Yeah, obviously GW2 had more people playing, but I was surprised just how many of the available servers were either Full or High and very hard to get into. Keep in mind, most of these people are people who pre-purchased already, and from the overwhelmingly positive response to the game....... well, I'd say ANet needs more servers lol
Haha, tremendously well? Do you even listen to yourself. People like him will make the game sell worse, people like you will make it sell worse as well. Only objective analysis/promotion of your game makes people want to look at it, fanboys put people off.
Even if that's true, let's think about something I've said in the past, which is: if you let anyone discourage you from buying a good game, that's your problem. The in-game community from the BWE's was helpful and friendly unlike most MMOs, if someone's spiteful attitude towards some stupid forum thread makes them avoid GW2, whatever. Fact is, this is not going to be the case the vast majority of the time, and "fan boys" are the ones responsible for getting the word out and making the game as popular as it is, even here on MMORPG.com. I thought I proved you wrong enough yesterday, I see you're back for more.
Apparently not, then again I'm not as emotionally vested in internet forums as you are. I don't care if some delusional thinks they stomped an argument or won an internet war, the only thing I took from it was a slight amount of pity towards you.
We'll be the ones saying that when you inflate active account numbers ;DDDDDDDDDDD
Since you mention inflating account numbers......
Tera(released) 11 servers edit - over half are low pop
GW2(beta) 48 servers and had to turn people away because of maxed server capacities.
Hmmm.....
Spin that
*crickets*
Truthfully I didn't know the amount of servers in the BETA, that is quite impressive. You've failed to include the EU and NA servers so TERA is closer to half than the quarter your information represents.
As I say I'm not saying that TERA will be more successful than Guild Wars 2, it definitely won't be. I was more making fun, than making a serious prediction that GW2 will experience massive drop-offs.
We'll be the ones saying that when you inflate active account numbers ;DDDDDDDDDDD
Since you mention inflating account numbers......
Tera(released) 11 servers edit - over half are low pop
GW2(beta) 48 servers and had to turn people away because of maxed server capacities.
Hmmm.....
Spin that
*crickets*
Truthfully I didn't know the amount of servers in the BETA, that is quite impressive. You've failed to include the EU and NA servers so TERA is closer to half than the quarter your information represents.
As I say I'm not saying that TERA will be more successful than Guild Wars 2, it definitely won't be. I was more making fun, than making a serious prediction that GW2 will experience massive drop-offs.
Actually it will have zero drop offs since it has no sub.
You made a fair point about Euro servers I left that out. You could include the Korean servers too and I don't think Tera would have 48 much less at max capacity.
We'll be the ones saying that when you inflate active account numbers ;DDDDDDDDDDD
Since you mention inflating account numbers......
Tera(released) 11 servers edit - over half are low pop
GW2(beta) 48 servers and had to turn people away because of maxed server capacities.
Hmmm.....
Spin that
*crickets*
Truthfully I didn't know the amount of servers in the BETA, that is quite impressive. You've failed to include the EU and NA servers so TERA is closer to half than the quarter your information represents.
As I say I'm not saying that TERA will be more successful than Guild Wars 2, it definitely won't be. I was more making fun, than making a serious prediction that GW2 will experience massive drop-offs.
Actually it will have zero drop offs since it has no sub.
Ummm.....I'm a fan of GW2 and find that comment silly. Dropoffs don't mean subs, it means active playerbase. GW2 may very well see good dropoffs after people hit max because they are used to the neverending carrot on the stick approach. Once they gear their character they might quit because they can't keep gearing up.
We'll be the ones saying that when you inflate active account numbers ;DDDDDDDDDDD
Since you mention inflating account numbers......
Tera(released) 11 servers edit - over half are low pop
GW2(beta) 48 servers and had to turn people away because of maxed server capacities.
Hmmm.....
Spin that
*crickets*
Truthfully I didn't know the amount of servers in the BETA, that is quite impressive. You've failed to include the EU and NA servers so TERA is closer to half than the quarter your information represents.
As I say I'm not saying that TERA will be more successful than Guild Wars 2, it definitely won't be. I was more making fun, than making a serious prediction that GW2 will experience massive drop-offs.
Actually it will have zero drop offs since it has no sub.
I find it sad that you're so defensive about your game that you jump on wording technicalities.
We'll be the ones saying that when you inflate active account numbers ;DDDDDDDDDDD
Since you mention inflating account numbers......
Tera(released) 11 servers edit - over half are low pop
GW2(beta) 48 servers and had to turn people away because of maxed server capacities.
Hmmm.....
Spin that
*crickets*
Truthfully I didn't know the amount of servers in the BETA, that is quite impressive. You've failed to include the EU and NA servers so TERA is closer to half than the quarter your information represents.
As I say I'm not saying that TERA will be more successful than Guild Wars 2, it definitely won't be. I was more making fun, than making a serious prediction that GW2 will experience massive drop-offs.
Actually it will have zero drop offs since it has no sub.
Ummm.....I'm a fan of GW2 and find that comment silly. Dropoffs don't mean subs, it means active playerbase. GW2 may very well see good dropoffs after people hit max because they are used to the neverending carrot on the stick approach. Once they gear their character they might quit because they can't keep gearing up.
Since GW2 has no carrot on a stick or gear grind I believe those people did poor research prior to spending their money.
Restarting GW2 if you get bored of it is as easy as starting the client and pushing the play button.
And to somewhat stay on topic the combat and WvW/competitive PVP is the endgame not gear grind.
We'll be the ones saying that when you inflate active account numbers ;DDDDDDDDDDD
Since you mention inflating account numbers......
Tera(released) 11 servers edit - over half are low pop
GW2(beta) 48 servers and had to turn people away because of maxed server capacities.
Hmmm.....
Spin that
*crickets*
Truthfully I didn't know the amount of servers in the BETA, that is quite impressive. You've failed to include the EU and NA servers so TERA is closer to half than the quarter your information represents.
As I say I'm not saying that TERA will be more successful than Guild Wars 2, it definitely won't be. I was more making fun, than making a serious prediction that GW2 will experience massive drop-offs.
Actually it will have zero drop offs since it has no sub.
Ummm.....I'm a fan of GW2 and find that comment silly. Dropoffs don't mean subs, it means active playerbase. GW2 may very well see good dropoffs after people hit max because they are used to the neverending carrot on the stick approach. Once they gear their character they might quit because they can't keep gearing up.
Since GW2 has no carrot on a stick or gear grind I believe those people did poor research prior to spending their money.
Restarting GW2 if you get bored of it is as easy as starting the client and pushing the play button.
And to somewhat stay on topic the combat and WvW/competitive PVP is the endgame not gear grind.
Genuine question, because though I hate GW2 fanboys with a passion I'm indifferent to the game itself. What is the point of WvWvW/Instanced PvP in the long run?
Gear Rewards? Titles? Leaderboards?
I get that PvP is fun, but even though I enjoyed it in WAR conquering keeps/regions eventually got old.
battle in tera are far better that in guild war 2 , what you guy smoke ?im not saying the game better that gw2 , but the battle system and the action in tera battle are far more fast and dynamic ( get past lvl 20-30 plz before judge tera battle ) .played both game and gw2 only a tab target game ,like wow honestly i know you guy are big big big gw2 fanboy but that just stupid now .
give some credit to other game and stop to be blind . but honestly im sure gw2 will be the better game in the end
but from the topic title , tera win easy for the combat system .
Well, a good many people don't share your opinion. I like GW2 fast, actiony combat, the constant moving and positioning, the self-healing and self-reliance combined with the ability to support your allies, the fact that all characters can have a nice balance of damage, control and support, the need to be situationally aware in combat, etc. Tab-targetting in GW2 is perfectly fine... hell, some skills (mesmer clones and phantasms) require a specific target since they'll only attack the one you target them on and will shatter when that target dies.
Here's how I think of it... if health and damage were balanced, a GW2 character would likely defeat a Tera character with relative ease. Their attacks would be ridiculously easy to avoid or interrupt, they're imbalanced, being stuck in the archaic trinity style...
We'll be the ones saying that when you inflate active account numbers ;DDDDDDDDDDD
Since you mention inflating account numbers......
Tera(released) 11 servers edit - over half are low pop
GW2(beta) 48 servers and had to turn people away because of maxed server capacities.
