybe I should have said warrior instead as that is really what I meant big bad melee mob heading for your caster, move your caster up off the ground and out of melee range. and if indeed something crazy like that should happen, players will just use the "levitate" kill method.. all you have done here is replace ONE method of control for another.. now what? Now maybe the big bad mob starts throwing giant boulders at you, or maybe it has a leap ability like the warrior.
That sounds a hell of a lot more interesting than: tank taunts mobs healer heals tank, dps kills mobs.
Without roles, and methods of control, all we'll end up with is mass chaotic zerfest where everyone is a tank,dps,CC, and healer wrapped in one.. Sorta like GW2..
The problem now is that most people can't think outside the box.
I believe that crowd control and support will take a much bigger role in eqn. Because of the way the AI works and the way the environments can be manipulated players will need to use more strategy than they have traditionally. AI works? What we'll see is random chaos, or a predictable code.. I seriously doubt SOE will allow random chaos, because it will cause too much havoc.. I suspect we'll see predictable code that will be discovered and used against the mobs like ALL combat in the past to the current date..
They're using a new AI called Storybricks. Maybe do some research before you bash it. As for combat being chaotic, um...good. The last thing we need is yet another MMO where the combat resembles doing the hokey pokey more than it does actual combat. People need to learn to think on their feet again in MMO's. This reminds me of when they introduced Incursions in EVE and all of the mission runners took their nice shiny expensive ships in and promptly got melted. Man the whining on the forums was a sight to behold. The players who were successfull had learned to adapt and soon people were making bank on those missions. Even still that new AI was not on the level of Storybricks and I'm looking forward to seeing what it's capable of.
Want to protect the squishes from damage, put up a wall of stone between your group and the mob If the mob can't attack us, we can't attack him either thru that stone wall..so now what? Umm use your brain. Maybe there's another Mob you can still see. Attack him instead? Or maybe the mobs you just los LOS on are now healing their comrades or have started attacking the wall to remove it and have your warrior attack any mobs that get through, So we are back to the tank tanking again.. lol Maybe I should have said warrior instead as that is really what I meant big bad melee mob heading for your caster, move your caster up off the ground and out of melee range. and if indeed something crazy like that should happen, players will just use the "levitate" kill method.. all you have done here is replace ONE method of control for another.. now what? Now maybe the big bad mob starts throwing giant boulders at you, or maybe it has a leap ability like the warrior.
That sounds a hell of a lot more interesting than: tank taunts mobs healer heals tank, dps kills mobs.
Without roles, and methods of control, all we'll end up with is mass chaotic zerfest where everyone is a tank,dps,CC, and healer wrapped in one.. Sorta like GW2..
The problem now is that most people can't think outside the box.
From what I read, "Storybricks" has nothing to do with combat AI.. Storybricks is the AI that controls where and when mobs spawn and move within the area, and how they interact.. Combat AI is a different code all together.. Not sure why so many have a hard time understanding program code.. Code is CODE.. You will either get a random action, or you will get a pre-coded action from the mob.. NOTHING new to see here.. This has been the way combat has been since the 90's.. Storybricks is NOT some new combat AI program.. FYI.. Incase you haven't kept up..
Well, looks like EQN will be another game that's cool to hate.
"As you read these words, a release is seven days or less away or has just happened within the last seven days those are now the only two states youll find the world of Tyria."...Guild Wars 2
Not sure why so many have a hard time understanding program code.. Code is CODE.. You will either get a random action, or you will get a pre-coded action from the mob..
From a pure coding perspective you won't ever get a random action. You will only ever get a pre-coded action. There's no magical random function in a computer, it's just a pre-coded algorithm like any other. It just happens to be extraordinarily difficult to predict.
Now, from a more abstracted perspective there's a vast array of possible AI implementations that's anything but as simple as you claim it to be. And these possibilities are only expanding. Combat AI most definitely isn't what it used to be in the 90s. It's nowhere near the level of even the simplest player, but your assessment is simply wrong from either perspective.
We are the bunny. Resistance is futile. ''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\ ( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o) (")("),,(")("),(")(")
Not sure why so many have a hard time understanding program code.. Code is CODE.. You will either get a random action, or you will get a pre-coded action from the mob..
From a pure coding perspective you won't ever get a random action. You will only ever get a pre-coded action. There's no magical random function in a computer, it's just a pre-coded algorithm like any other. It just happens to be extraordinarily difficult to predict.
Now, from a more abstracted perspective there's a vast array of possible AI implementations that's anything but as simple as you claim it to be. And these possibilities are only expanding. Combat AI most definitely isn't what it used to be in the 90s. It's nowhere near the level of even the simplest player, but your assessment is simply wrong from either perspective.
I think you missed the point.. OR you were just looking for a reason to argue.. What I refer to as code is the predictability of the outcome.. One of two things will always happen in combat AI.. The AI will either randomly choose an action and/or target, or will follow a scripted code resulting into a defined outcome.. Generally speaking PvE players do not like random chaos, and when such chaos does occur it normally results into Zergfest like GW2.. If one or a group of people can not control the the actions or outcome of the fights, PvE players will just simply resort to OUTNUMBER the enemy and zerg it.. Problem solved..
For any devs to imply they have some smart AI is just false.. And I have yet to find any game where the combat AI isn't exposed and figured out.. EVERY single raid boss in every game I've played has had the most complex dance.. BUT it doesn't take long before the dance is learned and repeated.. That is combat AI in a nutshell..
