I can't believe people even play those games. It's like my friend who never reads books, and she tells me Harry Potter is the best book she ever read. Of course it is, it's the ONLY book you have ever read.
So maybe you should actually play GW2. And understand how awesome the following video is. GW2 dungeon is easy to do, hard to master.
Not too much specialization. But not too little, either.
Theres a point at which a character is no longer a one trick pony, but not yet a jack of all trades either. When you have quite a couple of possibilities, and quite a bit of complexity to manage, but you're still very different from other characters.
And thats the point - every class should play very differently. So things that are important in one class should be completely irrelevant in another.
This automatically leads to some sort of trinity.
I also think I might prefer the tank/healer/crowdcontrol trinity over the tank/healer/damagedealer trinity. Because in the former, everybody has to work towards the same goal. In the later, damage dealers automatically will be brilliant solists and will have little to do in party except deaggro and will end up blaming the tank and/or the healer when things go wrong.
One could also add more roles. Maybe mobs hit so hard, without a debuffer no tank can manage the pain ? Or maybe without a buffer, damage output will be rather mediocre.
I can't believe people even play those games. It's like my friend who never reads books, and she tells me Harry Potter is the best book she ever read. Of course it is, it's the ONLY book you have ever read.
So maybe you should actually play GW2. And understand how awesome the following video is. GW2 dungeon is easy to do, hard to master.
They cant get it, its like showing master chess player playing chess to someone who has no clue about chess.
I'm sure, in practice, for those who fully understand GW2's professions and the encounters etc. it is a whole lot less random than it looks - and I'm not saying it doesn't take a measure of skill to play at a high level in such a system.
To me it looks like, and from my experience playing GW2, it feels like while yes you are playing with other people, you are coordinating and playing off of each other's abilities and such etc.
It never felt like we were actually dependent on each other in any way.
Like, it really didn't matter who they were or what they were doing - as long as everyone generally knew how to play their class a little bit and understood the encounters at the most basic level - nothing else really mattered.
It didn't matter I was a Guardian with a 2H sword & 1H Mace + Focus combo specced into Zeal and Radiance (hard to remember now, racking my brain for the right terms!)
And it didn't matter if that guy was an Elementalist using a staff & fire magic vs. a dagger/focus and Water.
Really just felt like builds and classes and character didn't matter at all. Which is kind of the point, I know, but because it didn't matter - it didn't matter to me either.
Where's the fun in that?
I mean, I like knowing "I'm the tank. I have a defensive spec, and am geared for survival and threat generation. My job is to keep everyone in my party alive, and lead this group at a comfortable pace so that everyone wins."
"That gal is the healer - she's specced into Holy and has high Spirit - good, should be able to keep her mana up so I can chain pull pretty quickly."
"That Mage's talents are all over the place - I'm going to have to be pretty clear on what CC I want for each pull and who is assigned to Moon and Circle for each. I'd better keep on eye on his threat and save my Taunt for when he invariably pulls aggro."
To me - that is interdependence. That is everyone in the group being important - having a role that they must execute in order for all of us to win. If they don't pull their weight, we will all suffer.
It's a social obligation in my mind - I am not going to tool around and waste these people's time, because I understand that they are people sitting behind a keyboard just like me, they have time that is precious to them, I'm not going to waste it by not doing my best each and every pull.
That is trinity combat to me.
That, to me, is the difference and what makes it really stand out vs. non-trinity based party mechanics.
It didn't matter I was a Guardian with a 2H sword & 1H Mace + Focus combo specced into Zeal and Radiance (hard to remember now, racking my brain for the right terms!)
And it didn't matter if that guy was an Elementalist using a staff & fire magic vs. a dagger/focus and Water.
Really just felt like builds and classes and character didn't matter at all. Which is kind of the point, I know, but because it didn't matter - it didn't matter to me either.
Where's the fun in that?
You said, there is many spec you should use. But really there is only one best spec for every situation.
If you actually take a look at those video I linked. There is a reason for every button they pressed. Every weapon or skill they used have a reason. Every trait they use have a reason. Because that's the best way to do things.
To me the mentality between GW2 dungeon and other mmorpg is quite different.
In other mmorpg, you just try to "beat" the dungeon. In GW2, you try to do the dungeon as fast and as smooth as possible. Partially because people have been running the same dungeon for eternity.
Usually people in other mmorpg move onto raids once they finished dungeon. But GW2 dont' have that. So those dungeon crawler just keep repeating the same dungeon over and over again.
That's not to say I dislike the system in other mmorpg. I love raiding in other mmorpg, and find it very interesting and techincal. But if you only compare 5 man dungeon, I find GW2 far superior.
And the good thing about not depending on other people is you can actually solo those dungeon. If you really think those people are just using random skills. Why don't you try to solo AC yourself. Or try to beat the world record for 5 man speed run. You should have an account anyway and you dont' need to pay any money.
I can't believe people even play those games. It's like my friend who never reads books, and she tells me Harry Potter is the best book she ever read. Of course it is, it's the ONLY book you have ever read.
So maybe you should actually play GW2. And understand how awesome the following video is. GW2 dungeon is easy to do, hard to master.
They cant get it, its like showing master chess player playing chess to someone who has no clue about chess.
I'm sure, in practice, for those who fully understand GW2's professions and the encounters etc. it is a whole lot less random than it looks - and I'm not saying it doesn't take a measure of skill to play at a high level in such a system.
To me it looks like, and from my experience playing GW2, it feels like while yes you are playing with other people, you are coordinating and playing off of each other's abilities and such etc.
It never felt like we were actually dependent on each other in any way.
Like, it really didn't matter who they were or what they were doing - as long as everyone generally knew how to play their class a little bit and understood the encounters at the most basic level - nothing else really mattered.
It didn't matter I was a Guardian with a 2H sword & 1H Mace + Focus combo specced into Zeal and Radiance (hard to remember now, racking my brain for the right terms!)