Hmmm.....
Spin that
*crickets*
Truthfully I didn't know the amount of servers in the BETA, that is quite impressive. You've failed to include the EU and NA servers so TERA is closer to half than the quarter your information represents.
As I say I'm not saying that TERA will be more successful than Guild Wars 2, it definitely won't be. I was more making fun, than making a serious prediction that GW2 will experience massive drop-offs.
Actually it will have zero drop offs since it has no sub.
Ummm.....I'm a fan of GW2 and find that comment silly. Dropoffs don't mean subs, it means active playerbase. GW2 may very well see good dropoffs after people hit max because they are used to the neverending carrot on the stick approach. Once they gear their character they might quit because they can't keep gearing up.
Since GW2 has no carrot on a stick or gear grind I believe those people did poor research prior to spending their money.
Restarting GW2 if you get bored of it is as easy as starting the client and pushing the play button.
And to somewhat stay on topic the combat and WvW/competitive PVP is the endgame not gear grind.
Genuine question, because though I hate GW2 fanboys with a passion I'm indifferent to the game itself. What is the point of WvWvW/Instanced PvP in the long run?
Gear Rewards? Titles? Leaderboards?
I get that PvP is fun, but even though I enjoyed it in WAR conquering keeps/regions eventually got old.
For one thing, the winners of each WvW cycle get buffs for your server's PvE area that may give extra magic find, extra damage, etc. So basically you're fighting for your whole world. Another is the exclusively PvP gear available (no PvP stats, unique skins) that can be earned. Plus it's simply insanely freakin' fun. It really is.
We'll be the ones saying that when you inflate active account numbers ;DDDDDDDDDDD
Since you mention inflating account numbers......
Tera(released) 11 servers edit - over half are low pop
GW2(beta) 48 servers and had to turn people away because of maxed server capacities.
Hmmm.....
Spin that
*crickets*
Truthfully I didn't know the amount of servers in the BETA, that is quite impressive. You've failed to include the EU and NA servers so TERA is closer to half than the quarter your information represents.
As I say I'm not saying that TERA will be more successful than Guild Wars 2, it definitely won't be. I was more making fun, than making a serious prediction that GW2 will experience massive drop-offs.
Actually it will have zero drop offs since it has no sub.
Ummm.....I'm a fan of GW2 and find that comment silly. Dropoffs don't mean subs, it means active playerbase. GW2 may very well see good dropoffs after people hit max because they are used to the neverending carrot on the stick approach. Once they gear their character they might quit because they can't keep gearing up.
Since GW2 has no carrot on a stick or gear grind I believe those people did poor research prior to spending their money.
Restarting GW2 if you get bored of it is as easy as starting the client and pushing the play button.
And to somewhat stay on topic the combat and WvW/competitive PVP is the endgame not gear grind.
Genuine question, because though I hate GW2 fanboys with a passion I'm indifferent to the game itself. What is the point of WvWvW/Instanced PvP in the long run?
Gear Rewards? Titles? Leaderboards?
I get that PvP is fun, but even though I enjoyed it in WAR conquering keeps/regions eventually got old.
For one thing, the winners of each WvW cycle get buffs for your server's PvE area that may give extra magic find, extra damage, etc. So basically you're fighting for your whole world. Another is the exclusively PvP gear available (no PvP stats, unique skins) that can be earned. Plus it's simply insanely freakin' fun. It really is.
If you mean tangable transferable rewards (which I think you do) you get experience, gold, and titles along with legacy items. You could literally jump in PvP at level 1 and play until you are level 80. The whole time you are in PvP you are buffed to 80 but you also get PvE experience that transfers over when you leave PvP. Same as gold and PvP items for WvWvW use only. Structured PvP is an E-sport scene that is completely seperate from the rest of the world of GW2. the only thing carried over there are character looks. Everyone has the same choices of loadouts though to keep things balanced. Nothing transfers in or out of structured PvP except MAYBE titles I believe.
We'll be the ones saying that when you inflate active account numbers ;DDDDDDDDDDD
Since you mention inflating account numbers......
Tera(released) 11 servers edit - over half are low pop
GW2(beta) 48 servers and had to turn people away because of maxed server capacities.
Hmmm.....
Spin that
*crickets*
To be fair, we have no clue how many people per server GW2 vs. TERA can each handle adequately. In reality I'm sure GW2 had more people online though, I mean the hype alone for the game should tell you that. What's your point however? And how does that apply to the topic of this thread, regarding comparison of their combat systems, not the games as a whole?
I tend to prefer the combat in TERA but that is more a matter of personal taste than anything else.
I think an interesting side example to note here is the Elder Scroll series and Bethesda games in general (maybe excluding Skryim). When playing in third person view your character often looks strange and floaty during combat, this is due to a disjoint between what we expect and what we see. In real life you cannot run side to side while swinging a large axe, neither can you peddle backwards while firing a bow. Our brains realize this and the movement of the characters falls into a type of uncanny valley for combat, this plagued the earlier bethesda games and in my opinion that is also why some players think Guild Wars 2 combat doesn't give a very weighty feel to it. When you can move while casting/attacking the top and bottom halves of your character are not in sync graphically and it creates strange twists and motions that bother some people subconsciously because their brains recognize that the human body does not move in that manner. That is why to me personally it feels weird in Guild Wars 2 when I am strafing in circles around someone while flailing my greatsword around.
A lot of people complain about animation lock in TERA, but that is a core part of balancing active gameplay. Name any God of War/Devil May Cry beat-em-up or fighting game that didn't have animation locks and I will show you an awful gameplay system. If you do not have animation locks you often get either A) Spammy combat or Unbalanced melee vs ranged tradeoffs, both of which I think are a little too prevalent in GW 2.
Now I actually enjoyed Guild Wars 2 combat, but the lack of any resource system or vulnerability period while using 90%+ of skills made it a very clusterf*** experience for me, especially in very populated zones or WvWvW pvp. Ironically, despite TERA being the one with crosshair aiming I found GW 2 to have more in common with FPS's. Without resource management and with the constant movement combat is more about mobility and using skills reactionary to the situation which is very reminiscent of an FPS like Unreal Tournament. TERA is more slow and deliberate as attacks have large windups, animation frames that cannot be interrupted, and focuses more on punishment similar to a fighting game like Soul Caliber. Which you prefer is once again up to personal taste, but once again I like TERA a bit more in this respect.
And of course lastly the animations have something to do with it. When you hit things in TERA they flinch, they get bowled over, you get a satisfying sound effect that changes according to your weapon/attack and blood sprays in every direction. WIth player collisions enabled stronger attacks can physically force your opponent backwards even if they block with their shield. In GW 2 your attacks often feel very insubstantial. If you hit someone with a flurry of attacks as a Mesmer often you have no real indication that you did anything besides some combat numbers popping up, better hit effects would give the combat a more meaty feel to it. I do feel like the weapon swapping in GW 2 is kind of gimmicky though, really all you are doing is adding a hotkey to access half your skillbar and sometimes putting a cooldown on it.
In the end I actually enjoyed the combat in both games, but TERA definitely has my vote for better combat system. Better questing system however....
I tend to prefer the combat in TERA but that is more a matter of personal taste than anything else.
I think an interesting side example to note here is the Elder Scroll series and Bethesda games in general (maybe excluding Skryim). When playing in third person view your character often looks strange and floaty during combat, this is due to a disjoint between what we expect and what we see. In real life you cannot run side to side while swinging a large axe, neither can you peddle backwards while firing a bow. Our brains realize this and the movement of the characters falls into a type of uncanny valley for combat, this plagued the earlier bethesda games and in my opinion that is also why some players think Guild Wars 2 combat doesn't give a very weighty feel to it. When you can move while casting/attacking the top and bottom halves of your character are not in sync graphically and it creates strange twists and motions that bother some people subconsciously because their brains recognize that the human body does not move in that manner. That is why to me personally it feels weird in Guild Wars 2 when I am strafing in circles around someone while flailing my greatsword around.
A lot of people complain about animation lock in TERA, but that is a core part of balancing active gameplay. Name any God of War/Devil May Cry beat-em-up or fighting game that didn't have animation locks and I will show you an awful gameplay system. If you do not have animation locks you often get either A) Spammy combat or Unbalanced melee vs ranged tradeoffs, both of which I think are a little too prevalent in GW 2.