Roles still exist and they've made that clear. Seems many can't get around their comments of "no dedicated tanks or healers" and can't fathom any other way to play a game. To me they were talking about how those roles have performed, not about the roles themselves. No taunt spam or heal ui mini-game. Having XYZ isn't needed 100% of the time. Doesn't mean certain encounters won't benefit from having a tank-healer combo, but others might not need them at all.
In other words, a zergfest in the making.
We didn't need another MMO to show us that, just hop into your first WoW dungeon to see that chaos in real time!
1. Hunter rushes in with his tank pet before the tank.
2. Refuses to turn off the pet's growl.
3. Caster DPS (i.e., Shadow DPS, you know the suppose to be fake healer) pulling the room will wildly aimed DoTs, without the DPS to down then, that the tank can't hold, as the hunter's pet is growling enough to hold ALL aggro including the Arcane mage who can't even draw aggro off that turtle-from-hell. Then the fake healer can't heal, and the whole dungeon group dies!
Roles still exist and they've made that clear. Seems many can't get around their comments of "no dedicated tanks or healers" and can't fathom any other way to play a game. To me they were talking about how those roles have performed, not about the roles themselves. No taunt spam or heal ui mini-game. Having XYZ isn't needed 100% of the time. Doesn't mean certain encounters won't benefit from having a tank-healer combo, but others might not need them at all.
In other words, a zergfest in the making.
We didn't need another MMO to show us that, just hop into your first WoW dungeon to see that chaos in real time!
1. Hunter rushes in with his tank pet before the tank.
2. Refuses to turn off the pet's growl.
3. Caster DPS (i.e., Shadow DPS, you know the suppose to be fake healer) pulling the room will wildly aimed DoTs, without the DPS to down then, that the tank can't hold, as the hunter's pet is growling enough to hold ALL aggro including the Arcane mage who can't even draw aggro off that turtle-from-hell. Then the fake healer can't heal, and the whole dungeon group dies!
I find it funny that essentially what people are arguing for here is the continuation of stupid AI. In order for the classic trinity to work, every single enemy you fight has to be really, really dumb. Wouldn't making a feature in a game more advanced generally be considered a good thing, even if making it more advanced necessitates changing some other systems in order to work with the new setup? Shouldn't the design of an RPG be more focused on building a believable world than on artificial constraints designed to try to force players to engage in certain activities or do things in a certain way, without regard to whether it actually make sense within the game's world?
Personally, if EQN can provide us with decent AI, I don't care how much that screws up the roles people traditionally like to use in combat, because the new roles that form will be better roles, more fitting to the setting of the game. The mechanics should be tailored to fit the narrative reality, not the narrative reality either tailored to fit the mechanics or ignored by them completely.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
Roles still exist and they've made that clear. Seems many can't get around their comments of "no dedicated tanks or healers" and can't fathom any other way to play a game. To me they were talking about how those roles have performed, not about the roles themselves. No taunt spam or heal ui mini-game. Having XYZ isn't needed 100% of the time. Doesn't mean certain encounters won't benefit from having a tank-healer combo, but others might not need them at all.
In other words, a zergfest in the making.
We didn't need another MMO to show us that, just hop into your first WoW dungeon to see that chaos in real time!
1. Hunter rushes in with his tank pet before the tank.
2. Refuses to turn off the pet's growl.
3. Caster DPS (i.e., Shadow DPS, you know the suppose to be fake healer) pulling the room will wildly aimed DoTs, without the DPS to down then, that the tank can't hold, as the hunter's pet is growling enough to hold ALL aggro including the Arcane mage who can't even draw aggro off that turtle-from-hell. Then the fake healer can't heal, and the whole dungeon group dies!
Been there.
Saw that.
Got the T-shirt.
4 years-ago.
As someone said above, obviously some can't think outside the box.
Combat doesn't have to be strict trinity no deviation or mindless zerging. There are options that have not been used or at least not done well due to AI and game mechanics of the past.
You describe a situation that calls for XYZ and ABC show up and fail. No duh.
From my understanding of what they are going for is that an encounter may strongly benefit from XYZ, but XNF or YUR might work, just a bit trickier. In games like WoW (at least early version) if you showed up with the right classes/builds/gear, memorized the pattern, and didn't screw up, it was a almost sure victory. Challenge goes away very quickly.
If the AI isn't static and have variation, it isn't as easy to memorize and be prepared at all times. Here comes multi-classing. The devs have said that people are free to try with any class/build, but they might get owned. Might have to get more people, might have to try new classes/builds/gear, but it is a learning process.
We all have different definitions, but for me a zerg = mindless dps. Simply outnumber the enemy. This works when it is 1 huge mob or some semi-manageable group. DG mentioned "thousands" of Orcs in one example. Mobs will be zerging the players. Stop expecting the game to be a clone of the past.
The group you described might die horribly to the Orc Chief, but might be the best make up vs the Giant King. There being options is what will hopefully come of EQN's system. Not "having" to have the same make up for 95% of combat.
Maybe a "zerg" is needed, maybe only a small group. Variation is key, not the same crap over and over that has been done to death. Maybe a area is attacked by 5 dragons at once, maybe you and your 4 closest friends can't put on your best gear and own them in a instance. Maybe the whole server will need to take them down.
From what I read, "Storybricks" has nothing to do with combat AI.. Storybricks is the AI that controls where and when mobs spawn and move within the area, and how they interact.. Combat AI is a different code all together..
Not sure why so many have a hard time understanding program code.. Code is CODE.. You will either get a random action, or you will get a pre-coded action from the mob.. NOTHING new to see here..
Obviously, you like many others are making your conclusions without the full picture. While none of us know what EQN will really be like, stating "facts" without any proof is silly.