And it didn't matter if that guy was an Elementalist using a staff & fire magic vs. a dagger/focus and Water.
Really just felt like builds and classes and character didn't matter at all. Which is kind of the point, I know, but because it didn't matter - it didn't matter to me either.
Where's the fun in that?
I mean, I like knowing "I'm the tank. I have a defensive spec, and am geared for survival and threat generation. My job is to keep everyone in my party alive, and lead this group at a comfortable pace so that everyone wins."
"That gal is the healer - she's specced into Holy and has high Spirit - good, should be able to keep her mana up so I can chain pull pretty quickly."
"That Mage's talents are all over the place - I'm going to have to be pretty clear on what CC I want for each pull and who is assigned to Moon and Circle for each. I'd better keep on eye on his threat and save my Taunt for when he invariably pulls aggro."
To me - that is interdependence. That is everyone in the group being important - having a role that they must execute in order for all of us to win. If they don't pull their weight, we will all suffer.
It's a social obligation in my mind - I am not going to tool around and waste these people's time, because I understand that they are people sitting behind a keyboard just like me, they have time that is precious to them, I'm not going to waste it by not doing my best each and every pull.
That is trinity combat to me.
That, to me, is the difference and what makes it really stand out vs. non-trinity based party mechanics.
Actually, there is a huge difference between builds in GW2, and the examples you give above of a traditional mmo setup are almost exactly equivalent to the thought process you would go through in GW2- except the "tanking" is very different and there is a greater degree of fluidity in that you can still achieve to a certain extent without an ideal set up. Another difference is that players can experiment with synergistic group set ups beyond a very strictly defined heal/dps/tank set up.
I can understand what you mean though in terms of running with pugs- you just work around what you have with like you said not necessarily a strong sense of specific role. But the same can be said for tank&spank games- as long as everyone vaguely knows what to do you can get by.
To elaborate on my GW2 take on your above examples though, I would go through a similar thought process in spvp. If I am running a shout/bow warrior I know my role, if our mage is glass I know how they are going to play and what "purpose" they serve; in other words depending on the players/classes/builds we would use different strategies to win. There are a greater variety of roles and flexibility to graduate between total support and total burst, but there is still a strong dependence on everyone in a team and an understanding and correct use of build/role.
It is much more complex than many other games, partly because of the deep customization. But to use your example of an ele, my game will play a hell of a lot different if the ele on my team is using a staff or using daggers.
I gave up on group content in GW2 before I think I got enough experience with it to fully understand and appreciate the nuances. I'm sure I'm not alone in that.
I will consent to saying that the trinity is easier for me to understand, only because I've learned everything about it with years and years and years of practice in WoW since 2004, as well as other games like Rift, WAR, FFXI, SWTOR, FFXIV, etc.
So I won't say one is truly better than the other, but due to my familiarity with trinity-based combat mechanics, I'd say that it gives designers a LOT of room and opportunity to create interesting mechanics and encounters.
There are few challenges left for me outside of say raid-wide healing, which can certainly be a fun/difficult task, as over the years the rest has really devolved into simply memorizing patterns - pretty much learning dance moves and executing them.
Go here, turn this way, move out of that, focus on this, now focus on that. Etc.
The "art" of tanking/dps/cc etc. seems long gone from these games.
When it was there, it was something truly special.
I gave up on group content in GW2 before I think I got enough experience with it to fully understand and appreciate the nuances. I'm sure I'm not alone in that.
I will consent to saying that the trinity is easier for me to understand, only because I've learned everything about it with years and years and years of practice in WoW since 2004, as well as other games like Rift, WAR, FFXI, SWTOR, FFXIV, etc.
So I won't say one is truly better than the other, but due to my familiarity with trinity-based combat mechanics, I'd say that it gives designers a LOT of room and opportunity to create interesting mechanics and encounters.
There are few challenges left for me outside of say raid-wide healing, which can certainly be a fun/difficult task, as over the years the rest has really devolved into simply memorizing patterns - pretty much learning dance moves and executing them.
Go here, turn this way, move out of that, focus on this, now focus on that. Etc.
The "art" of tanking/dps/cc etc. seems long gone from these games.
When it was there, it was something truly special.
You have your preferences, people just dont want to find out they like inferior stuff, i guess its just pride/ego thingy.
For me, i own a car that is inferior to many other cars, but it fullfills everything i want from car to fullfill, and even has some advantages like super low maintenance cost and general cost/km. So i dont really give a shit there are superior cars out there
I gave up on group content in GW2 before I think I got enough experience with it to fully understand and appreciate the nuances. I'm sure I'm not alone in that.
I will consent to saying that the trinity is easier for me to understand, only because I've learned everything about it with years and years and years of practice in WoW since 2004, as well as other games like Rift, WAR, FFXI, SWTOR, FFXIV, etc.
So I won't say one is truly better than the other, but due to my familiarity with trinity-based combat mechanics, I'd say that it gives designers a LOT of room and opportunity to create interesting mechanics and encounters.
There are few challenges left for me outside of say raid-wide healing, which can certainly be a fun/difficult task, as over the years the rest has really devolved into simply memorizing patterns - pretty much learning dance moves and executing them.
Go here, turn this way, move out of that, focus on this, now focus on that. Etc.
The "art" of tanking/dps/cc etc. seems long gone from these games.
When it was there, it was something truly special.
I think your first sentence describes a great many people, and many of those people are the ones who show random gifs and/or youtube videos of GW2 content to attempt to show the "zerginess" of the game. Even that Tequatl gif a few posts up doesn't even show the full picture of that encounter, since all it shows is the attack team doing what it's supposed to be doing...attacking. Of course, because they themselves don't understand the nuance to what they are viewing, they wind up looking completely ignorant to those who understand what is truly happening.
Other things that might look random, but are completely coordinated are things like elementalists dropping water fields and people using blast finishers to create a ton of aoe healing or blasting fire fields for might stacking, whirling in a light field for condition removal, etc.