Now I actually enjoyed Guild Wars 2 combat, but the lack of any resource system or vulnerability period while using 90%+ of skills made it a very clusterf*** experience for me, especially in very populated zones or WvWvW pvp. Ironically, despite TERA being the one with crosshair aiming I found GW 2 to have more in common with FPS's. Without resource management and with the constant movement combat is more about mobility and using skills reactionary to the situation which is very reminiscent of an FPS like Unreal Tournament. TERA is more slow and deliberate as attacks have large windups, animation frames that cannot be interrupted, and focuses more on punishment similar to a fighting game like Soul Caliber. Which you prefer is once again up to personal taste, but once again I like TERA a bit more in this respect.
And of course lastly the animations have something to do with it. When you hit things in TERA they flinch, they get bowled over, you get a satisfying sound effect that changes according to your weapon/attack and blood sprays in every direction. WIth player collisions enabled stronger attacks can physically force your opponent backwards even if they block with their shield. In GW 2 your attacks often feel very insubstantial. If you hit someone with a flurry of attacks as a Mesmer often you have no real indication that you did anything besides some combat numbers popping up, better hit effects would give the combat a more meaty feel to it. I do feel like the weapon swapping in GW 2 is kind of gimmicky though, really all you are doing is adding a hotkey to access half your skillbar and sometimes putting a cooldown on it.
In the end I actually enjoyed the combat in both games, but TERA definitely has my vote for better combat system. Better questing system however....
Where did you come from? This is everything I've said in the past but better worded and even surprised me as I didn't think of it "uncanny valley but for combat". Brilliant.
Permission to use your post in the future?
I think only time will tell who was right in their choice of combat mechanics but I'm leaning strongly towards TERA. ArenaNet has their balancing work cut out for them. You mentioned combat being a clusterf*ck? That's exactly how I felt when it got to several players doing something together. Feedback is. just. not. there. And the times it is, it's very poor IMO.
I can't judge that right now, as that's something that only time will truly tell. Two, three months after launch or so? I did enjoy swapping weapons out and I honestly hope that all the weapons each class can use will be just as viable in almost every situation (more balancing, heh).
Where did you come from? This is everything I've said in the past but better worded and even surprised me as I didn't think of it "uncanny valley but for combat". Brilliant.
Permission to use your post in the future?
Feel free, I've checked this forum periodically for awhile now but never felt the need to make an account. With all the exciting MMO's coming out this year though I thought it might be a good time to do so. It's a shame that the GW 2 hype has forced it into the role WoW used to dominate, the "this game is good but it's not going to be better than GW2" syndrome that makes playerbases extremely hostile and less likely to play multiple MMO's at one time.
MMO loyalty is fine and all since it can often promote community, but it gets kind of ridiculous when it is for a game that is not even released yet. For example this thread is comparing combat in TERA vs GW2, but with GW 2 not even being released for who knows how long who cares which is better. You can always just play TERA now and switch later, or just play both.
As for the topic itself I would like to add that open world pvp in TERA works extremely well. The plethora of escape skills and hard CC + instant mounting means that if you try to grief someone that doesn't want to fight back it is easy for them to get away a good percentage of the time. The ratio of damage done to life pool for TERA's pvp combat is fairly balanced where the attacks that do heavy damage are easy to avoid so you never feel like you are gibbed with no chance to fight back (something I really hated in WoW).
GW 2 WvW was fun but almost all the time it was small zergs like GW 1 where some unfortunate souls where stomped over by superior numbers, and whoever tried to stay behind to defend got stampeded themselves a minute or two later. Since even friendly bodies have collisions in TERA (and can block projectiles), it is much harder for you to get treaded by 3-4 guys because they will actually get in each others way. I feel that the explosions and firey sparks are a bit overdone in GW 2 as well, making it hard to differentiate skills and what is happening on higher settings. However you could say the same for the combat numbers in TERA as well depending on how far zoomed in you play on your character.
I tend to prefer the combat in TERA but that is more a matter of personal taste than anything else.
I think an interesting side example to note here is the Elder Scroll series and Bethesda games in general (maybe excluding Skryim). When playing in third person view your character often looks strange and floaty during combat, this is due to a disjoint between what we expect and what we see. In real life you cannot run side to side while swinging a large axe, neither can you peddle backwards while firing a bow. Our brains realize this and the movement of the characters falls into a type of uncanny valley for combat, this plagued the earlier bethesda games and in my opinion that is also why some players think Guild Wars 2 combat doesn't give a very weighty feel to it. When you can move while casting/attacking the top and bottom halves of your character are not in sync graphically and it creates strange twists and motions that bother some people subconsciously because their brains recognize that the human body does not move in that manner. That is why to me personally it feels weird in Guild Wars 2 when I am strafing in circles around someone while flailing my greatsword around.
A lot of people complain about animation lock in TERA, but that is a core part of balancing active gameplay. Name any God of War/Devil May Cry beat-em-up or fighting game that didn't have animation locks and I will show you an awful gameplay system. If you do not have animation locks you often get either A) Spammy combat or Unbalanced melee vs ranged tradeoffs, both of which I think are a little too prevalent in GW 2.
Now I actually enjoyed Guild Wars 2 combat, but the lack of any resource system or vulnerability period while using 90%+ of skills made it a very clusterf*** experience for me, especially in very populated zones or WvWvW pvp. Ironically, despite TERA being the one with crosshair aiming I found GW 2 to have more in common with FPS's. Without resource management and with the constant movement combat is more about mobility and using skills reactionary to the situation which is very reminiscent of an FPS like Unreal Tournament. TERA is more slow and deliberate as attacks have large windups, animation frames that cannot be interrupted, and focuses more on punishment similar to a fighting game like Soul Caliber. Which you prefer is once again up to personal taste, but once again I like TERA a bit more in this respect.
And of course lastly the animations have something to do with it. When you hit things in TERA they flinch, they get bowled over, you get a satisfying sound effect that changes according to your weapon/attack and blood sprays in every direction. WIth player collisions enabled stronger attacks can physically force your opponent backwards even if they block with their shield. In GW 2 your attacks often feel very insubstantial. If you hit someone with a flurry of attacks as a Mesmer often you have no real indication that you did anything besides some combat numbers popping up, better hit effects would give the combat a more meaty feel to it. I do feel like the weapon swapping in GW 2 is kind of gimmicky though, really all you are doing is adding a hotkey to access half your skillbar and sometimes putting a cooldown on it.
In the end I actually enjoyed the combat in both games, but TERA definitely has my vote for better combat system. Better questing system however....
You are one of the few critics I feel I can talk to. We both have our different opinions on these games so it is obvious we will not change each others minds. I've played Tera, you've played GW2 (I hope, else we have nothing to talk about until you have). I never really got the "floaty" feeling in GW2. Attacks do make the characters recoil and even knock them on their ass. They can't have animations interrupting attacks though less you get Tera. I mean that in no disrespect but I feel that the animation lock was the single worst move they made.
There are animation locks in other action games but you can't tell me you see no difference between GoW combat and Tera combat. And actually GoW and devil may cry have zero permanent animations. 90% of them can be interrupted with a block or a dodge. Moving on though I feel the hit animations aren't over the top because it kills the flow of combat. They have to still be able to hit you back. If every move animation locked the enemy things would be far too easy. No matter how much damage they could do just cycle hit's and keep them locked.
This was a big problem in Monster hunter and follows through in Tera. In MH a coordinated party could keep a rathalos (one of the games premier wyverns) literally locked in place by just repeating certain attacks. I've seen it done in Tera as well. In fact, I did it in Tera. You can animation lock BAM's by cycling moves and syncing them with others in your party.
Moving on to resource systems. Every class has one. Not sure how you missed that. Every class's abilities use a resource system. So...yeah.
Every skill has a vulnerability period. Not sure how you missed that either. Most skills have a wind-up which varies depending on the skill. Every skill also has an associated animation that goes along with it. You have animation lock in GW2 it just doesn't lock you standing still MOST OF THE TIME. For example if I, as a thief, use the flying lotus dual dagger skill. I am locked flying forward while spinning my blades. Can't move any other direction. In essence the whole move is a lock.