While code and AI is not going to duplicate "intelligence" there can be a huge scale of difficulty and challenge built in. Tier 1 mobs may have 5 standard attacks, Tier 5 mobs might have 25 to choose from. Who knows. Along with Storybricks, mobs might not only have 50+ abilities on their skill bar, they might also protect-heal-coordinate with one another. You can only "predict" aka google how to do an encounter when someone else has done it before, if the encounter has 100 outcomes, good luck with that.
Again, we have no clue what Storybricks along with SOE is capable of. So far all SOE has said has been pretty spot on. Their claims about Landmark have been accurate. You are free to call their bluff, call it hype, nothing new, smoke up our.... but until we see something else, I'll at least give them the benefit of the doubt.
Doubt is always easier then faith, but it is what it is. Simply saying "that's not possible" or "it's the same old thing" at this point is incorrect. If they don't deliver, well then they don't. But I have a hard time calling someone a liar until they've been given the chance to prove themselves. They've made it a point to say that they aren't coating everything in rainbows to make it better than what it is, they claim that the AI is capable of things we haven't seen before.
For any devs to imply they have some smart AI is just false.. And I have yet to find any game where the combat AI isn't exposed and figured out.. EVERY single raid boss in every game I've played has had the most complex dance.. BUT it doesn't take long before the dance is learned and repeated.. That is combat AI in a nutshell..
So if something has never been done before it isn't possible? Great logic there...
No offense, but you really have a closed view. You make the assumption that EQN = every other game. That "raiding" or general PVE will be just like every other game. Not saying EQN's system will be so next gen that it won't have a pattern, but if it even is a baby step beyond what we've had for 15+ years, it is a step in the right direction.
They scrapped the game multiple times for a reason, they don't want to be that game. Players obviously like grinding and instancing (WoW is pretty damn popular), doesn't mean they have to copy it. Heck GW2 is popular, guess people like zerging to.
They've said they are making a game they want to play, they are gamers as well. People need help knowing what they like sometimes.
You're right about the dance, but I think of it like music. Most games play the same tune. Hopefully EQN is like Jazz. Not that I'm a big Jazz fan, but it can be freeform, take it where you want it to go. You might learn some songs, but a lot of it only lives in a certain time and moment to not be repeated.
I find it funny that essentially what people are arguing for here is the continuation of stupid AI. In order for the classic trinity to work, every single enemy you fight has to be really, really dumb. Wouldn't making a feature in a game more advanced generally be considered a good thing, even if making it more advanced necessitates changing some other systems in order to work with the new setup? Shouldn't the design of an RPG be more focused on building a believable world than on artificial constraints designed to try to force players to engage in certain activities or do things in a certain way, without regard to whether it actually make sense within the game's world?
Personally, if EQN can provide us with decent AI, I don't care how much that screws up the roles people traditionally like to use in combat, because the new roles that form will be better roles, more fitting to the setting of the game. The mechanics should be tailored to fit the narrative reality, not the narrative reality either tailored to fit the mechanics or ignored by them completely.
I think some just can wrap their heads around anything besides what they've known. Might be they can't handle change, more challenge, or having to think for themselves, but it seems silly to want the same old thing when we've seen how those games end up.
Freedom can be scary. "What? I can pick whatever class I want, build and gear it how I want and use it freely?" lol
Some need to be told that they have to choose a class, choose a build, choose gear and then use it exactly the right way for a particular situation. On day one of most games, most people are set on a path that has very little choice or consequence involved.
I wish games like Pantheon would pick up and give them all somewhere to go. Grind and do the same thing forever.
I've seen many people against PVP say they don't like it because they aren't good at it. Makes complete sense, but at least they admit it instead throwing PVP and those that like it all into some mouth breathing, ganking, immature group.
If people only enjoy and feel comfortable being told exactly what to do and following the "how to guide" to play effectively, and knowing that if they show up with XYZ, they win, good for them. Just hope EQN doesn't cater to them mainly.
I think you missed the point.. OR you were just looking for a reason to argue.. What I refer to as code is the predictability of the outcome.. One of two things will always happen in combat AI.. The AI will either randomly choose an action and/or target, or will follow a scripted code resulting into a defined outcome.. Generally speaking PvE players do not like random chaos, and when such chaos does occur it normally results into Zergfest like GW2.. If one or a group of people can not control the the actions or outcome of the fights, PvE players will just simply resort to OUTNUMBER the enemy and zerg it.. Problem solved..
Until the outnumbered mobs flee or run towards a larger camp of allies. You really should look into Storybricks further before you spout any more unfounded bullshit.
For any devs to imply they have some smart AI is just false.. And I have yet to find any game where the combat AI isn't exposed and figured out.. EVERY single raid boss in every game I've played has had the most complex dance.. BUT it doesn't take long before the dance is learned and repeated.. That is combat AI in a nutshell..
How many games have you played that use the Storybricks AI?
Good Luck with the Storybricks.. you might want to wait till you actually SEE IT in action.. We've all been down this hype road before.. I suspect we'll end up with chaotic zerg combat similar to GW2, or you end up with controlled combat like the trinity.. Take your pick,
Originally posted by Rydeson Good Luck with the Storybricks.. you might want to wait till you actually SEE IT in action.. We've all been down this hype road before.. I suspect we'll end up with chaotic zerg combat similar to GW2, or you end up with controlled combat like the trinity.. Take your pick,
Right no one has seen it in action yet, so why dismiss it. Sony didn't create StoryBricks, it's a company that specializes in creating AI, so I'm waiting to see what it's like but I'm hopefull that it will make a difference.