I will always admit though that compared to something like WoW, GW2 style action combat is always going to look like mass chaos to most everyone.
I will argue the point of when there was any "art" to the trinity. I don't feel like there was every truly an "art" to it, but rather the mechanics were tuned in such a way that a single mistake could cause a wipe. At the core though, Tanks still taunted, CC'ers still just CC'd and DPS folks DPSed. There hasn't been a fundamental change to the trinity in the nearly 20 years I have been playing mmos. Encounters have changed quite a bit, for the better for the most part.
I gave up on group content in GW2 before I think I got enough experience with it to fully understand and appreciate the nuances. I'm sure I'm not alone in that.
I will consent to saying that the trinity is easier for me to understand, only because I've learned everything about it with years and years and years of practice in WoW since 2004, as well as other games like Rift, WAR, FFXI, SWTOR, FFXIV, etc.
So I won't say one is truly better than the other, but due to my familiarity with trinity-based combat mechanics, I'd say that it gives designers a LOT of room and opportunity to create interesting mechanics and encounters.
There are few challenges left for me outside of say raid-wide healing, which can certainly be a fun/difficult task, as over the years the rest has really devolved into simply memorizing patterns - pretty much learning dance moves and executing them.
Go here, turn this way, move out of that, focus on this, now focus on that. Etc.
The "art" of tanking/dps/cc etc. seems long gone from these games.
When it was there, it was something truly special.
GW2 was so lacking for me I did not get that far as well. We know trinity, so it is easy to do of the bat. But I am happy to try out a new combat system, the issue is we have trinity or a zerg. In the interests of easymode and solo play trinity was dropped, so we are not going to see other group combat systems.
Group combat systems simply do not fit into where designers want MMO's heading.
I gave up on group content in GW2 before I think I got enough experience with it to fully understand and appreciate the nuances. I'm sure I'm not alone in that.
I will consent to saying that the trinity is easier for me to understand, only because I've learned everything about it with years and years and years of practice in WoW since 2004, as well as other games like Rift, WAR, FFXI, SWTOR, FFXIV, etc.
So I won't say one is truly better than the other, but due to my familiarity with trinity-based combat mechanics, I'd say that it gives designers a LOT of room and opportunity to create interesting mechanics and encounters.
There are few challenges left for me outside of say raid-wide healing, which can certainly be a fun/difficult task, as over the years the rest has really devolved into simply memorizing patterns - pretty much learning dance moves and executing them.
Go here, turn this way, move out of that, focus on this, now focus on that. Etc.
The "art" of tanking/dps/cc etc. seems long gone from these games.
When it was there, it was something truly special.
GW2 was so lacking for me I did not get that far as well. We know trinity, so it is easy to do of the bat. But I am happy to try out a new combat system, the issue is we have trinity or a zerg. In the interests of easymode and solo play trinity was dropped, so we are not going to see other group combat systems.
Group combat systems simply do not fit into where designers want MMO's heading.
I love how simple and black & white your world is. You've got it all figured out, I see. How could anyone disagree with that?
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
I gave up on group content in GW2 before I think I got enough experience with it to fully understand and appreciate the nuances. I'm sure I'm not alone in that.
I will consent to saying that the trinity is easier for me to understand, only because I've learned everything about it with years and years and years of practice in WoW since 2004, as well as other games like Rift, WAR, FFXI, SWTOR, FFXIV, etc.
So I won't say one is truly better than the other, but due to my familiarity with trinity-based combat mechanics, I'd say that it gives designers a LOT of room and opportunity to create interesting mechanics and encounters.
There are few challenges left for me outside of say raid-wide healing, which can certainly be a fun/difficult task, as over the years the rest has really devolved into simply memorizing patterns - pretty much learning dance moves and executing them.
Go here, turn this way, move out of that, focus on this, now focus on that. Etc.
The "art" of tanking/dps/cc etc. seems long gone from these games.
When it was there, it was something truly special.
I think your first sentence describes a great many people, and many of those people are the ones who show random gifs and/or youtube videos of GW2 content to attempt to show the "zerginess" of the game. Even that Tequatl gif a few posts up doesn't even show the full picture of that encounter, since all it shows is the attack team doing what it's supposed to be doing...attacking. Of course, because they themselves don't understand the nuance to what they are viewing, they wind up looking completely ignorant to those who understand what is truly happening.
Other things that might look random, but are completely coordinated are things like elementalists dropping water fields and people using blast finishers to create a ton of aoe healing or blasting fire fields for might stacking, whirling in a light field for condition removal, etc.
I will always admit though that compared to something like WoW, GW2 style action combat is always going to look like mass chaos to most everyone.
I will argue the point of when there was any "art" to the trinity. I don't feel like there was every truly an "art" to it, but rather the mechanics were tuned in such a way that a single mistake could cause a wipe. At the core though, Tanks still taunted, CC'ers still just CC'd and DPS folks DPSed. There hasn't been a fundamental change to the trinity in the nearly 20 years I have been playing mmos. Encounters have changed quite a bit, for the better for the most part.
Indeed. If trinity is all you've know all your life, non-trinity combat, or any PvP for that matter, will seem like chaos.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Ye no deadly boss mods popping up countdowns left right and center to tell thrm when to jump 4 paces to the right, and bosses that chase you even though there's no threat meter!, I can imagine their horror, how the hell do they do their rotations in that
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Originally posted by Bladestrom Ye no deadly boss mods popping up countdowns left right and center to tell thrm when to jump 4 paces to the right, and bosses that chase you even though there's no threat meter!, I can imagine their horror, how the hell do they do their rotations in that
I gave up on group content in GW2 before I think I got enough experience with it to fully understand and appreciate the nuances. I'm sure I'm not alone in that.
I will consent to saying that the trinity is easier for me to understand, only because I've learned everything about it with years and years and years of practice in WoW since 2004, as well as other games like Rift, WAR, FFXI, SWTOR, FFXIV, etc.