Again it just doesn't lock you standing still most of the time. The only game that has any weight to blows is probably dead island. It can only get away with that because zombies are everywhere so it doesn't matter if you lock one. Do you know how many times I've punched a centaur in GoW with a cestus fist just to have it stand still? The only thing that happens is you have a weighted hit screen to impart impact. Happens all the time in DMC too. The only enemies that really feel impact are smaller minions. Even they sometimes are immune to scaled hit animations.
So I disagree with you there. I didn't feel floaty nor did I see anything that defies the human body. Also swinging a greatsword running looks wierd to us because we don't live in the middle ages. Nobody uses a greatsword.
Do you think that in the crusades they seriously came to a complete halt to wind up and strike someone with a greatsword? In history longswordsman were shock troopers and charged into battle first. yes, they charged in, with huge swords. Swinging AND running. None of them came to a halt in front of the front lines to swing. They charged through the lines swinging and running.
Just as archers moved and fired. If anything the combat is more realistic. Real warfare with spears and swords did not take place standing still jabbing your weapons at each other. Everyone was constantly moving unless they were part of a phalanx or something.
Where did you come from? This is everything I've said in the past but better worded and even surprised me as I didn't think of it "uncanny valley but for combat". Brilliant.
Permission to use your post in the future?
Feel free, I've checked this forum periodically for awhile now but never felt the need to make an account. With all the exciting MMO's coming out this year though I thought it might be a good time to do so. It's a shame that the GW 2 hype has forced it into the role WoW used to dominate, the "this game is good but it's not going to be better than GW2" syndrome that makes playerbases extremely hostile and less likely to play multiple MMO's at one time.
MMO loyalty is fine and all since it can often promote community, but it gets kind of ridiculous when it is for a game that is not even released yet. For example this thread is comparing combat in TERA vs GW2, but with GW 2 not even being released for who knows how long who cares which is better. You can always just play TERA now and switch later, or just play both.
As for the topic itself I would like to add that open world pvp in TERA works extremely well. The plethora of escape skills and hard CC + instant mounting means that if you try to grief someone that doesn't want to fight back it is easy for them to get away a good percentage of the time. The ratio of damage done to life pool for TERA's pvp combat is fairly balanced where the attacks that do heavy damage are easy to avoid so you never feel like you are gibbed with no chance to fight back (something I really hated in WoW).
GW 2 WvW was fun but almost all the time it was small zergs like GW 1 where some unfortunate souls where stomped over by superior numbers, and whoever tried to stay behind to defend got stampeded themselves a minute or two later. Since even friendly bodies have collisions in TERA (and can block projectiles), it is much harder for you to get treaded by 3-4 guys because they will actually get in each others way. I feel that the explosions and firey sparks are a bit overdone in GW 2 as well, making it hard to differentiate skills and what is happening on higher settings. However you could say the same for the combat numbers in TERA as well depending on how far zoomed in you play on your character.
I'd also like to address the zerging. Which doesn't happen. True players are in big numbers but they always seperate into smaller skirmishes. There is no zerging out single players. Here, watch this. http://www.talesoftyria.com/. its a podcast of GW2 and in the beginning shows some WvWvW.
I'm not sure if you played it and I won't sit here and tell you your wrong in your personal experience if you have. That video shows my experience with WvWvW. Players attack together then quickly disperse as they battle in their own pockets of 2v2 or whatever. Not once were there more than 3 people targeting me at once. Which I don't consider being zerged.
I could walk into these huge clouds of players and not be one shot. I'd get picked out by an enemy in the crowed and we'd battle. Everyone else battling their oponents completely oblivious to me and this man.
Genuine question, because though I hate GW2 fanboys with a passion I'm indifferent to the game itself. What is the point of WvWvW/Instanced PvP in the long run?
Gear Rewards? Titles? Leaderboards?
I get that PvP is fun, but even though I enjoyed it in WAR conquering keeps/regions eventually got old.
I think the fact that GW2 basically always and continuously presents you with a challenge no matter where you go + that its more based mobility in general makes it overall more enjoyable.
Even if Tera had a better system in the abstract (which I don't think it does) combat is a a two sided game your character is only one side of it.
You are one of the few critics I feel I can talk to. We both have our different opinions on these games so it is obvious we will not change each others minds. I've played Tera, you've played GW2 (I hope, else we have nothing to talk about until you have). I never really got the "floaty" feeling in GW2. Attacks do make the characters recoil and even knock them on their ass. They can't have animations interrupting attacks though less you get Tera. I mean that in no disrespect but I feel that the animation lock was the single worst move they made.
There are animation locks in other action games but you can't tell me you see no difference between GoW combat and Tera combat. And actually GoW and devil may cry have zero permanent animations. 90% of them can be interrupted with a block or a dodge. Moving on though I feel the hit animations aren't over the top because it kills the flow of combat. They have to still be able to hit you back. If every move animation locked the enemy things would be far too easy. No matter how much damage they could do just cycle hit's and keep them locked.
This was a big problem in Monster hunter and follows through in Tera. In MH a coordinated party could keep a rathalos (one of the games premier wyverns) literally locked in place by just repeating certain attacks. I've seen it done in Tera as well. In fact, I did it in Tera. You can animation lock BAM's by cycling moves and syncing them with others in your party.
Moving on to resource systems. Every class has one. Not sure how you missed that. Every class's abilities use a resource system. So...yeah.
Every skill has a vulnerability period. Not sure how you missed that either. Most skills have a wind-up which varies depending on the skill. Every skill also has an associated animation that goes along with it. You have animation lock in GW2 it just doesn't lock you standing still MOST OF THE TIME. For example if I, as a thief, use the flying lotus dual dagger skill. I am locked flying forward while spinning my blades. Can't move any other direction. In essence the whole move is a lock.
Again it just doesn't lock you standing still most of the time. The only game that has any weight to blows is probably dead island. It can only get away with that because zombies are everywhere so it doesn't matter if you lock one. Do you know how many times I've punched a centaur in GoW with a cestus fist just to have it stand still? The only thing that happens is you have a weighted hit screen to impart impact. Happens all the time in DMC too. The only enemies that really feel impact are smaller minions. Even they sometimes are immune to scaled hit animations.
So I disagree with you there. I didn't feel floaty nor did I see anything that defies the human body. Also swinging a greatsword running looks wierd to us because we don't live in the middle ages. Nobody uses a greatsword.
Do you think that in the crusades they seriously came to a complete halt to wind up and strike someone with a greatsword? In history longswordsman were shock troopers and charged into battle first. yes, they charged in, with huge swords. Swinging AND running. None of them came to a halt in front of the front lines to swing. They charged through the lines swinging and running.
Just as archers moved and fired. If anything the combat is more realistic. Real warfare with spears and swords did not take place standing still jabbing your weapons at each other. Everyone was constantly moving unless they were part of a phalanx or something.
Well, to address your points (and I did play quite a bit over BWE although I never got anyone above early twenties since I tried a lot of classes):
- For the example with longswordsman, archers, and such. In a real charge there would be factors like momentum, fatigue, swing directions effecting impact, etc. Obviously I don't expect all that in a game because it would be way to hard to implement for the most part, but the lack of it really is what makes the difference. If someone charged forward with a greatsword and does a big homerun swing at the end that looks right, if I run literally in circles around someone while my giant sword waves back and forth like a toothpick independent of my legs that is when it strikes me as weird. However if you are used to that kind of animation it probably would not bother you as much. The feel of meaty blos is also more of a presentation thing, as you feel like you are hitting something with the blood sprays and sparks as you make contact. It's more an aesthetics thing in this case where personal preference will decide it.
- As for WvW my experience was much different than yours. Having played TONS of GW1 this was a lot like AB, fun but kind of zergy. Most of the time the fights would be 5 vs 2 or 6 vs 3 or somesuch as small packs would overrun points defended by only a handful of players. However as tactics mature in the game this could easily change. But this could have just been my experience with the game and you could easily have had a different one. (However it is interesting to note that Arenanet has historically been very rocky with balance, since GW1 was very very Fotm and nerfs where almost always devastating hammers).