Originally posted by Rydeson Good Luck with the Storybricks.. you might want to wait till you actually SEE IT in action.. We've all been down this hype road before.. I suspect we'll end up with chaotic zerg combat similar to GW2, or you end up with controlled combat like the trinity.. Take your pick,
Right no one has seen it in action yet, so why dismiss it. Sony didn't create StoryBricks, it's a company that specializes in creating AI, so I'm waiting to see what it's like but I'm hopefull that it will make a difference.
I also fully believe that the people crying for storybricks to be revolutionary don't know what they're getting themselves into. When they finally do get it....I have a feeling they'll realize that it's not what they expected or really wanted.
Originally posted by Rydeson Good Luck with the Storybricks.. you might want to wait till you actually SEE IT in action.. We've all been down this hype road before.. I suspect we'll end up with chaotic zerg combat similar to GW2, or you end up with controlled combat like the trinity.. Take your pick,
Right no one has seen it in action yet, so why dismiss it. Sony didn't create StoryBricks, it's a company that specializes in creating AI, so I'm waiting to see what it's like but I'm hopefull that it will make a difference.
I also fully believe that the people crying for storybricks to be revolutionary don't know what they're getting themselves into. When they finally do get it....I have a feeling they'll realize that it's not what they expected or really wanted.
From what I read so far about Storybricks.. It's just another AI with "more" variables on how mob's interact with the world and players.. Now when it comes to combat.. We'll either get zerg combat, or you'll get threat management combat.. I too think some are expecting too much from Storybricks.. As I said before I suspect that EQN combat will resemble GW2 a lot more then EQ1.. <sad>
there is a simple way to make a threat system that plays different then today.
Today the player generate equal threat to any enemy, every threat is counted as the same.
But what if some mobs generate more threat if some one uses heal magic. If some mobs lose threat when some one uses firemagic(cause they absorb fire, so why attacking?). If a mob only generates threat to ranged attacks(no threat from heals or buffs). If a mob generates only hate to the ones that attacks him with melee weapons(no threat from heals or buffs).
in all this scenarios the classical tank will fail, except the last one. And Storybricks adds a system that sets the likes/dislikes of npcs, its already an improvement to the classical trinity. you will need all kinds of different class setups to handle those.
Heal-Tanks, Water-Damage-Tanks, Ranged-Tanks
If it turns to a zerg, then only because the players can't handle the different likes/dislikes of the NPCs
Originally posted by Rydeson Good Luck with the Storybricks.. you might want to wait till you actually SEE IT in action.. We've all been down this hype road before.. I suspect we'll end up with chaotic zerg combat similar to GW2, or you end up with controlled combat like the trinity.. Take your pick,
Right no one has seen it in action yet, so why dismiss it. Sony didn't create StoryBricks, it's a company that specializes in creating AI, so I'm waiting to see what it's like but I'm hopefull that it will make a difference.
I also fully believe that the people crying for storybricks to be revolutionary don't know what they're getting themselves into. When they finally do get it....I have a feeling they'll realize that it's not what they expected or really wanted.
From what I read so far about Storybricks.. It's just another AI with "more" variables on how mob's interact with the world and players.. Now when it comes to combat.. We'll either get zerg combat, or you'll get threat management combat.. I too think some are expecting too much from Storybricks.. As I said before I suspect that EQN combat will resemble GW2 a lot more then EQ1..
That's generalizing a bit. They set up the npc's to have needs/wants and give them different actions that they can choose to achieve them. It's definitely more complex than your standard AI. Basically in your current AI the mobs follow very basic pre-scripted behaviour. Player attacks group of mobs, mobs use threat variable to determine who to attack, mobs attack highest threat character. Tank uses taunt to go to top of threat table. Once the encounter is underway the AI just follows the pre-scripted pattern until all the npc's are dead or the party is.
With Storybricks the AI the NPC's base their actions on the Need/Wants set up for them. So when the encounter starts the NPC will determine whether they are likely to survive the encounter and if not, they will want to survive, so they would in that case flee towards the nearest camp of allies. If they decide that they may be able to defeat the player they will stay and fight and then the process starts over. Whether the npc is in combat or not it's still the same system determining what the npc will do.
You keep talking as if there will be a separate AI for combat and for everything else when SOE has specifically said it is all the same underlying AI.
Min.. you might want to wait for the numbers on this.. combat AI is different then NPC interaction AI.. One is threat management and the other is NOT.. No one knows at this point even what skills and abilities are available, which will tell us a lot about the game and roles.. Will there be "complete heals"? Will there be "snaring" of mobs? Will there be "charming" or "mezing" of mobs? Will there be feign death? Will I be able to kite, or have pets? GW2 failed to give us anything like what I just described, at least like we had in original EQ..
Originally posted by Rydeson Min.. you might want to wait for the numbers on this.. combat AI is different then NPC interaction AI.. One is threat management and the other is NOT.. No one knows at this point even what skills and abilities are available, which will tell us a lot about the game and roles.. Will there be "complete heals"? Will there be "snaring" of mobs? Will there be "charming" or "mezing" of mobs? Will there be feign death? Will I be able to kite, or have pets? GW2 failed to give us anything like what I just described, at least like we had in original EQ..
*sigh* The combat AI and the NPC interaction AI is the same, they have already stated specifically that. Someone linked an interview where they explicitly said this.