So I won't say one is truly better than the other, but due to my familiarity with trinity-based combat mechanics, I'd say that it gives designers a LOT of room and opportunity to create interesting mechanics and encounters.
There are few challenges left for me outside of say raid-wide healing, which can certainly be a fun/difficult task, as over the years the rest has really devolved into simply memorizing patterns - pretty much learning dance moves and executing them.
Go here, turn this way, move out of that, focus on this, now focus on that. Etc.
The "art" of tanking/dps/cc etc. seems long gone from these games.
When it was there, it was something truly special.
GW2 was so lacking for me I did not get that far as well. We know trinity, so it is easy to do of the bat. But I am happy to try out a new combat system, the issue is we have trinity or a zerg. In the interests of easymode and solo play trinity was dropped, so we are not going to see other group combat systems.
Group combat systems simply do not fit into where designers want MMO's heading.
I love how simple and black & white your world is. You've got it all figured out, I see. How could anyone disagree with that?
My evidence is the near total lack of any other group combat system being tried out and the removal over the years of trinity mechanics. If you have something you have spotted to suggest otherwise do say.
I am not the sort of person who uses "maybe" and "IMO" as a form of punctuation in my replies. As I am human, I think anyone should be able to guess I could be wrong.
Some people love to hate on trinity, but it is still the superior combat system.
The major alternative so far has been making every class a DPS class, and introduce dodging and evading attacks. Basically this is how 99% of the games from Korea work. It's basically console gameplay.
The problem is that it's solo gameplay, even in a group, you're basically a class that solos, you don't talk during the battle, you don't ask for heals or ask for support, there's no designated CC or designated puller, no designated tank, you basically...mash buttons and constantly dodge.
I just can't wrap my head around how people think this is good. It's bad, pretty awful compared to trinity where your group is dependent on each other, and where everyone has a well defined function.
Combat in Korean MMO is too easy, boring and repetitive.
Raids in those Korean MMO are even worse, they're zergs, they really are, there is no cooperation, no class officers, no preparation, just mash those buttons.
This action style combat has other downsides, the fact those games lack any form of community, why socialise when you can just solo everything and don't depend on anyone. It actually attracts console players, and anti-social people. It's mindless zerg and there is no sense of community or hierarchy or class definition.
Combat in MMO has become stupid, it's so dumbed down to the point of being console combat.
sorry but calling the trinity superior is EXACTLY the main prob.
you got heal, dd and tanks. everyone has his or her set role. and THAT is what screws the idea.
they simply forgot CC or rather removed on ALL of those chars.
when it started (even in WoW damnit), it was all about sheep sap go.
nowadays? you get a timer from the tank telling the heal to be ready and the dds to take their pots.
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
I gave up on group content in GW2 before I think I got enough experience with it to fully understand and appreciate the nuances. I'm sure I'm not alone in that.
I will consent to saying that the trinity is easier for me to understand, only because I've learned everything about it with years and years and years of practice in WoW since 2004, as well as other games like Rift, WAR, FFXI, SWTOR, FFXIV, etc.
So I won't say one is truly better than the other, but due to my familiarity with trinity-based combat mechanics, I'd say that it gives designers a LOT of room and opportunity to create interesting mechanics and encounters.
There are few challenges left for me outside of say raid-wide healing, which can certainly be a fun/difficult task, as over the years the rest has really devolved into simply memorizing patterns - pretty much learning dance moves and executing them.
Go here, turn this way, move out of that, focus on this, now focus on that. Etc.
The "art" of tanking/dps/cc etc. seems long gone from these games.
When it was there, it was something truly special.
GW2 was so lacking for me I did not get that far as well. We know trinity, so it is easy to do of the bat. But I am happy to try out a new combat system, the issue is we have trinity or a zerg. In the interests of easymode and solo play trinity was dropped, so we are not going to see other group combat systems.
Group combat systems simply do not fit into where designers want MMO's heading.
I love how simple and black & white your world is. You've got it all figured out, I see. How could anyone disagree with that?
My evidence is the near total lack of any other group combat system being tried out and the removal over the years of trinity mechanics. If you have something you have spotted to suggest otherwise do say.
I am not the sort of person who uses "maybe" and "IMO" as a form of punctuation in my replies. As I am human, I think anyone should be able to guess I could be wrong.
edit. self moderate.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
I gave up on group content in GW2 before I think I got enough experience with it to fully understand and appreciate the nuances. I'm sure I'm not alone in that.
I will consent to saying that the trinity is easier for me to understand, only because I've learned everything about it with years and years and years of practice in WoW since 2004, as well as other games like Rift, WAR, FFXI, SWTOR, FFXIV, etc.
So I won't say one is truly better than the other, but due to my familiarity with trinity-based combat mechanics, I'd say that it gives designers a LOT of room and opportunity to create interesting mechanics and encounters.
There are few challenges left for me outside of say raid-wide healing, which can certainly be a fun/difficult task, as over the years the rest has really devolved into simply memorizing patterns - pretty much learning dance moves and executing them.
Go here, turn this way, move out of that, focus on this, now focus on that. Etc.
The "art" of tanking/dps/cc etc. seems long gone from these games.
When it was there, it was something truly special.
GW2 was so lacking for me I did not get that far as well. We know trinity, so it is easy to do of the bat. But I am happy to try out a new combat system, the issue is we have trinity or a zerg. In the interests of easymode and solo play trinity was dropped, so we are not going to see other group combat systems.
Group combat systems simply do not fit into where designers want MMO's heading.
I love how simple and black & white your world is. You've got it all figured out, I see. How could anyone disagree with that?
My evidence is the near total lack of any other group combat system being tried out and the removal over the years of trinity mechanics. If you have something you have spotted to suggest otherwise do say.
I am not the sort of person who uses "maybe" and "IMO" as a form of punctuation in my replies. As I am human, I think anyone should be able to guess I could be wrong.