- As for the MH comparison this is simply not true in TERA as stronger bosses all have hefty CC immunity. The GoW one is more apt since very few skills in TERA can cancel cast, but this is probably because TERA is an MMO and GoW is not (cancel casting would be very hard to balance for in pvp in a non-fighting game). In GW2 some skills do have animations that lock you into a certain movement or direction, but in Tera almost everything does. The more important distinction to note is that movement is the most IMPORTANT type of animation locking, since the ability to move while performing an action has historically been the hardest thing to balance in games. WoW had to add dead zones to hunters because they could move while firing, anything that can move while firing/casting is usually extremely OP in MOBA's, etc. If your ranged classes are not locked into standing still animations while casting or firing you will have to compensate with melee slows and gap closers and that can quickly become a slippery slope when it comes to pvp. Sure you can argue that every class has a ranged option as well but that just means you are fighting fire with fire because melee can't cut it. They have a long time to balance this though so it could easily turn out OK.
- It seemed rather chaotic actually due to how much skills where being spammed (especially in pve content although this may have been because I was on a hella populated server) not sure what you mean by a resource system though, the only one I really noticed was cooldowns which is not really a resource system by itself and more of a tiered global cooldown.
Right now I still stand by my opinion that TERA combat is better. However the caveat is that GW2 has a long development time still and could easily change my opinion by the time it releases.
I tend to prefer the combat in TERA but that is more a matter of personal taste than anything else.
I think an interesting side example to note here is the Elder Scroll series and Bethesda games in general (maybe excluding Skryim). When playing in third person view your character often looks strange and floaty during combat, this is due to a disjoint between what we expect and what we see. In real life you cannot run side to side while swinging a large axe, neither can you peddle backwards while firing a bow. Our brains realize this and the movement of the characters falls into a type of uncanny valley for combat, this plagued the earlier bethesda games and in my opinion that is also why some players think Guild Wars 2 combat doesn't give a very weighty feel to it. When you can move while casting/attacking the top and bottom halves of your character are not in sync graphically and it creates strange twists and motions that bother some people subconsciously because their brains recognize that the human body does not move in that manner. That is why to me personally it feels weird in Guild Wars 2 when I am strafing in circles around someone while flailing my greatsword around.
A lot of people complain about animation lock in TERA, but that is a core part of balancing active gameplay. Name any God of War/Devil May Cry beat-em-up or fighting game that didn't have animation locks and I will show you an awful gameplay system. If you do not have animation locks you often get either A) Spammy combat or Unbalanced melee vs ranged tradeoffs, both of which I think are a little too prevalent in GW 2.
Now I actually enjoyed Guild Wars 2 combat, but the lack of any resource system or vulnerability period while using 90%+ of skills made it a very clusterf*** experience for me, especially in very populated zones or WvWvW pvp. Ironically, despite TERA being the one with crosshair aiming I found GW 2 to have more in common with FPS's. Without resource management and with the constant movement combat is more about mobility and using skills reactionary to the situation which is very reminiscent of an FPS like Unreal Tournament. TERA is more slow and deliberate as attacks have large windups, animation frames that cannot be interrupted, and focuses more on punishment similar to a fighting game like Soul Caliber. Which you prefer is once again up to personal taste, but once again I like TERA a bit more in this respect.
And of course lastly the animations have something to do with it. When you hit things in TERA they flinch, they get bowled over, you get a satisfying sound effect that changes according to your weapon/attack and blood sprays in every direction. WIth player collisions enabled stronger attacks can physically force your opponent backwards even if they block with their shield. In GW 2 your attacks often feel very insubstantial. If you hit someone with a flurry of attacks as a Mesmer often you have no real indication that you did anything besides some combat numbers popping up, better hit effects would give the combat a more meaty feel to it. I do feel like the weapon swapping in GW 2 is kind of gimmicky though, really all you are doing is adding a hotkey to access half your skillbar and sometimes putting a cooldown on it.
In the end I actually enjoyed the combat in both games, but TERA definitely has my vote for better combat system. Better questing system however....
Where did you come from? This is everything I've said in the past but better worded and even surprised me as I didn't think of it "uncanny valley but for combat". Brilliant.
Permission to use your post in the future?
I think only time will tell who was right in their choice of combat mechanics but I'm leaning strongly towards TERA. ArenaNet has their balancing work cut out for them. You mentioned combat being a clusterf*ck? That's exactly how I felt when it got to several players doing something together. Feedback is. just. not. there. And the times it is, it's very poor IMO.
I can't judge that right now, as that's something that only time will truly tell. Two, three months after launch or so? I did enjoy swapping weapons out and I honestly hope that all the weapons each class can use will be just as viable in almost every situation (more balancing, heh).
Actually you can move side to side while swinging an axe.
You just don't run. Proper footwork allows you to move and attack. Its allows you to advance and retreat linearly in any direction or in a circular motion. A good fighter in only planted for power for a VERY brief moment.
You can take it to the bank that anyone I spar with that "animation locked" would get his ass handed to him everytime.
The reason many games look weird is they can capture anything other than running. Fighters don't run they use footwork and turns of the hip. Games don't allow you to control your characters hips. All fighting styles teach you that the hips are the key and foot work is essentialy.
The bow part is correct though. You can fire a bow on the run but you will be wildly in accurate at Short range I believe a good archer can do it with the right bow but he'd have to aim for the body and not necessarily have a good idea where he would hit.
Now horse mounted archers can shoot accurately on the move but they have methods of establishing a dynamic stability on the horse.
You are one of the few critics I feel I can talk to. We both have our different opinions on these games so it is obvious we will not change each others minds. I've played Tera, you've played GW2 (I hope, else we have nothing to talk about until you have). I never really got the "floaty" feeling in GW2. Attacks do make the characters recoil and even knock them on their ass. They can't have animations interrupting attacks though less you get Tera. I mean that in no disrespect but I feel that the animation lock was the single worst move they made.
There are animation locks in other action games but you can't tell me you see no difference between GoW combat and Tera combat. And actually GoW and devil may cry have zero permanent animations. 90% of them can be interrupted with a block or a dodge. Moving on though I feel the hit animations aren't over the top because it kills the flow of combat. They have to still be able to hit you back. If every move animation locked the enemy things would be far too easy. No matter how much damage they could do just cycle hit's and keep them locked.
This was a big problem in Monster hunter and follows through in Tera. In MH a coordinated party could keep a rathalos (one of the games premier wyverns) literally locked in place by just repeating certain attacks. I've seen it done in Tera as well. In fact, I did it in Tera. You can animation lock BAM's by cycling moves and syncing them with others in your party.
Moving on to resource systems. Every class has one. Not sure how you missed that. Every class's abilities use a resource system. So...yeah.
Every skill has a vulnerability period. Not sure how you missed that either. Most skills have a wind-up which varies depending on the skill. Every skill also has an associated animation that goes along with it. You have animation lock in GW2 it just doesn't lock you standing still MOST OF THE TIME. For example if I, as a thief, use the flying lotus dual dagger skill. I am locked flying forward while spinning my blades. Can't move any other direction. In essence the whole move is a lock.
Again it just doesn't lock you standing still most of the time. The only game that has any weight to blows is probably dead island. It can only get away with that because zombies are everywhere so it doesn't matter if you lock one. Do you know how many times I've punched a centaur in GoW with a cestus fist just to have it stand still? The only thing that happens is you have a weighted hit screen to impart impact. Happens all the time in DMC too. The only enemies that really feel impact are smaller minions. Even they sometimes are immune to scaled hit animations.
So I disagree with you there. I didn't feel floaty nor did I see anything that defies the human body. Also swinging a greatsword running looks wierd to us because we don't live in the middle ages. Nobody uses a greatsword.
Do you think that in the crusades they seriously came to a complete halt to wind up and strike someone with a greatsword? In history longswordsman were shock troopers and charged into battle first. yes, they charged in, with huge swords. Swinging AND running. None of them came to a halt in front of the front lines to swing. They charged through the lines swinging and running.
Just as archers moved and fired. If anything the combat is more realistic. Real warfare with spears and swords did not take place standing still jabbing your weapons at each other. Everyone was constantly moving unless they were part of a phalanx or something.
Well, to address your points (and I did play quite a bit over BWE although I never got anyone above early twenties since I tried a lot of classes):
- For the example with longswordsman, archers, and such. In a real charge there would be factors like momentum, fatigue, swing directions effecting impact, etc. Obviously I don't expect all that in a game because it would be way to hard to implement for the most part, but the lack of it really is what makes the difference. If someone charged forward with a greatsword and does a big homerun swing at the end that looks right, if I run literally in circles around someone while my giant sword waves back and forth like a toothpick independent of my legs that is when it strikes me as weird. However if you are used to that kind of animation it probably would not bother you as much. The feel of meaty blos is also more of a presentation thing, as you feel like you are hitting something with the blood sprays and sparks as you make contact. It's more an aesthetics thing in this case where personal preference will decide it.