Originally posted by Rydeson Good Luck with the Storybricks.. you might want to wait till you actually SEE IT in action.. We've all been down this hype road before.. I suspect we'll end up with chaotic zerg combat similar to GW2, or you end up with controlled combat like the trinity.. Take your pick,
From what I read so far about Storybricks.. It's just another AI with "more" variables on how mob's interact with the world and players.. Now when it comes to combat.. We'll either get zerg combat, or you'll get threat management combat.. I too think some are expecting too much from Storybricks.. As I said before I suspect that EQN combat will resemble GW2 a lot more then EQ1..
Min.. you might want to wait for the numbers on this.. combat AI is different then NPC interaction AI.. One is threat management and the other is NOT.. No one knows at this point even what skills and abilities are available, which will tell us a lot about the game and roles.. Will there be "complete heals"? Will there be "snaring" of mobs? Will there be "charming" or "mezing" of mobs? Will there be feign death? Will I be able to kite, or have pets? GW2 failed to give us anything like what I just described, at least like we had in original EQ..
How will you avoid every fight being a ping-pong DPS race ala GW2?
Terry Michaels: We have only scratched the surface so far talking about multiclassing and combat in EverQuest Next. Once we’re ready to talk in more detail, we’ll be able to address this question and the underlying concerns.
What line, if any, is drawn between interaction between “Human” NPCs such as guards, merchants, etc and “Monster” NPCs, and what distinctions can be made between interaction between these two groups other than initial “kill on sight” status with the player? Can players in essence abandon the entire world of human NPCs in favor of “going native” among monster NPCs?
Storybricks: We’re not going to talk about design specifics for EverQuest Next. However, we can say that we are creating a unified AI architecture for combat and non-combat behaviors, which means that NPCs inside combat could potentially have a much greater range of reactions to PCs than just “kill on sight” (and a lot more varied goals, as explained in the presentation of rallying calls) and vice-versa: NPCs’ daily lives could be affected by the potential occurence of combat, either as a threat or a goal.
Where can AI in EQNext go?
Terry Michaels: Our goal for EverQuest Next is to work with Storybricks to create an experience for players that hasn’t been seen before in an MMO. So to answer your question, it can go as far as we need to in order to reach our goal!
What kinds of things can an encounter learn to do, to combat player tactics?
Terry Michaels: Both in and out of combat the characters in our world are going to be watching what the players do and reacting to them in organic ways in order to try to satisfy their current wants and needs. This isn’t so much about “learning” as it is about interacting and reacting to what’s happening around you in an understandable and smart way.
If you played EQ and GW2, why didn't people Zerg in EQ? Or WOW or any other game for that matter? Why is there such a need to compare to GW2?
Couldn't 20-50 random players rolled around in EQ killing everything? Or just 10 druids run in a pack without the need of others? Why did people fall into particular roles?
Simply removing taunt and heal spam instantly turns people into mindless zerg zombies? Or is there more to it?
My answer is that GW2 was designed poorly or well depending on how you look at it. PVE is a joke and a means to an end, that being WvWvW. They wanted a time sink, but at the same time wanted to make it some what painless and rolling around on a loop seemed to be okay for that.
People complained all the time about it of course, I don't remember anyone going, "Damn I love spamming AOEs to tag mobs that die before my damage hits!"
Every class is designed to DPS above all else. PVE is designed with static spawns that connect and loop that players can follow along a path either in a small group or a huge zerg. Respawn is so quick that it is more profitable and rewarding to just tag a long even though I'm assuming most find it boring, not fun, and leaving no room for individuality or thinking for one's self. Just follow and spam, yay!
WoW catered to soloing for the most part.
EQ catered to small groups.
Etc Etc.
Each game is designed a way to help players reach a goal. That goal usually being max level, remove levels and things change a bit. Of course there will be some form of general progression, but maybe grinding mobs as quickly as possible isn't the best way to reach a goal. Gotta look at the reason why people are doing certain actions to begin with.
So far SOE and Storybricks have made no indication that zerging is the route they want to go down. They gone out of their way to say "We don't want to be like GW2." Yet some how some of you think that is exactly what they intend to do. Devs aren't morons, they don't accidentally design a game to play a certain way. It might not be the way some players want, but it is rarely some unforeseen event. Did they promise a zerg free game, not that I remember. Nor did they promise a game revolving around only small group PVE either.
SOE has promised a huge world with multiple tiers, procedurally generated content, dynamic mobs, AI that roams and "does what it wants", etc. Along with classes (40+) with roles that aren't self contained soloing machines like GW2's. How any of that fits into GW2 structure is a question I can't answer.
Removing the trinity doesn't magically equate to GW2 or zerging, several other elements have to come into play for it to happen. Same as why so many dislike what WoW has become, it isn't 1 or 2 things, it is a long list of issues that when combined, the game loses it's appeal very quickly. So many are quick to talk trash after they spent 5-10 years playing just like everyone else.
I've never heard anyone say they prefer zerging over any sort of meaningful structure. This leads me to believe that if a game rewards those that avoid zerging, players won't do it. Why would they?
Means to an end. If zerging isn't the best path, it won't be what people follow. Heck, for all we know, if a mob requires 1 player to kill and 10 tag it, there could be zero reward making zerging 100% pointless.
You are right that we should wait and see before getting too excited, so should you and others so quick to jump to conclusions that completely go against what SOE has said.
Again, progress is progress. We can either have the same system that has been done to death or try something new. Why anyone wouldn't at least want something even remotely better is confusing. GW2 isn't a terrible game (didn't hold me very long), but I can't see why it has become the new benchmark of what not to be. I doubt devs develop their game going "Lets make our game exactly like X, faults and all."
By the way, what about a chaotic "trinity"? Group of players with different classes (roles) run up against a group of mobs, why can't the action be unpredictable (to a point) with players maintaining their structure? Look for the grey between the black and white. Some people might actually want a challenge while having some strategy.