How about tabletop RPGs? Games other than MMORPGs? Hell, any PvP in any game! Your lack of evidence is all on you.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
I gave up on group content in GW2 before I think I got enough experience with it to fully understand and appreciate the nuances. I'm sure I'm not alone in that.
I will consent to saying that the trinity is easier for me to understand, only because I've learned everything about it with years and years and years of practice in WoW since 2004, as well as other games like Rift, WAR, FFXI, SWTOR, FFXIV, etc.
So I won't say one is truly better than the other, but due to my familiarity with trinity-based combat mechanics, I'd say that it gives designers a LOT of room and opportunity to create interesting mechanics and encounters.
There are few challenges left for me outside of say raid-wide healing, which can certainly be a fun/difficult task, as over the years the rest has really devolved into simply memorizing patterns - pretty much learning dance moves and executing them.
Go here, turn this way, move out of that, focus on this, now focus on that. Etc.
The "art" of tanking/dps/cc etc. seems long gone from these games.
When it was there, it was something truly special.
GW2 was so lacking for me I did not get that far as well. We know trinity, so it is easy to do of the bat. But I am happy to try out a new combat system, the issue is we have trinity or a zerg. In the interests of easymode and solo play trinity was dropped, so we are not going to see other group combat systems.
Group combat systems simply do not fit into where designers want MMO's heading.
I love how simple and black & white your world is. You've got it all figured out, I see. How could anyone disagree with that?
My evidence is the near total lack of any other group combat system being tried out and the removal over the years of trinity mechanics. If you have something you have spotted to suggest otherwise do say.
Your problem here is that if the combat isn't packaged in a specific 4 or 5 man group, then it isn't group combat to you, despite the presence or even need for teamwork. Puzzle Pirates, Wizard 101, Pirate 101, Asheron's Call, Atlantica Online, Grepolis, and Travian all have other group combat systems, some of them being around for a decade or so.
I am not the sort of person who uses "maybe" and "IMO" as a form of punctuation in my replies. As I am human, I think anyone should be able to guess I could be wrong.
Correct. You've been very consistent in expressing that it isn't that you don't know the difference between fact and opinion, it is that you don't care there is a difference.
EDIT: Quirhid, thank you for bringing up the obvious one - almost every form of PVP.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I gave up on group content in GW2 before I think I got enough experience with it to fully understand and appreciate the nuances. I'm sure I'm not alone in that.
I will consent to saying that the trinity is easier for me to understand, only because I've learned everything about it with years and years and years of practice in WoW since 2004, as well as other games like Rift, WAR, FFXI, SWTOR, FFXIV, etc.
So I won't say one is truly better than the other, but due to my familiarity with trinity-based combat mechanics, I'd say that it gives designers a LOT of room and opportunity to create interesting mechanics and encounters.
There are few challenges left for me outside of say raid-wide healing, which can certainly be a fun/difficult task, as over the years the rest has really devolved into simply memorizing patterns - pretty much learning dance moves and executing them.
Go here, turn this way, move out of that, focus on this, now focus on that. Etc.
The "art" of tanking/dps/cc etc. seems long gone from these games.
When it was there, it was something truly special.
GW2 was so lacking for me I did not get that far as well. We know trinity, so it is easy to do of the bat. But I am happy to try out a new combat system, the issue is we have trinity or a zerg. In the interests of easymode and solo play trinity was dropped, so we are not going to see other group combat systems.
Group combat systems simply do not fit into where designers want MMO's heading.
I love how simple and black & white your world is. You've got it all figured out, I see. How could anyone disagree with that?
My evidence is the near total lack of any other group combat system being tried out and the removal over the years of trinity mechanics. If you have something you have spotted to suggest otherwise do say.
Your problem here is that if the combat isn't packaged in a specific 4 or 5 man group, then it isn't group combat to you, despite the presence or even need for teamwork. Puzzle Pirates, Wizard 101, Pirate 101, Asheron's Call, Atlantica Online, Grepolis, and Travian all have other group combat systems, some of them being around for a decade or so.
I am not the sort of person who uses "maybe" and "IMO" as a form of punctuation in my replies. As I am human, I think anyone should be able to guess I could be wrong.
Correct. You've been very consistent in expressing that it isn't that you don't know the difference between fact and opinion, it is that you don't care there is a difference.
EDIT: Quirhid, thank you for bringing up the obvious one - almost every form of PVP.
I am really not sure what Quirhid is getting at. He mentioned table top RPG's not sure what he is trying to say there?
Of those games you mentioned I have played Asheron's Call (ages ago) and had a look at Wizard 101 (not sure its a MMO). I suppose this may come down to what we call a different group combat system? To me AC was not different, can you tell us how it was? Wizard did have a different mechanic, not sure I would call it a group combat mechanic but my time there was limited. The rest I have never played, could you give us a couple of examples of how they differ?
We may be moving away from what a MMO is here. I think EVE has a very different group combat mechanic, but it is not a MMO in my eyes. Likewise Planetside does, but it is a MMOFPS and borrows much from FPS group play. So if you start to move away from MMO's you will find other kinds of group PvP.
Large scale PvP is group PvP. Take AoC or DAoC sieges for example. But yes, here I am focusing on smaller groups, I am not saying there has been no development on the larger scale, but I do see it as tactical rather than group role.
Even large scale is built for easymode solo players now. Take that GW2 siege just announced, correct me if I misheard, but I think Bill said it lasted no more than 15 mins. OMG the drama if anyone should be expected to be online for more than 15 minutes.
I gave up on group content in GW2 before I think I got enough experience with it to fully understand and appreciate the nuances. I'm sure I'm not alone in that.
I will consent to saying that the trinity is easier for me to understand, only because I've learned everything about it with years and years and years of practice in WoW since 2004, as well as other games like Rift, WAR, FFXI, SWTOR, FFXIV, etc.
So I won't say one is truly better than the other, but due to my familiarity with trinity-based combat mechanics, I'd say that it gives designers a LOT of room and opportunity to create interesting mechanics and encounters.