- As for WvW my experience was much different than yours. Having played TONS of GW1 this was a lot like AB, fun but kind of zergy. Most of the time the fights would be 5 vs 2 or 6 vs 3 or somesuch as small packs would overrun points defended by only a handful of players. However as tactics mature in the game this could easily change. But this could have just been my experience with the game and you could easily have had a different one. (However it is interesting to note that Arenanet has historically been very rocky with balance, since GW1 was very very Fotm and nerfs where almost always devastating hammers).
- As for the MH comparison this is simply not true in TERA as stronger bosses all have hefty CC immunity. The GoW one is more apt since very few skills in TERA can cancel cast, but this is probably because TERA is an MMO and GoW is not (cancel casting would be very hard to balance for in pvp in a non-fighting game). In GW2 some skills do have animations that lock you into a certain movement or direction, but in Tera almost everything does. The more important distinction to note is that movement is the most IMPORTANT type of animation locking, since the ability to move while performing an action has historically been the hardest thing to balance in games. WoW had to add dead zones to hunters because they could move while firing, anything that can move while firing/casting is usually extremely OP in MOBA's, etc. If your ranged classes are not locked into standing still animations while casting or firing you will have to compensate with melee slows and gap closers and that can quickly become a slippery slope when it comes to pvp. Sure you can argue that every class has a ranged option as well but that just means you are fighting fire with fire because melee can't cut it. They have a long time to balance this though so it could easily turn out OK.
- It seemed rather chaotic actually due to how much skills where being spammed (especially in pve content although this may have been because I was on a hella populated server) not sure what you mean by a resource system though, the only one I really noticed was cooldowns which is not really a resource system by itself and more of a tiered global cooldown.
Right now I still stand by my opinion that TERA combat is better. However the caveat is that GW2 has a long development time still and could easily change my opinion by the time it releases.
Thanks for the response.
I agree with you about weight momentum. Strafing in skyrim, for example, feels extremely wierd even in first person while wielding a two handed weapon because of this. I don't think middle age combat ever came to a complete halt but something is odd about it. I suddenly have the urge to try to swing a larg mallet or something while moving sideways. I honestly am having a hard time picturing how it should work in my mind. That being said in GW2 I played as a theif and a necromancer. You can easily strafe and hit strong blows with daggers and spells are a fantasy element with no wieght momentum at all.
I have seen guardians use the greatsword and nothing struck me as odd about their combat. Again though I didn't particularly pay attention to it nor did I play one. I also may just be used to it in games now.
I can understand how your view on WvWvW was formed. I just didn't experience it that way. So I agree your critique is valid for your experience, I just can't reinforce it in any way because I did not experience that. Maybe the sides you were going up against weren't that even? For example If I take a group of four to siege a castle it is likely that all of us will be targeted by at least 10 people each. Bring this scale slightly closer to what you may have experienced and if you were only with 20 people and they had 40 there is a good chance that everybody was being targeted on your side by more people. I can't say though. If they were even groups Then those 6 people targeting your two must have had people they were being hit by behind them. So they probably died, if the groups were even.
Interesting. I only fought a boss in my time there and we stun locked it. Or at least it appeared we did. Ranged in GW2 did not seem that powerful. Every class had the option for ranged but instead skirmishes usually started at range but ended in melee. As all skirmishes should. The ranged options are what balance things. The warrior and many other more 'in your face' classes have ranged snares and traps and things. All of these abilities can be dodged or countered but the ranged focus of a warrior is largely central on closing distance then switching to sword and board or whatever you normally use in melee. Ranger's ranged skillset (again your skills depend on what type of weapon your using) usually involves many slows and damagers too but instead rangers use them to gain distance rather than to close it. Let it also be known that back peddeling is significantly slower than running forward. That is the downfall of many rangers. You can't just kite things to death because running forward is always faster than running backwards. I feel this in itself balances the two. Melee classes have far more health and thus can tank all of the damage and squish rangers as long as they dodge snares and use their own. When they catch up to the rangers its over by and large. You can't really escape because, again, you backpeddle slower than you move forward. Because no move has a movement lock you can just keep tailing them as a warrior and keep up. See the balance works both ways because yes rangers can move while firing but here, so can melee classes. If you can dodge the snares your in the clear. As theif I can't tell you how many times I would surprise rangers by throwing my dagger (which cripples them) then dodging all their snares and proceeding to rip them to shreds with heartseeker, lotus, and cloak and dagger.
It also counts that ranged does no where near the damage that melee does. You may feel like your contributing as a ranged class against a DE but your not. Your damage is pitiful in comparison to the warriors and melee wielders up front who are in the thick. That's not to say ranged is useless but if you had an entire party of ranged or even mostly ranged your screwed. That's not to say Ranger's but rather people too stubborn or scared to pull out a sword. Rangers are very viable in melee as well.
Comments
Since you mention inflating account numbers......
Tera(released) 11 servers edit - over half are low pop
GW2(beta) 48 servers and had to turn people away because of maxed server capacities.
Hmmm.....
Spin that
*crickets*
Life IS Feudal
Yeah, obviously GW2 had more people playing, but I was surprised just how many of the available servers were either Full or High and very hard to get into. Keep in mind, most of these people are people who pre-purchased already, and from the overwhelmingly positive response to the game....... well, I'd say ANet needs more servers lol
Apparently not, then again I'm not as emotionally vested in internet forums as you are. I don't care if some delusional thinks they stomped an argument or won an internet war, the only thing I took from it was a slight amount of pity towards you.
Hi
I guess my post is the 800 pound gorilla sitting in the room
Life IS Feudal
Truthfully I didn't know the amount of servers in the BETA, that is quite impressive. You've failed to include the EU and NA servers so TERA is closer to half than the quarter your information represents.
As I say I'm not saying that TERA will be more successful than Guild Wars 2, it definitely won't be. I was more making fun, than making a serious prediction that GW2 will experience massive drop-offs.
Hi
Actually it will have zero drop offs since it has no sub.
You made a fair point about Euro servers I left that out. You could include the Korean servers too and I don't think Tera would have 48 much less at max capacity.
Life IS Feudal
Ummm.....I'm a fan of GW2 and find that comment silly. Dropoffs don't mean subs, it means active playerbase. GW2 may very well see good dropoffs after people hit max because they are used to the neverending carrot on the stick approach. Once they gear their character they might quit because they can't keep gearing up.
I find it sad that you're so defensive about your game that you jump on wording technicalities.
Hi
Since GW2 has no carrot on a stick or gear grind I believe those people did poor research prior to spending their money.
Restarting GW2 if you get bored of it is as easy as starting the client and pushing the play button.
And to somewhat stay on topic the combat and WvW/competitive PVP is the endgame not gear grind.
Life IS Feudal
Genuine question, because though I hate GW2 fanboys with a passion I'm indifferent to the game itself. What is the point of WvWvW/Instanced PvP in the long run?
Gear Rewards? Titles? Leaderboards?
I get that PvP is fun, but even though I enjoyed it in WAR conquering keeps/regions eventually got old.
Hi
Well, a good many people don't share your opinion. I like GW2 fast, actiony combat, the constant moving and positioning, the self-healing and self-reliance combined with the ability to support your allies, the fact that all characters can have a nice balance of damage, control and support, the need to be situationally aware in combat, etc. Tab-targetting in GW2 is perfectly fine... hell, some skills (mesmer clones and phantasms) require a specific target since they'll only attack the one you target them on and will shatter when that target dies.
Here's how I think of it... if health and damage were balanced, a GW2 character would likely defeat a Tera character with relative ease. Their attacks would be ridiculously easy to avoid or interrupt, they're imbalanced, being stuck in the archaic trinity style...
Oderint, dum metuant.
For one thing, the winners of each WvW cycle get buffs for your server's PvE area that may give extra magic find, extra damage, etc. So basically you're fighting for your whole world. Another is the exclusively PvP gear available (no PvP stats, unique skins) that can be earned. Plus it's simply insanely freakin' fun. It really is.