Every group member contributing to combat (even it it is just 5 people) and doing DPS isn't zerging. It is by design and what SOE seems to be going for. It makes far more sense for everyone to attempt to kill a target then have everyone split doing only 1 role. No reason it can't be flexible and allow players to contribute in numerous ways.
If EQN simply removes the option for mass groups of people to roam around in a herd by making it less rewarding and by having AI that requires teamwork and strategy for smaller groups, zerging of both numbers and dps spam go away.
Comments
The problem now is that most people can't think outside the box.
From what I read, "Storybricks" has nothing to do with combat AI.. Storybricks is the AI that controls where and when mobs spawn and move within the area, and how they interact.. Combat AI is a different code all together.. Not sure why so many have a hard time understanding program code.. Code is CODE.. You will either get a random action, or you will get a pre-coded action from the mob.. NOTHING new to see here.. This has been the way combat has been since the 90's.. Storybricks is NOT some new combat AI program.. FYI.. Incase you haven't kept up..
"As you read these words, a release is seven days or less away or has just happened within the last seven days those are now the only two states youll find the world of Tyria."...Guild Wars 2
From a pure coding perspective you won't ever get a random action. You will only ever get a pre-coded action. There's no magical random function in a computer, it's just a pre-coded algorithm like any other. It just happens to be extraordinarily difficult to predict.
Now, from a more abstracted perspective there's a vast array of possible AI implementations that's anything but as simple as you claim it to be. And these possibilities are only expanding. Combat AI most definitely isn't what it used to be in the 90s. It's nowhere near the level of even the simplest player, but your assessment is simply wrong from either perspective.
We are the bunny.
Resistance is futile.
''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\
( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o)
(")("),,(")("),(")(")
I think you missed the point.. OR you were just looking for a reason to argue.. What I refer to as code is the predictability of the outcome.. One of two things will always happen in combat AI.. The AI will either randomly choose an action and/or target, or will follow a scripted code resulting into a defined outcome.. Generally speaking PvE players do not like random chaos, and when such chaos does occur it normally results into Zergfest like GW2.. If one or a group of people can not control the the actions or outcome of the fights, PvE players will just simply resort to OUTNUMBER the enemy and zerg it.. Problem solved..
For any devs to imply they have some smart AI is just false.. And I have yet to find any game where the combat AI isn't exposed and figured out.. EVERY single raid boss in every game I've played has had the most complex dance.. BUT it doesn't take long before the dance is learned and repeated.. That is combat AI in a nutshell..
In other words, a zergfest in the making.
We didn't need another MMO to show us that, just hop into your first WoW dungeon to see that chaos in real time!
1. Hunter rushes in with his tank pet before the tank.
2. Refuses to turn off the pet's growl.
3. Caster DPS (i.e., Shadow DPS, you know the suppose to be fake healer) pulling the room will wildly aimed DoTs, without the DPS to down then, that the tank can't hold, as the hunter's pet is growling enough to hold ALL aggro including the Arcane mage who can't even draw aggro off that turtle-from-hell. Then the fake healer can't heal, and the whole dungeon group dies!
Been there.
Saw that.
Got the T-shirt.
4 years-ago.
.:| Kevyne@Shandris - Armory |:. - When WoW was #1 - .:| I AM A HOLY PALADIN - Guild Theme |:.
LEEERRRROYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY JENKINSSSSSSS.. lol
I find it funny that essentially what people are arguing for here is the continuation of stupid AI. In order for the classic trinity to work, every single enemy you fight has to be really, really dumb. Wouldn't making a feature in a game more advanced generally be considered a good thing, even if making it more advanced necessitates changing some other systems in order to work with the new setup? Shouldn't the design of an RPG be more focused on building a believable world than on artificial constraints designed to try to force players to engage in certain activities or do things in a certain way, without regard to whether it actually make sense within the game's world?
Personally, if EQN can provide us with decent AI, I don't care how much that screws up the roles people traditionally like to use in combat, because the new roles that form will be better roles, more fitting to the setting of the game. The mechanics should be tailored to fit the narrative reality, not the narrative reality either tailored to fit the mechanics or ignored by them completely.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
As someone said above, obviously some can't think outside the box.
Combat doesn't have to be strict trinity no deviation or mindless zerging. There are options that have not been used or at least not done well due to AI and game mechanics of the past.
You describe a situation that calls for XYZ and ABC show up and fail. No duh.
From my understanding of what they are going for is that an encounter may strongly benefit from XYZ, but XNF or YUR might work, just a bit trickier. In games like WoW (at least early version) if you showed up with the right classes/builds/gear, memorized the pattern, and didn't screw up, it was a almost sure victory. Challenge goes away very quickly.
If the AI isn't static and have variation, it isn't as easy to memorize and be prepared at all times. Here comes multi-classing. The devs have said that people are free to try with any class/build, but they might get owned. Might have to get more people, might have to try new classes/builds/gear, but it is a learning process.
We all have different definitions, but for me a zerg = mindless dps. Simply outnumber the enemy. This works when it is 1 huge mob or some semi-manageable group. DG mentioned "thousands" of Orcs in one example. Mobs will be zerging the players. Stop expecting the game to be a clone of the past.
The group you described might die horribly to the Orc Chief, but might be the best make up vs the Giant King. There being options is what will hopefully come of EQN's system. Not "having" to have the same make up for 95% of combat.
Maybe a "zerg" is needed, maybe only a small group. Variation is key, not the same crap over and over that has been done to death. Maybe a area is attacked by 5 dragons at once, maybe you and your 4 closest friends can't put on your best gear and own them in a instance. Maybe the whole server will need to take them down.
http://eqn.junkiesnation.com/2013/09/10/storybricks-and-soe-answer-some-questions/
Obviously, you like many others are making your conclusions without the full picture. While none of us know what EQN will really be like, stating "facts" without any proof is silly.
While code and AI is not going to duplicate "intelligence" there can be a huge scale of difficulty and challenge built in. Tier 1 mobs may have 5 standard attacks, Tier 5 mobs might have 25 to choose from. Who knows. Along with Storybricks, mobs might not only have 50+ abilities on their skill bar, they might also protect-heal-coordinate with one another. You can only "predict" aka google how to do an encounter when someone else has done it before, if the encounter has 100 outcomes, good luck with that.
Again, we have no clue what Storybricks along with SOE is capable of. So far all SOE has said has been pretty spot on. Their claims about Landmark have been accurate. You are free to call their bluff, call it hype, nothing new, smoke up our.... but until we see something else, I'll at least give them the benefit of the doubt.
Doubt is always easier then faith, but it is what it is. Simply saying "that's not possible" or "it's the same old thing" at this point is incorrect. If they don't deliver, well then they don't. But I have a hard time calling someone a liar until they've been given the chance to prove themselves. They've made it a point to say that they aren't coating everything in rainbows to make it better than what it is, they claim that the AI is capable of things we haven't seen before.
So if something has never been done before it isn't possible? Great logic there...
No offense, but you really have a closed view. You make the assumption that EQN = every other game. That "raiding" or general PVE will be just like every other game. Not saying EQN's system will be so next gen that it won't have a pattern, but if it even is a baby step beyond what we've had for 15+ years, it is a step in the right direction.
They scrapped the game multiple times for a reason, they don't want to be that game. Players obviously like grinding and instancing (WoW is pretty damn popular), doesn't mean they have to copy it. Heck GW2 is popular, guess people like zerging to.
They've said they are making a game they want to play, they are gamers as well. People need help knowing what they like sometimes.
You're right about the dance, but I think of it like music. Most games play the same tune. Hopefully EQN is like Jazz. Not that I'm a big Jazz fan, but it can be freeform, take it where you want it to go. You might learn some songs, but a lot of it only lives in a certain time and moment to not be repeated.
I think some just can wrap their heads around anything besides what they've known. Might be they can't handle change, more challenge, or having to think for themselves, but it seems silly to want the same old thing when we've seen how those games end up.
Freedom can be scary. "What? I can pick whatever class I want, build and gear it how I want and use it freely?" lol
Some need to be told that they have to choose a class, choose a build, choose gear and then use it exactly the right way for a particular situation. On day one of most games, most people are set on a path that has very little choice or consequence involved.
I wish games like Pantheon would pick up and give them all somewhere to go. Grind and do the same thing forever.
I've seen many people against PVP say they don't like it because they aren't good at it. Makes complete sense, but at least they admit it instead throwing PVP and those that like it all into some mouth breathing, ganking, immature group.
If people only enjoy and feel comfortable being told exactly what to do and following the "how to guide" to play effectively, and knowing that if they show up with XYZ, they win, good for them. Just hope EQN doesn't cater to them mainly.
Right no one has seen it in action yet, so why dismiss it. Sony didn't create StoryBricks, it's a company that specializes in creating AI, so I'm waiting to see what it's like but I'm hopefull that it will make a difference.
I also fully believe that the people crying for storybricks to be revolutionary don't know what they're getting themselves into. When they finally do get it....I have a feeling they'll realize that it's not what they expected or really wanted.
From what I read so far about Storybricks.. It's just another AI with "more" variables on how mob's interact with the world and players.. Now when it comes to combat.. We'll either get zerg combat, or you'll get threat management combat.. I too think some are expecting too much from Storybricks.. As I said before I suspect that EQN combat will resemble GW2 a lot more then EQ1.. <sad>
there is a simple way to make a threat system that plays different then today.
Today the player generate equal threat to any enemy, every threat is counted as the same.
But what if some mobs generate more threat if some one uses heal magic. If some mobs lose threat when some one uses firemagic(cause they absorb fire, so why attacking?). If a mob only generates threat to ranged attacks(no threat from heals or buffs). If a mob generates only hate to the ones that attacks him with melee weapons(no threat from heals or buffs).
in all this scenarios the classical tank will fail, except the last one. And Storybricks adds a system that sets the likes/dislikes of npcs, its already an improvement to the classical trinity. you will need all kinds of different class setups to handle those.
Heal-Tanks, Water-Damage-Tanks, Ranged-Tanks
If it turns to a zerg, then only because the players can't handle the different likes/dislikes of the NPCs
That's generalizing a bit. They set up the npc's to have needs/wants and give them different actions that they can choose to achieve them. It's definitely more complex than your standard AI. Basically in your current AI the mobs follow very basic pre-scripted behaviour. Player attacks group of mobs, mobs use threat variable to determine who to attack, mobs attack highest threat character. Tank uses taunt to go to top of threat table. Once the encounter is underway the AI just follows the pre-scripted pattern until all the npc's are dead or the party is.
With Storybricks the AI the NPC's base their actions on the Need/Wants set up for them. So when the encounter starts the NPC will determine whether they are likely to survive the encounter and if not, they will want to survive, so they would in that case flee towards the nearest camp of allies. If they decide that they may be able to defeat the player they will stay and fight and then the process starts over. Whether the npc is in combat or not it's still the same system determining what the npc will do.
You keep talking as if there will be a separate AI for combat and for everything else when SOE has specifically said it is all the same underlying AI.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
*sigh* The combat AI and the NPC interaction AI is the same, they have already stated specifically that. Someone linked an interview where they explicitly said this.
How will you avoid every fight being a ping-pong DPS race ala GW2?
Terry Michaels: We have only scratched the surface so far talking about multiclassing and combat in EverQuest Next. Once we’re ready to talk in more detail, we’ll be able to address this question and the underlying concerns.
What line, if any, is drawn between interaction between “Human” NPCs such as guards, merchants, etc and “Monster” NPCs, and what distinctions can be made between interaction between these two groups other than initial “kill on sight” status with the player? Can players in essence abandon the entire world of human NPCs in favor of “going native” among monster NPCs?
Storybricks: We’re not going to talk about design specifics for EverQuest Next. However, we can say that we are creating a unified AI architecture for combat and non-combat behaviors, which means that NPCs inside combat could potentially have a much greater range of reactions to PCs than just “kill on sight” (and a lot more varied goals, as explained in the presentation of rallying calls) and vice-versa: NPCs’ daily lives could be affected by the potential occurence of combat, either as a threat or a goal.
Where can AI in EQNext go?
Terry Michaels: Our goal for EverQuest Next is to work with Storybricks to create an experience for players that hasn’t been seen before in an MMO. So to answer your question, it can go as far as we need to in order to reach our goal!
What kinds of things can an encounter learn to do, to combat player tactics?
Terry Michaels: Both in and out of combat the characters in our world are going to be watching what the players do and reacting to them in organic ways in order to try to satisfy their current wants and needs. This isn’t so much about “learning” as it is about interacting and reacting to what’s happening around you in an understandable and smart way.
If you played EQ and GW2, why didn't people Zerg in EQ? Or WOW or any other game for that matter? Why is there such a need to compare to GW2?
Couldn't 20-50 random players rolled around in EQ killing everything? Or just 10 druids run in a pack without the need of others? Why did people fall into particular roles?
Simply removing taunt and heal spam instantly turns people into mindless zerg zombies? Or is there more to it?
My answer is that GW2 was designed poorly or well depending on how you look at it. PVE is a joke and a means to an end, that being WvWvW. They wanted a time sink, but at the same time wanted to make it some what painless and rolling around on a loop seemed to be okay for that.
People complained all the time about it of course, I don't remember anyone going, "Damn I love spamming AOEs to tag mobs that die before my damage hits!"
Every class is designed to DPS above all else. PVE is designed with static spawns that connect and loop that players can follow along a path either in a small group or a huge zerg. Respawn is so quick that it is more profitable and rewarding to just tag a long even though I'm assuming most find it boring, not fun, and leaving no room for individuality or thinking for one's self. Just follow and spam, yay!
WoW catered to soloing for the most part.
EQ catered to small groups.
Etc Etc.
Each game is designed a way to help players reach a goal. That goal usually being max level, remove levels and things change a bit. Of course there will be some form of general progression, but maybe grinding mobs as quickly as possible isn't the best way to reach a goal. Gotta look at the reason why people are doing certain actions to begin with.
So far SOE and Storybricks have made no indication that zerging is the route they want to go down. They gone out of their way to say "We don't want to be like GW2." Yet some how some of you think that is exactly what they intend to do. Devs aren't morons, they don't accidentally design a game to play a certain way. It might not be the way some players want, but it is rarely some unforeseen event. Did they promise a zerg free game, not that I remember. Nor did they promise a game revolving around only small group PVE either.
SOE has promised a huge world with multiple tiers, procedurally generated content, dynamic mobs, AI that roams and "does what it wants", etc. Along with classes (40+) with roles that aren't self contained soloing machines like GW2's. How any of that fits into GW2 structure is a question I can't answer.
Removing the trinity doesn't magically equate to GW2 or zerging, several other elements have to come into play for it to happen. Same as why so many dislike what WoW has become, it isn't 1 or 2 things, it is a long list of issues that when combined, the game loses it's appeal very quickly. So many are quick to talk trash after they spent 5-10 years playing just like everyone else.
I've never heard anyone say they prefer zerging over any sort of meaningful structure. This leads me to believe that if a game rewards those that avoid zerging, players won't do it. Why would they?
Means to an end. If zerging isn't the best path, it won't be what people follow. Heck, for all we know, if a mob requires 1 player to kill and 10 tag it, there could be zero reward making zerging 100% pointless.
You are right that we should wait and see before getting too excited, so should you and others so quick to jump to conclusions that completely go against what SOE has said.
Again, progress is progress. We can either have the same system that has been done to death or try something new. Why anyone wouldn't at least want something even remotely better is confusing. GW2 isn't a terrible game (didn't hold me very long), but I can't see why it has become the new benchmark of what not to be. I doubt devs develop their game going "Lets make our game exactly like X, faults and all."
By the way, what about a chaotic "trinity"? Group of players with different classes (roles) run up against a group of mobs, why can't the action be unpredictable (to a point) with players maintaining their structure? Look for the grey between the black and white. Some people might actually want a challenge while having some strategy.
Every group member contributing to combat (even it it is just 5 people) and doing DPS isn't zerging. It is by design and what SOE seems to be going for. It makes far more sense for everyone to attempt to kill a target then have everyone split doing only 1 role. No reason it can't be flexible and allow players to contribute in numerous ways.
If EQN simply removes the option for mass groups of people to roam around in a herd by making it less rewarding and by having AI that requires teamwork and strategy for smaller groups, zerging of both numbers and dps spam go away.