There are few challenges left for me outside of say raid-wide healing, which can certainly be a fun/difficult task, as over the years the rest has really devolved into simply memorizing patterns - pretty much learning dance moves and executing them.
Go here, turn this way, move out of that, focus on this, now focus on that. Etc.
The "art" of tanking/dps/cc etc. seems long gone from these games.
When it was there, it was something truly special.
GW2 was so lacking for me I did not get that far as well. We know trinity, so it is easy to do of the bat. But I am happy to try out a new combat system, the issue is we have trinity or a zerg. In the interests of easymode and solo play trinity was dropped, so we are not going to see other group combat systems.
Group combat systems simply do not fit into where designers want MMO's heading.
I love how simple and black & white your world is. You've got it all figured out, I see. How could anyone disagree with that?
My evidence is the near total lack of any other group combat system being tried out and the removal over the years of trinity mechanics. If you have something you have spotted to suggest otherwise do say.
Your problem here is that if the combat isn't packaged in a specific 4 or 5 man group, then it isn't group combat to you, despite the presence or even need for teamwork. Puzzle Pirates, Wizard 101, Pirate 101, Asheron's Call, Atlantica Online, Grepolis, and Travian all have other group combat systems, some of them being around for a decade or so.
I am not the sort of person who uses "maybe" and "IMO" as a form of punctuation in my replies. As I am human, I think anyone should be able to guess I could be wrong.
Correct. You've been very consistent in expressing that it isn't that you don't know the difference between fact and opinion, it is that you don't care there is a difference.
EDIT: Quirhid, thank you for bringing up the obvious one - almost every form of PVP.
I am really not sure what Quirhid is getting at. He mentioned table top RPG's not sure what he is trying to say there?
Of those games you mentioned I have played Asheron's Call (ages ago) and had a look at Wizard 101 (not sure its a MMO). I suppose this may come down to what we call a different group combat system? To me AC was not different, can you tell us how it was? Wizard did have a different mechanic, not sure I would call it a group combat mechanic but my time there was limited. The rest I have never played, could you give us a couple of examples of how they differ?
We may be moving away from what a MMO is here. I think EVE has a very different group combat mechanic, but it is not a MMO in my eyes. Likewise Planetside does, but it is a MMOFPS and borrows much from FPS group play. So if you start to move away from MMO's you will find other kinds of group PvP.
Large scale PvP is group PvP. Take AoC or DAoC sieges for example. But yes, here I am focusing on smaller groups, I am not saying there has been no development on the larger scale, but I do see it as tactical rather than group role.
Even large scale is built for easymode solo players now. Take that GW2 siege just announced, correct me if I misheard, but I think Bill said it lasted no more than 15 mins. OMG the drama if anyone should be expected to be online for more than 15 minutes.
Yeah, if you exlude MMOs from MMOs....EvE is not MMO? GW2 is not MMO?
Which MMOs should we exlude from the MMOs so it can fit your argument. Please, make a list
In fact what YOU really want is small coop/lobby game, which wouldnt be included in MMOs.
Originally posted by Loktofeit You've been very consistent in expressing that it isn't that you don't know the difference between fact and opinion, it is that you don't care there is a difference.
Wizard 101 (not sure its a MMO).
I think EVE has a very different group combat mechanic, but it is not a MMO in my eyes.
When I made that statement, I was hoping you would understand it is something to work on correcting and not something to proudly reinforce in your very next post.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Originally posted by Loktofeit You've been very consistent in expressing that it isn't that you don't know the difference between fact and opinion, it is that you don't care there is a difference.
Wizard 101 (not sure its a MMO).
I think EVE has a very different group combat mechanic, but it is not a MMO in my eyes.
When I made that statement, I was hoping you would understand it is something to work on correcting and not something to proudly reinforce in your very next post.
This is for the other fellow - when did I say GW2 was not a MMO?
Loktofeit if that is your only answer, it seems to me you have no reply. You seem to know these games better than me, tell us what is different.
I am making an argument about mainstream MMOs, If you wish to widen this out to PvP in all games, then yes there have been changes. That does not answer my issues about where the MMO industry has gone.
Originally posted by Loktofeit You've been very consistent in expressing that it isn't that you don't know the difference between fact and opinion, it is that you don't care there is a difference.
Wizard 101 (not sure its a MMO).
I think EVE has a very different group combat mechanic, but it is not a MMO in my eyes.
When I made that statement, I was hoping you would understand it is something to work on correcting and not something to proudly reinforce in your very next post.
This is for the other fellow - when did I say GW2 was not a MMO?
Loktofeit if that is your only answer, it seems to me you have no reply. You seem to know these games better than me, tell us what is different.
I am making an argument about mainstream MMOs, If you wish to widen this out to PvP in all games, then yes there have been changes. That does not answer my issues about where the MMO industry has gone.
Eve is very much a MMO.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Originally posted by Loktofeit You've been very consistent in expressing that it isn't that you don't know the difference between fact and opinion, it is that you don't care there is a difference.
Wizard 101 (not sure its a MMO).
I think EVE has a very different group combat mechanic, but it is not a MMO in my eyes.
When I made that statement, I was hoping you would understand it is something to work on correcting and not something to proudly reinforce in your very next post.
This is for the other fellow - when did I say GW2 was not a MMO?
Loktofeit if that is your only answer, it seems to me you have no reply. You seem to know these games better than me, tell us what is different.
I am making an argument about mainstream MMOs, If you wish to widen this out to PvP in all games, then yes there have been changes. That does not answer my issues about where the MMO industry has gone.
You made it so that no one can give you an answer, because when you get an example that you don't like, you just stick your head in the sand and say "Thats not an MMO in my eyes."