Oderint, dum metuant.
If you mean tangable transferable rewards (which I think you do) you get experience, gold, and titles along with legacy items. You could literally jump in PvP at level 1 and play until you are level 80. The whole time you are in PvP you are buffed to 80 but you also get PvE experience that transfers over when you leave PvP. Same as gold and PvP items for WvWvW use only. Structured PvP is an E-sport scene that is completely seperate from the rest of the world of GW2. the only thing carried over there are character looks. Everyone has the same choices of loadouts though to keep things balanced. Nothing transfers in or out of structured PvP except MAYBE titles I believe.
http://www.wix.com/guardiansofthegarter/home
To be fair, we have no clue how many people per server GW2 vs. TERA can each handle adequately. In reality I'm sure GW2 had more people online though, I mean the hype alone for the game should tell you that. What's your point however? And how does that apply to the topic of this thread, regarding comparison of their combat systems, not the games as a whole?
I tend to prefer the combat in TERA but that is more a matter of personal taste than anything else.
I think an interesting side example to note here is the Elder Scroll series and Bethesda games in general (maybe excluding Skryim). When playing in third person view your character often looks strange and floaty during combat, this is due to a disjoint between what we expect and what we see. In real life you cannot run side to side while swinging a large axe, neither can you peddle backwards while firing a bow. Our brains realize this and the movement of the characters falls into a type of uncanny valley for combat, this plagued the earlier bethesda games and in my opinion that is also why some players think Guild Wars 2 combat doesn't give a very weighty feel to it. When you can move while casting/attacking the top and bottom halves of your character are not in sync graphically and it creates strange twists and motions that bother some people subconsciously because their brains recognize that the human body does not move in that manner. That is why to me personally it feels weird in Guild Wars 2 when I am strafing in circles around someone while flailing my greatsword around.
A lot of people complain about animation lock in TERA, but that is a core part of balancing active gameplay. Name any God of War/Devil May Cry beat-em-up or fighting game that didn't have animation locks and I will show you an awful gameplay system. If you do not have animation locks you often get either A) Spammy combat or
Unbalanced melee vs ranged tradeoffs, both of which I think are a little too prevalent in GW 2.
Now I actually enjoyed Guild Wars 2 combat, but the lack of any resource system or vulnerability period while using 90%+ of skills made it a very clusterf*** experience for me, especially in very populated zones or WvWvW pvp. Ironically, despite TERA being the one with crosshair aiming I found GW 2 to have more in common with FPS's. Without resource management and with the constant movement combat is more about mobility and using skills reactionary to the situation which is very reminiscent of an FPS like Unreal Tournament. TERA is more slow and deliberate as attacks have large windups, animation frames that cannot be interrupted, and focuses more on punishment similar to a fighting game like Soul Caliber. Which you prefer is once again up to personal taste, but once again I like TERA a bit more in this respect.
And of course lastly the animations have something to do with it. When you hit things in TERA they flinch, they get bowled over, you get a satisfying sound effect that changes according to your weapon/attack and blood sprays in every direction. WIth player collisions enabled stronger attacks can physically force your opponent backwards even if they block with their shield. In GW 2 your attacks often feel very insubstantial. If you hit someone with a flurry of attacks as a Mesmer often you have no real indication that you did anything besides some combat numbers popping up, better hit effects would give the combat a more meaty feel to it. I do feel like the weapon swapping in GW 2 is kind of gimmicky though, really all you are doing is adding a hotkey to access half your skillbar and sometimes putting a cooldown on it.
In the end I actually enjoyed the combat in both games, but TERA definitely has my vote for better combat system. Better questing system however....
Where did you come from? This is everything I've said in the past but better worded and even surprised me as I didn't think of it "uncanny valley but for combat". Brilliant.
Permission to use your post in the future?
I think only time will tell who was right in their choice of combat mechanics but I'm leaning strongly towards TERA. ArenaNet has their balancing work cut out for them. You mentioned combat being a clusterf*ck? That's exactly how I felt when it got to several players doing something together. Feedback is. just. not. there. And the times it is, it's very poor IMO.
I can't judge that right now, as that's something that only time will truly tell. Two, three months after launch or so? I did enjoy swapping weapons out and I honestly hope that all the weapons each class can use will be just as viable in almost every situation (more balancing, heh).
Best part about the combat, I didn't ahve to kill 100 trees when doing it.
The sum of the parts makes the game for me. If God of War had crappy quests like TEra, I"d have hated every minute of it.
Tera's the typical pig in makeup that we've seen a dozen times. It has one trick, the combat, still the same game.
You can't call GW2 combat gimicky, considering the entire game diverges from your wow/mmo prototype. A gimick is a one trick pony, ala Tera.
Feel free, I've checked this forum periodically for awhile now but never felt the need to make an account. With all the exciting MMO's coming out this year though I thought it might be a good time to do so. It's a shame that the GW 2 hype has forced it into the role WoW used to dominate, the "this game is good but it's not going to be better than GW2" syndrome that makes playerbases extremely hostile and less likely to play multiple MMO's at one time.
MMO loyalty is fine and all since it can often promote community, but it gets kind of ridiculous when it is for a game that is not even released yet. For example this thread is comparing combat in TERA vs GW2, but with GW 2 not even being released for who knows how long who cares which is better. You can always just play TERA now and switch later, or just play both.
As for the topic itself I would like to add that open world pvp in TERA works extremely well. The plethora of escape skills and hard CC + instant mounting means that if you try to grief someone that doesn't want to fight back it is easy for them to get away a good percentage of the time. The ratio of damage done to life pool for TERA's pvp combat is fairly balanced where the attacks that do heavy damage are easy to avoid so you never feel like you are gibbed with no chance to fight back (something I really hated in WoW).
GW 2 WvW was fun but almost all the time it was small zergs like GW 1 where some unfortunate souls where stomped over by superior numbers, and whoever tried to stay behind to defend got stampeded themselves a minute or two later. Since even friendly bodies have collisions in TERA (and can block projectiles), it is much harder for you to get treaded by 3-4 guys because they will actually get in each others way. I feel that the explosions and firey sparks are a bit overdone in GW 2 as well, making it hard to differentiate skills and what is happening on higher settings. However you could say the same for the combat numbers in TERA as well depending on how far zoomed in you play on your character.
You are one of the few critics I feel I can talk to. We both have our different opinions on these games so it is obvious we will not change each others minds. I've played Tera, you've played GW2 (I hope, else we have nothing to talk about until you have). I never really got the "floaty" feeling in GW2. Attacks do make the characters recoil and even knock them on their ass. They can't have animations interrupting attacks though less you get Tera. I mean that in no disrespect but I feel that the animation lock was the single worst move they made.
There are animation locks in other action games but you can't tell me you see no difference between GoW combat and Tera combat. And actually GoW and devil may cry have zero permanent animations. 90% of them can be interrupted with a block or a dodge. Moving on though I feel the hit animations aren't over the top because it kills the flow of combat. They have to still be able to hit you back. If every move animation locked the enemy things would be far too easy. No matter how much damage they could do just cycle hit's and keep them locked.
This was a big problem in Monster hunter and follows through in Tera. In MH a coordinated party could keep a rathalos (one of the games premier wyverns) literally locked in place by just repeating certain attacks. I've seen it done in Tera as well. In fact, I did it in Tera. You can animation lock BAM's by cycling moves and syncing them with others in your party.
Moving on to resource systems. Every class has one. Not sure how you missed that. Every class's abilities use a resource system. So...yeah.
Every skill has a vulnerability period. Not sure how you missed that either. Most skills have a wind-up which varies depending on the skill. Every skill also has an associated animation that goes along with it. You have animation lock in GW2 it just doesn't lock you standing still MOST OF THE TIME. For example if I, as a thief, use the flying lotus dual dagger skill. I am locked flying forward while spinning my blades. Can't move any other direction. In essence the whole move is a lock.
Again it just doesn't lock you standing still most of the time. The only game that has any weight to blows is probably dead island. It can only get away with that because zombies are everywhere so it doesn't matter if you lock one. Do you know how many times I've punched a centaur in GoW with a cestus fist just to have it stand still? The only thing that happens is you have a weighted hit screen to impart impact. Happens all the time in DMC too. The only enemies that really feel impact are smaller minions. Even they sometimes are immune to scaled hit animations.
So I disagree with you there. I didn't feel floaty nor did I see anything that defies the human body. Also swinging a greatsword running looks wierd to us because we don't live in the middle ages. Nobody uses a greatsword.
Do you think that in the crusades they seriously came to a complete halt to wind up and strike someone with a greatsword? In history longswordsman were shock troopers and charged into battle first. yes, they charged in, with huge swords. Swinging AND running. None of them came to a halt in front of the front lines to swing. They charged through the lines swinging and running.
Just as archers moved and fired. If anything the combat is more realistic. Real warfare with spears and swords did not take place standing still jabbing your weapons at each other. Everyone was constantly moving unless they were part of a phalanx or something.
http://www.wix.com/guardiansofthegarter/home
I'd also like to address the zerging. Which doesn't happen. True players are in big numbers but they always seperate into smaller skirmishes. There is no zerging out single players. Here, watch this. http://www.talesoftyria.com/. its a podcast of GW2 and in the beginning shows some WvWvW.
I'm not sure if you played it and I won't sit here and tell you your wrong in your personal experience if you have. That video shows my experience with WvWvW. Players attack together then quickly disperse as they battle in their own pockets of 2v2 or whatever. Not once were there more than 3 people targeting me at once. Which I don't consider being zerged.
I could walk into these huge clouds of players and not be one shot. I'd get picked out by an enemy in the crowed and we'd battle. Everyone else battling their oponents completely oblivious to me and this man.
http://www.wix.com/guardiansofthegarter/home
Titles, better looking gear, achievements, story, fun, pvp
I think the fact that GW2 basically always and continuously presents you with a challenge no matter where you go + that its more based mobility in general makes it overall more enjoyable.
Even if Tera had a better system in the abstract (which I don't think it does) combat is a a two sided game your character is only one side of it.
Well, to address your points (and I did play quite a bit over BWE although I never got anyone above early twenties since I tried a lot of classes):
- For the example with longswordsman, archers, and such. In a real charge there would be factors like momentum, fatigue, swing directions effecting impact, etc. Obviously I don't expect all that in a game because it would be way to hard to implement for the most part, but the lack of it really is what makes the difference. If someone charged forward with a greatsword and does a big homerun swing at the end that looks right, if I run literally in circles around someone while my giant sword waves back and forth like a toothpick independent of my legs that is when it strikes me as weird. However if you are used to that kind of animation it probably would not bother you as much. The feel of meaty blos is also more of a presentation thing, as you feel like you are hitting something with the blood sprays and sparks as you make contact. It's more an aesthetics thing in this case where personal preference will decide it.
- As for WvW my experience was much different than yours. Having played TONS of GW1 this was a lot like AB, fun but kind of zergy. Most of the time the fights would be 5 vs 2 or 6 vs 3 or somesuch as small packs would overrun points defended by only a handful of players. However as tactics mature in the game this could easily change. But this could have just been my experience with the game and you could easily have had a different one. (However it is interesting to note that Arenanet has historically been very rocky with balance, since GW1 was very very Fotm and nerfs where almost always devastating hammers).
- As for the MH comparison this is simply not true in TERA as stronger bosses all have hefty CC immunity. The GoW one is more apt since very few skills in TERA can cancel cast, but this is probably because TERA is an MMO and GoW is not (cancel casting would be very hard to balance for in pvp in a non-fighting game). In GW2 some skills do have animations that lock you into a certain movement or direction, but in Tera almost everything does. The more important distinction to note is that movement is the most IMPORTANT type of animation locking, since the ability to move while performing an action has historically been the hardest thing to balance in games. WoW had to add dead zones to hunters because they could move while firing, anything that can move while firing/casting is usually extremely OP in MOBA's, etc. If your ranged classes are not locked into standing still animations while casting or firing you will have to compensate with melee slows and gap closers and that can quickly become a slippery slope when it comes to pvp. Sure you can argue that every class has a ranged option as well but that just means you are fighting fire with fire because melee can't cut it. They have a long time to balance this though so it could easily turn out OK.
- It seemed rather chaotic actually due to how much skills where being spammed (especially in pve content although this may have been because I was on a hella populated server) not sure what you mean by a resource system though, the only one I really noticed was cooldowns which is not really a resource system by itself and more of a tiered global cooldown.
Right now I still stand by my opinion that TERA combat is better. However the caveat is that GW2 has a long development time still and could easily change my opinion by the time it releases.
Actually you can move side to side while swinging an axe.
You just don't run. Proper footwork allows you to move and attack. Its allows you to advance and retreat linearly in any direction or in a circular motion. A good fighter in only planted for power for a VERY brief moment.
You can take it to the bank that anyone I spar with that "animation locked" would get his ass handed to him everytime.
The reason many games look weird is they can capture anything other than running. Fighters don't run they use footwork and turns of the hip. Games don't allow you to control your characters hips. All fighting styles teach you that the hips are the key and foot work is essentialy.
The bow part is correct though. You can fire a bow on the run but you will be wildly in accurate at Short range I believe a good archer can do it with the right bow but he'd have to aim for the body and not necessarily have a good idea where he would hit.
Now horse mounted archers can shoot accurately on the move but they have methods of establishing a dynamic stability on the horse.
Thanks for the response.
I agree with you about weight momentum. Strafing in skyrim, for example, feels extremely wierd even in first person while wielding a two handed weapon because of this. I don't think middle age combat ever came to a complete halt but something is odd about it. I suddenly have the urge to try to swing a larg mallet or something while moving sideways. I honestly am having a hard time picturing how it should work in my mind. That being said in GW2 I played as a theif and a necromancer. You can easily strafe and hit strong blows with daggers and spells are a fantasy element with no wieght momentum at all.
I have seen guardians use the greatsword and nothing struck me as odd about their combat. Again though I didn't particularly pay attention to it nor did I play one. I also may just be used to it in games now.
I can understand how your view on WvWvW was formed. I just didn't experience it that way. So I agree your critique is valid for your experience, I just can't reinforce it in any way because I did not experience that. Maybe the sides you were going up against weren't that even? For example If I take a group of four to siege a castle it is likely that all of us will be targeted by at least 10 people each. Bring this scale slightly closer to what you may have experienced and if you were only with 20 people and they had 40 there is a good chance that everybody was being targeted on your side by more people. I can't say though. If they were even groups Then those 6 people targeting your two must have had people they were being hit by behind them. So they probably died, if the groups were even.
Interesting. I only fought a boss in my time there and we stun locked it. Or at least it appeared we did. Ranged in GW2 did not seem that powerful. Every class had the option for ranged but instead skirmishes usually started at range but ended in melee. As all skirmishes should. The ranged options are what balance things. The warrior and many other more 'in your face' classes have ranged snares and traps and things. All of these abilities can be dodged or countered but the ranged focus of a warrior is largely central on closing distance then switching to sword and board or whatever you normally use in melee. Ranger's ranged skillset (again your skills depend on what type of weapon your using) usually involves many slows and damagers too but instead rangers use them to gain distance rather than to close it. Let it also be known that back peddeling is significantly slower than running forward. That is the downfall of many rangers. You can't just kite things to death because running forward is always faster than running backwards. I feel this in itself balances the two. Melee classes have far more health and thus can tank all of the damage and squish rangers as long as they dodge snares and use their own. When they catch up to the rangers its over by and large. You can't really escape because, again, you backpeddle slower than you move forward. Because no move has a movement lock you can just keep tailing them as a warrior and keep up. See the balance works both ways because yes rangers can move while firing but here, so can melee classes. If you can dodge the snares your in the clear. As theif I can't tell you how many times I would surprise rangers by throwing my dagger (which cripples them) then dodging all their snares and proceeding to rip them to shreds with heartseeker, lotus, and cloak and dagger.
It also counts that ranged does no where near the damage that melee does. You may feel like your contributing as a ranged class against a DE but your not. Your damage is pitiful in comparison to the warriors and melee wielders up front who are in the thick. That's not to say ranged is useless but if you had an entire party of ranged or even mostly ranged your screwed. That's not to say Ranger's but rather people too stubborn or scared to pull out a sword. Rangers are very viable in melee as well.
http://www.wix.com/guardiansofthegarter/home