Scot, I gave you a reply. You returned with this. Honestly, crap like that should get you punted from the forum or at least the thread, because you've been here long enough that a reply like that is either intentionally trying to provoke a negative response or simply a refusal to understand even the basics of the discussion you are interjecting in. I say 'refusal' because you have been posting here in these same types of threads for over a decade. If you don't understanding even the basics of the subject matter by now, it is because you simply don't want to.
It's like discussing mathematics and every time the number four comes up in an equation some guy jumps in to insist the solution is wrong because in their world the value of four is nine and a quarter.
It's pretty frustrating.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Comments
They cant get it, its like showing master chess player playing chess to someone who has no clue about chess.
I prefer systems with specialization.
Not too much specialization. But not too little, either.
Theres a point at which a character is no longer a one trick pony, but not yet a jack of all trades either. When you have quite a couple of possibilities, and quite a bit of complexity to manage, but you're still very different from other characters.
And thats the point - every class should play very differently. So things that are important in one class should be completely irrelevant in another.
This automatically leads to some sort of trinity.
I also think I might prefer the tank/healer/crowdcontrol trinity over the tank/healer/damagedealer trinity. Because in the former, everybody has to work towards the same goal. In the later, damage dealers automatically will be brilliant solists and will have little to do in party except deaggro and will end up blaming the tank and/or the healer when things go wrong.
One could also add more roles. Maybe mobs hit so hard, without a debuffer no tank can manage the pain ? Or maybe without a buffer, damage output will be rather mediocre.
I'm sure, in practice, for those who fully understand GW2's professions and the encounters etc. it is a whole lot less random than it looks - and I'm not saying it doesn't take a measure of skill to play at a high level in such a system.
To me it looks like, and from my experience playing GW2, it feels like while yes you are playing with other people, you are coordinating and playing off of each other's abilities and such etc.
It never felt like we were actually dependent on each other in any way.
Like, it really didn't matter who they were or what they were doing - as long as everyone generally knew how to play their class a little bit and understood the encounters at the most basic level - nothing else really mattered.
It didn't matter I was a Guardian with a 2H sword & 1H Mace + Focus combo specced into Zeal and Radiance (hard to remember now, racking my brain for the right terms!)
And it didn't matter if that guy was an Elementalist using a staff & fire magic vs. a dagger/focus and Water.
Really just felt like builds and classes and character didn't matter at all. Which is kind of the point, I know, but because it didn't matter - it didn't matter to me either.
Where's the fun in that?
I mean, I like knowing "I'm the tank. I have a defensive spec, and am geared for survival and threat generation. My job is to keep everyone in my party alive, and lead this group at a comfortable pace so that everyone wins."
"That gal is the healer - she's specced into Holy and has high Spirit - good, should be able to keep her mana up so I can chain pull pretty quickly."
"That Mage's talents are all over the place - I'm going to have to be pretty clear on what CC I want for each pull and who is assigned to Moon and Circle for each. I'd better keep on eye on his threat and save my Taunt for when he invariably pulls aggro."
To me - that is interdependence. That is everyone in the group being important - having a role that they must execute in order for all of us to win. If they don't pull their weight, we will all suffer.
It's a social obligation in my mind - I am not going to tool around and waste these people's time, because I understand that they are people sitting behind a keyboard just like me, they have time that is precious to them, I'm not going to waste it by not doing my best each and every pull.
That is trinity combat to me.
That, to me, is the difference and what makes it really stand out vs. non-trinity based party mechanics.
You said, there is many spec you should use. But really there is only one best spec for every situation.
If you actually take a look at those video I linked. There is a reason for every button they pressed. Every weapon or skill they used have a reason. Every trait they use have a reason. Because that's the best way to do things.
To me the mentality between GW2 dungeon and other mmorpg is quite different.
In other mmorpg, you just try to "beat" the dungeon. In GW2, you try to do the dungeon as fast and as smooth as possible. Partially because people have been running the same dungeon for eternity.
Usually people in other mmorpg move onto raids once they finished dungeon. But GW2 dont' have that. So those dungeon crawler just keep repeating the same dungeon over and over again.
That's not to say I dislike the system in other mmorpg. I love raiding in other mmorpg, and find it very interesting and techincal. But if you only compare 5 man dungeon, I find GW2 far superior.
And the good thing about not depending on other people is you can actually solo those dungeon. If you really think those people are just using random skills. Why don't you try to solo AC yourself. Or try to beat the world record for 5 man speed run. You should have an account anyway and you dont' need to pay any money.
Actually, there is a huge difference between builds in GW2, and the examples you give above of a traditional mmo setup are almost exactly equivalent to the thought process you would go through in GW2- except the "tanking" is very different and there is a greater degree of fluidity in that you can still achieve to a certain extent without an ideal set up. Another difference is that players can experiment with synergistic group set ups beyond a very strictly defined heal/dps/tank set up.
I can understand what you mean though in terms of running with pugs- you just work around what you have with like you said not necessarily a strong sense of specific role. But the same can be said for tank&spank games- as long as everyone vaguely knows what to do you can get by.
To elaborate on my GW2 take on your above examples though, I would go through a similar thought process in spvp. If I am running a shout/bow warrior I know my role, if our mage is glass I know how they are going to play and what "purpose" they serve; in other words depending on the players/classes/builds we would use different strategies to win. There are a greater variety of roles and flexibility to graduate between total support and total burst, but there is still a strong dependence on everyone in a team and an understanding and correct use of build/role.
It is much more complex than many other games, partly because of the deep customization. But to use your example of an ele, my game will play a hell of a lot different if the ele on my team is using a staff or using daggers.
I gave up on group content in GW2 before I think I got enough experience with it to fully understand and appreciate the nuances. I'm sure I'm not alone in that.
I will consent to saying that the trinity is easier for me to understand, only because I've learned everything about it with years and years and years of practice in WoW since 2004, as well as other games like Rift, WAR, FFXI, SWTOR, FFXIV, etc.
So I won't say one is truly better than the other, but due to my familiarity with trinity-based combat mechanics, I'd say that it gives designers a LOT of room and opportunity to create interesting mechanics and encounters.
There are few challenges left for me outside of say raid-wide healing, which can certainly be a fun/difficult task, as over the years the rest has really devolved into simply memorizing patterns - pretty much learning dance moves and executing them.
Go here, turn this way, move out of that, focus on this, now focus on that. Etc.
The "art" of tanking/dps/cc etc. seems long gone from these games.
When it was there, it was something truly special.
You have your preferences, people just dont want to find out they like inferior stuff, i guess its just pride/ego thingy.
For me, i own a car that is inferior to many other cars, but it fullfills everything i want from car to fullfill, and even has some advantages like super low maintenance cost and general cost/km. So i dont really give a shit there are superior cars out there
I think your first sentence describes a great many people, and many of those people are the ones who show random gifs and/or youtube videos of GW2 content to attempt to show the "zerginess" of the game. Even that Tequatl gif a few posts up doesn't even show the full picture of that encounter, since all it shows is the attack team doing what it's supposed to be doing...attacking. Of course, because they themselves don't understand the nuance to what they are viewing, they wind up looking completely ignorant to those who understand what is truly happening.
Other things that might look random, but are completely coordinated are things like elementalists dropping water fields and people using blast finishers to create a ton of aoe healing or blasting fire fields for might stacking, whirling in a light field for condition removal, etc.
I will always admit though that compared to something like WoW, GW2 style action combat is always going to look like mass chaos to most everyone.
I will argue the point of when there was any "art" to the trinity. I don't feel like there was every truly an "art" to it, but rather the mechanics were tuned in such a way that a single mistake could cause a wipe. At the core though, Tanks still taunted, CC'ers still just CC'd and DPS folks DPSed. There hasn't been a fundamental change to the trinity in the nearly 20 years I have been playing mmos. Encounters have changed quite a bit, for the better for the most part.
But it was the enemy's fault..
GW2 was so lacking for me I did not get that far as well. We know trinity, so it is easy to do of the bat. But I am happy to try out a new combat system, the issue is we have trinity or a zerg. In the interests of easymode and solo play trinity was dropped, so we are not going to see other group combat systems.
Group combat systems simply do not fit into where designers want MMO's heading.
I love how simple and black & white your world is. You've got it all figured out, I see. How could anyone disagree with that?
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Indeed. If trinity is all you've know all your life, non-trinity combat, or any PvP for that matter, will seem like chaos.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
And worst part:
they cannot blame anyone else
My evidence is the near total lack of any other group combat system being tried out and the removal over the years of trinity mechanics. If you have something you have spotted to suggest otherwise do say.
I am not the sort of person who uses "maybe" and "IMO" as a form of punctuation in my replies. As I am human, I think anyone should be able to guess I could be wrong.
sorry but calling the trinity superior is EXACTLY the main prob.
you got heal, dd and tanks. everyone has his or her set role. and THAT is what screws the idea.
they simply forgot CC or rather removed on ALL of those chars.
when it started (even in WoW damnit), it was all about sheep sap go.
nowadays? you get a timer from the tank telling the heal to be ready and the dds to take their pots.
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
edit. self moderate.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
How about tabletop RPGs? Games other than MMORPGs? Hell, any PvP in any game! Your lack of evidence is all on you.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
EDIT: Quirhid, thank you for bringing up the obvious one - almost every form of PVP.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I am really not sure what Quirhid is getting at. He mentioned table top RPG's not sure what he is trying to say there?
Of those games you mentioned I have played Asheron's Call (ages ago) and had a look at Wizard 101 (not sure its a MMO). I suppose this may come down to what we call a different group combat system? To me AC was not different, can you tell us how it was? Wizard did have a different mechanic, not sure I would call it a group combat mechanic but my time there was limited. The rest I have never played, could you give us a couple of examples of how they differ?
We may be moving away from what a MMO is here. I think EVE has a very different group combat mechanic, but it is not a MMO in my eyes. Likewise Planetside does, but it is a MMOFPS and borrows much from FPS group play. So if you start to move away from MMO's you will find other kinds of group PvP.
Large scale PvP is group PvP. Take AoC or DAoC sieges for example. But yes, here I am focusing on smaller groups, I am not saying there has been no development on the larger scale, but I do see it as tactical rather than group role.
Even large scale is built for easymode solo players now. Take that GW2 siege just announced, correct me if I misheard, but I think Bill said it lasted no more than 15 mins. OMG the drama if anyone should be expected to be online for more than 15 minutes.
Yeah, if you exlude MMOs from MMOs....EvE is not MMO? GW2 is not MMO?
Which MMOs should we exlude from the MMOs so it can fit your argument. Please, make a list
In fact what YOU really want is small coop/lobby game, which wouldnt be included in MMOs.
When I made that statement, I was hoping you would understand it is something to work on correcting and not something to proudly reinforce in your very next post.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
This is for the other fellow - when did I say GW2 was not a MMO?
Loktofeit if that is your only answer, it seems to me you have no reply. You seem to know these games better than me, tell us what is different.
I am making an argument about mainstream MMOs, If you wish to widen this out to PvP in all games, then yes there have been changes. That does not answer my issues about where the MMO industry has gone.
Eve is very much a MMO.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
You made it so that no one can give you an answer, because when you get an example that you don't like, you just stick your head in the sand and say "Thats not an MMO in my eyes."
Scot, I gave you a reply. You returned with this. Honestly, crap like that should get you punted from the forum or at least the thread, because you've been here long enough that a reply like that is either intentionally trying to provoke a negative response or simply a refusal to understand even the basics of the discussion you are interjecting in. I say 'refusal' because you have been posting here in these same types of threads for over a decade. If you don't understanding even the basics of the subject matter by now, it is because you simply don't want to.
It's like discussing mathematics and every time the number four comes up in an equation some guy jumps in to insist the solution is wrong because in their world the value of four is nine and a quarter.
It's pretty frustrating.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre