Originally posted by pb1285n Despite its many many flaws, Teras combat is fantastic. The endgame required coordination, skill, and a deep understanding of your class and abilities. They found a way to keep everyone involved in combat without moving away from the trinity, and the slightest hesitation from one party member could spell defeat. No game can even comes close to what Tera offers with its combat. Too bad the rest of the game is shallow and dull.
I like Tera's combat too but other games have defintely done it better. My personal favorite is probably Dragon Nest, which is similar to Tera but more fast-paced.
Difficult games these days get the label of having "bad game design" early and often. Like with Vanguard for example, its the opposite of a hand holding game, yet had it launched even without the bugs I assure you that it wouldnt have much more players than it does now. If people really wanted difficulty, it can be had.
Some gamers have just simply become too savvy as well. This isnt the dark ages of EQ where information was precious and the internets was an infant. Information is now so readily available about every quest or mob that within 2 short months of launch practically the whole game from tutorial to end game is intricately cataloged, allowing even the poorest of players to gain valuable insight and at least pretend to know what they're talking about.
If people really wanted to have to earn everything in the game, have a real old school feel and go bald from pulling their hair out, there are options available but most people arent playing these types of games. I wager most of the people who say they want such a challenge will falter quickly and go back to something more palatable like WoW. Theres a very small percentage of us left at this point that truly wants frustration to be a significant part of our gaming time. Thems the facts kids, and they're not going to change anytime soon.
If SOE puts their money where their mouth is, I'll be happy and lets just leave it to that.
There are many "fun" games out now, with smooth combat and quick action. These games are awesome, and hold our attention for maybe a month or so. No matter how novel the mechanics of a games combat system is, the truth is, you'll master it, and It will be boring.
The last few big name mmorpgs have tried to capture this video game combat style and have succeeded to a small degree. Combat is fun. But it comes at a trade off.
Class roles become almost non existent. Everyone become some form of dps bot, jumping and flipping around for no reason. So much so that no one really talks any more. There is no reason to formulate a plan. No reason to ask about builds or anything really. You just go, and treat it like the action game that mmorpgs have evolved into. If things go badly, fingers are blindly pointed. Where at one time you would know if it were an agro issue or dps or healing style, Now, outside of seeing someone stand in the fire, people only have a vague notion of what's going wrong when things go bad. Usually groups disband with finger pointing and "newb" declarations.
Where in classic MMOs you would see a group change tactics, talk it out, try new things and spend hours in a single dungeon. It's where friendships and memories were made. It's a huge reason why we clung to those games for so long. It kept our interest. And yes, when you had that many moving parts it took a lot of concentration, skill and awareness in order to succeed. The more modern games move towards video game controller action, the more dumbed down and simplistic they get. If you know how to jump around and click two to four buttons quickly, identify an attack animation and pick the right way to duck, you're a pro. Outside of that, what does class choice matter at that point?
I'm hoping that the "next" thing in MMOs isn't the same old thing that seem to be destroying them the last couple of years. Yes those MMOs were fun. But how many really kept the attention of the masses for any amount of time?
You are talking about a time where the MMORPG gaming populace was maybe 1/10th what it is now, and there were, what, less than 20 games to play.
Different times, Different players.
Games cost tons to make, and most of the money comes from those that care not for the games themselves, but the money. Ergo, games get made for the masses to gobble up. So they had best be "fun".
Every MMO that has kept peoples attention has been 'fun'. What your describing is a quick fix. The so called failed MMOs with action combat are anything but actual failures they are just not your cup of tea. Fun is mandatory for every game including MMOs. Also the word Fun is subjective by everyone. What is Fun to you, is not Fun to someone else.
Its also likely that your burned out of MMOs. Your post screams of needing an addiction and not a fix.
qft
Also, it seems OP wants longevity with long hours invested into the game... but in raids.
So basically he wants an asian grind fest themepark mmos.
I heard final fantasy in the previous iteration was great with that. That is not my cup of tea.
I like a challenge as well, but I also like to feel productive that I accomplish something in that time;
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble
I agree really. I like action combat on a console since it tends to be really well done.
The issue with putting it an mmo is that it will not be as good and action combat kills socialising since it's a button mashing fest. GW2 and Tera is the opposite of what EQ was about, they're console games.
I hope EQNext has tactical group gameplay, although since it might come to PS4 I won't get my hopes up too much.
Gw2 and especially Tera are not "button mashing fests".
It is apparently clear who has and hasn't played those games at their endgames.
99.9% of what is wrong with the current action MMO games has NOTHING to do with combat systems they employ. Tera has a severely weak questing system and a lack of content, and features a heavy grind based endgame. GW2 doesn't give the person a carrot to chase and has no trinity system. Those are the faults that prevent those games from being great, not their significantly superior combat systems.
if you combine a game with Tera's combat, TSWs quests/storyline, and Rifts endgame and flexibility; you'd have a monster of a game. Unfortunately the action MMOs just haven't put together a full package yet.
I would suggest the combat will be very similar to EQ2 .
Why break something that isn't broken .
You call EQ2's combat "not broken"? I guess it's a preference thing but I thought it was the WORST part of what was otherwise a solid game... well that and the character models, but I could overlook those. If EQN's combat is like EQ2's, I'll just skip it.
There are many "fun" games out now, with smooth combat and quick action. These games are awesome, and hold our attention for maybe a month or so. No matter how novel the mechanics of a games combat system is, the truth is, you'll master it, and It will be boring.
The last few big name mmorpgs have tried to capture this video game combat style and have succeeded to a small degree. Combat is fun. But it comes at a trade off.
Class roles become almost non existent. Everyone become some form of dps bot, jumping and flipping around for no reason. So much so that no one really talks any more. There is no reason to formulate a plan. No reason to ask about builds or anything really. You just go, and treat it like the action game that mmorpgs have evolved into. If things go badly, fingers are blindly pointed. Where at one time you would know if it were an agro issue or dps or healing style, Now, outside of seeing someone stand in the fire, people only have a vague notion of what's going wrong when things go bad. Usually groups disband with finger pointing and "newb" declarations.
Where in classic MMOs you would see a group change tactics, talk it out, try new things and spend hours in a single dungeon. It's where friendships and memories were made. It's a huge reason why we clung to those games for so long. It kept our interest. And yes, when you had that many moving parts it took a lot of concentration, skill and awareness in order to succeed. The more modern games move towards video game controller action, the more dumbed down and simplistic they get. If you know how to jump around and click two to four buttons quickly, identify an attack animation and pick the right way to duck, you're a pro. Outside of that, what does class choice matter at that point?
I'm hoping that the "next" thing in MMOs isn't the same old thing that seem to be destroying them the last couple of years. Yes those MMOs were fun. But how many really kept the attention of the masses for any amount of time?
I am pretty sure that had more to do with the fact that dungeons were a lot harder in the old days than todays cookie cutter dungeons together with the fact that you couldn't check any game wikis in the late 90s.
Even FPS styled combat with a few attacks takes skill and groupwork if the content is hard enough but now the games have at best a few raid dungeons that needs that kind skill, usually they substitute skill with gear now.
Compare GW1 and GW2 at launch. Neither had trinity but the first game actually took hard work early while the second ones difficulty got so nerfed after the first 2 betaweeks that combat suddenly takes very little skill.
I don't think we really can blame a specific combat mechanics for this, modern trinity games are as bad as none trinity games. For a game to really last long term it must have at least 25% really hard content which forces you to play a little better all the time instead of just farming better gear.
I mean, come on. Everytime a MMO have launched the last 5+ years someone already maxed a character out within 3 days or less. You just couldn't do that with games like Meridian 59, Lineage or Everquest back in the days.
What kills the long term value of a game is not the "fun" part and neither the combat mechanics but the difficulty.
They make the games for people who play MMOs 3-4 hours each week with not that much skill and want them to max out a character in a few months anyways. Real MMO fans that put that many hours or more each day can't really be satified long terms with that.
Add-ons & macros should not be utilized in EQN. Me saying this comes from experience. I never played WoW to the fashion that an add-on or macro would have helped me but Rift, the macro made life easy to make my max dps occur to get into the best group/raid going on at that moment...
Add-ons & macros should not be utilized in EQN. Me saying this comes from experience. I never played WoW to the fashion that an add-on or macro would have helped me but Rift, the macro made life easy to make my max dps occur to get into the best group/raid going on at that moment...
Agreed but for that to work do we need to reintroduce an old mechanic: Timing.
You don't need that many skills, you need to use each one at the exact right time to do plenty DPS and that timing needs to be based on what the mob or player you are hitting is doing.
That makes macroing really hard, otherwise people will just get an add for it if it isn't in the game itself. Macroing in itself isn't the problem, it is the stupid skill rotation people can use that makes it effective.
There are many "fun" games out now, with smooth combat and quick action. These games are awesome, and hold our attention for maybe a month or so. No matter how novel the mechanics of a games combat system is, the truth is, you'll master it, and It will be boring.
The last few big name mmorpgs have tried to capture this video game combat style and have succeeded to a small degree. Combat is fun. But it comes at a trade off.
Class roles become almost non existent. Everyone become some form of dps bot, jumping and flipping around for no reason. So much so that no one really talks any more. There is no reason to formulate a plan. No reason to ask about builds or anything really. You just go, and treat it like the action game that mmorpgs have evolved into. If things go badly, fingers are blindly pointed. Where at one time you would know if it were an agro issue or dps or healing style, Now, outside of seeing someone stand in the fire, people only have a vague notion of what's going wrong when things go bad. Usually groups disband with finger pointing and "newb" declarations.
Where in classic MMOs you would see a group change tactics, talk it out, try new things and spend hours in a single dungeon. It's where friendships and memories were made. It's a huge reason why we clung to those games for so long. It kept our interest. And yes, when you had that many moving parts it took a lot of concentration, skill and awareness in order to succeed. The more modern games move towards video game controller action, the more dumbed down and simplistic they get. If you know how to jump around and click two to four buttons quickly, identify an attack animation and pick the right way to duck, you're a pro. Outside of that, what does class choice matter at that point?
I'm hoping that the "next" thing in MMOs isn't the same old thing that seem to be destroying them the last couple of years. Yes those MMOs were fun. But how many really kept the attention of the masses for any amount of time?
I am pretty sure that had more to do with the fact that dungeons were a lot harder in the old days than todays cookie cutter dungeons together with the fact that you couldn't check any game wikis in the late 90s.
Even FPS styled combat with a few attacks takes skill and groupwork if the content is hard enough but now the games have at best a few raid dungeons that needs that kind skill, usually they substitute skill with gear now.
Compare GW1 and GW2 at launch. Neither had trinity but the first game actually took hard work early while the second ones difficulty got so nerfed after the first 2 betaweeks that combat suddenly takes very little skill.
I don't think we really can blame a specific combat mechanics for this, modern trinity games are as bad as none trinity games. For a game to really last long term it must have at least 25% really hard content which forces you to play a little better all the time instead of just farming better gear.
I mean, come on. Everytime a MMO have launched the last 5+ years someone already maxed a character out within 3 days or less. You just couldn't do that with games like Meridian 59, Lineage or Everquest back in the days.
What kills the long term value of a game is not the "fun" part and neither the combat mechanics but the difficulty.
They make the games for people who play MMOs 3-4 hours each week with not that much skill and want them to max out a character in a few months anyways. Real MMO fans that put that many hours or more each day can't really be satified long terms with that.
Finishing a game quickly should not be an indication of how easy the game is throughout.
I agree there should be w challenge but practically speaking in an mmo alternative content means that there is going to be easy solo content. Which is bad since in PUGs it means there could be a bad player that made it to end game, but the upside is a larger community.
so challenge should exist like nightmare dungeons at end game. Pvp early on and end game is a challenge.
Also devs should put an effort for solo hard mode lvling, and even group content early on that is challenging. Problem is it takes time to do this, and it might be better to give more attention to end game rather than put content only done in lvl 10, or lvl 15, etc.
For example, even with easy end game flashpoint people can try to solo them. Unfortunately the rewards for succeeding are normally the standard rewards and no recognition for it, which would be nice.
edit: even in WoW it allowed for people to create their own challenge in PVE, by kiting or aoe'ing large mobs. The challenge for each area would be too see how large group of npc's a person could down.
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble
Add-ons & macros should not be utilized in EQN. Me saying this comes from experience. I never played WoW to the fashion that an add-on or macro would have helped me but Rift, the macro made life easy to make my max dps occur to get into the best group/raid going on at that moment...
when you have 20 skills , you need macros dude .
And even with macros people you still have about 8 keys to press at the right time in the right order .
And then there are the situational buffs and abilities ... 5-6 of those on a hotbar.
Yeah so macros are meant to help people make the game a bit more playable .
Originally posted by pb1285n Despite its many many flaws, Teras combat is fantastic. The endgame required coordination, skill, and a deep understanding of your class and abilities. They found a way to keep everyone involved in combat without moving away from the trinity, and the slightest hesitation from one party member could spell defeat. No game can even comes close to what Tera offers with its combat. Too bad the rest of the game is shallow and dull.
I agree with the OP to some degree, but you made me think. There's this growing line of thinking I've seen (not anything you said) that only endgame is expected to be difficult and challenging, and that the content used to get there should be nice and easy.
I've never understood it. The most enjoyment I've ever had in MMOs were ones were the challenge and the coordination requirements started early, so by the time you hit the hard end game, you had already experienced tons and tons of levels and content that drilled into your head your party role, responsibilities, and how to go about them.
But now leveling content is easy, so when people hit end game in certain MMOs, suddenly it's like the way the game has been letting them play is suddenly all wrong. It's no wonder there's been such a rise for the hatred of pugs and instant finger pointing when that playstyle suddenly no longer works.
That's not to mention all the people you lose along the way due to boredom. Tera I enjoyed, but I could not get to the end game. It grew so incredibly boring at around 40 as I either facerolled everything or spent 10 minutes poking down a BAM's health (I did play Lancer, though I play a tank in every MMO i've gamed in).
Every MMO that has kept peoples attention has been 'fun'. What your describing is a quick fix. The so called failed MMOs with action combat are anything but actual failures they are just not your cup of tea. Fun is mandatory for every game including MMOs. Also the word Fun is subjective by everyone. What is Fun to you, is not Fun to someone else.
Its also likely that your burned out of MMOs. Your post screams of needing an addiction and not a fix.
qft
Also, it seems OP wants longevity with long hours invested into the game... but in raids.
So basically he wants an asian grind fest themepark mmos.
I heard final fantasy in the previous iteration was great with that. That is not my cup of tea.
I like a challenge as well, but I also like to feel productive that I accomplish something in that time;
I agree, but there's a difference between challenge and time-sink tedium. Just because you can do something quickly doesn't automatically make it easy. Just because something takes a long time to do doesn't automatically make it hard. Most MMORPGs are lacking in challenge, but offer plenty of tedious nonsense.
Add-ons & macros should not be utilized in EQN. Me saying this comes from experience. I never played WoW to the fashion that an add-on or macro would have helped me but Rift, the macro made life easy to make my max dps occur to get into the best group/raid going on at that moment...
Agreed but for that to work do we need to reintroduce an old mechanic: Timing.
You don't need that many skills, you need to use each one at the exact right time to do plenty DPS and that timing needs to be based on what the mob or player you are hitting is doing.
That makes macroing really hard, otherwise people will just get an add for it if it isn't in the game itself. Macroing in itself isn't the problem, it is the stupid skill rotation people can use that makes it effective.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Originally posted by Grailer
Originally posted by rahb0sse
I had to log in just to post something...
Add-ons & macros should not be utilized in EQN. Me saying this comes from experience. I never played WoW to the fashion that an add-on or macro would have helped me but Rift, the macro made life easy to make my max dps occur to get into the best group/raid going on at that moment...
when you have 20 skills , you need macros dude .
And even with macros people you still have about 8 keys to press at the right time in the right order .
And then there are the situational buffs and abilities ... 5-6 of those on a hotbar.
Yeah so macros are meant to help people make the game a bit more playable .
He answered you. It's about timing, not the too many skills aspect. There were about (on my mage in Rift) 8 total skills and it was about the order that macro's make the game playable.
Sigh, first off, how many action mmorpgs are there that actually do full on action combat? Cause GW2 isn't one of them, it's half-in and half out, it can't decide if it wants to go full action or keep one foot in the classic mmo style hotbar spamming combat system, and thus the whole thing feels "off" and disconnected/sloppy,.
Tera and Neverwinter are the closest, but still not fully there. Each of them still focuses on the hotbar/skillbar and spamming it, but both have FAR more fun/better "dodge" and the movement/controls are far far better and more tight feeling compared to Guild Wars 2. Darkfall wants to be, but it's marred by many technical issues and obvious lack of polish and depth.
There isn't a single fantasy mmorpg, from the ground up, that has went fully action combat and had a decent big budget behind it to do so (to my knowledge).
What I really can not stand are people saying that you can't have DEPTH or classes that are "different" when you have real action combat. This is simply not true at all.
There have been many in-depth combat systems that rewarded SKILL and tactics over the more simplified "button mashers" with little/no depth.
For example, Dragon's dogma. If anyone here has played it you know just how different you can make classes feel, each having their own advantages and USES while still retaining an "Action" combat system. From having a nimble and agile fighter who can focus on climbing and using quick blows, to having a ranger who can focus on CC with slnares/slows, among many others.
Then there's a little game called Severance (aka Blade of Darkness) which has probably the BEST melee combat system of any action game. Very in-depth and it does NOT reward "button mashers" at all, as well it also rewards you for using defense, being able to dodge or block incoming attacks is a MUST unless you want to die. You constnatly have to read your enemies movements and determine what attacks to use (as some take longer to pull off and each has advantages/disadvantages) so it's all down to your own strategy and skill.
Then there's Mount and Blade, as far as Mounted combat and Range combat goes there is (imo) none better. The game mixes rpg with action (you build up your character just like any rpg, stats and skills) and this in turn has an affect on your combat. From how long you can hold your bow to shoot before your aim starts getting looser and looser , to many other variations depending on how you've skilled up your character.
There is NO reason a real-=time action-focused combat system can not be both rewarding from an rpg standpoint, having your characters stats/abilities having an affect on how combat is, but also providing the FUN of action combat while still having depth to it and having classes play and feel differently, with them having many variations and advantages/disadvantages that make them useful in a group setting.
I'm still waiting for a AAA MMORPG that doesn't revolve around combat.
As I've said before, it's really sad that we have the ability to create virtual worlds and the best thing we can seem to do with them is make combat simulators.
Sigh, first off, how many action mmorpgs are there that actually do full on action combat? Cause GW2 isn't one of them, it's half-in and half out, it can't decide if it wants to go full action or keep one foot in the classic mmo style hotbar spamming combat system, and thus the whole thing feels "off" and disconnected/sloppy,.
There isn't a single fantasy mmorpg, from the ground up, that has went fully action combat and had a decent big budget behind it to do so (to my knowledge).
For example, Dragon's dogma.
Then there's a little game called Severance (aka Blade of Darkness)
Then there's Mount and Blade
There is NO reason a real-=time action-focused combat system can not be both rewarding from an rpg standpoint, having your characters stats/abilities having an affect on how combat is, but also providing the FUN of action combat while still having depth to it and having classes play and feel differently, with them having many variations and advantages/disadvantages that make them useful in a group setting.
Well "Dragon's dogma" is a single player console game
"Blade of Darkness" is a single player game from a studio that failed and "Mount and Blade" is a single player PC game.
What might work on a single player game may not work on a Multi-player game supporting 1,000s of users.
It is very simple: action combat works best for single player games or for low user count multi-player games where the players are located very close to each other and to the server.
Action combat IMHO is just not suited for MMORPGs because users may be on network lags between 40ms and 500ms, nor on high user count servers where server lag becomes an issue. Anyone who has played MMORPGs knows that server lag is a recurring problem on every MMORPG.
Sigh, first off, how many action mmorpgs are there that actually do full on action combat? Cause GW2 isn't one of them, it's half-in and half out, it can't decide if it wants to go full action or keep one foot in the classic mmo style hotbar spamming combat system, and thus the whole thing feels "off" and disconnected/sloppy,.
There isn't a single fantasy mmorpg, from the ground up, that has went fully action combat and had a decent big budget behind it to do so (to my knowledge).
For example, Dragon's dogma.
Then there's a little game called Severance (aka Blade of Darkness)
Then there's Mount and Blade
There is NO reason a real-=time action-focused combat system can not be both rewarding from an rpg standpoint, having your characters stats/abilities having an affect on how combat is, but also providing the FUN of action combat while still having depth to it and having classes play and feel differently, with them having many variations and advantages/disadvantages that make them useful in a group setting.
Well "Dragon's dogma" is a single player console game
"Blade of Darkness" is a single player game from a studio that failed and "Mount and Blade" is a single player PC game.
What might work on a single player game may not work on a Multi-player game supporting 1,000s of users.
It is very simple: action combat works best for single player games or for low user count multi-player games where the players are located very close to each other and to the server.
Action combat IMHO is just not suited for MMORPGs because users may be on network lags between 40ms and 500ms, nor on high user count servers where server lag becomes an issue. Anyone who has played MMORPGs knows that server lag is a recurring problem on every MMORPG.
What does Dragon's Dogma having to be single player have to do with anything? It's your character + two npc party members.
I like how you say blade of darkness is from a studio that failed, implying the game wasn't "good" because obviously they failed s that somehow discredit's it? No it doens't, because the game still stands the test of time as having the best melee combat system (to me at least), better then Jedi Knigh/Rune/dark souls, etc games which are normally praised for their melee combat.
Mount and Blade, you obviously know nothing about because 1. IT'S GOT MULTIPLAYER and 2. It supports up to TWO HUNDRED + people in a single match. All while having Mounted combat, range combat, melee combat going on at once, hell even the newer expansion (napoleonic wars) which has guns.
I understand lag will play a part , it does in ANY online game, rather it be action combat or not, however in this day and age with the increasing broadband and the fact that almost every AAA mmo has servers in NA, Aus, Europe, etc I don't think it's as bad as you might make it out to be.
Sigh, first off, how many action mmorpgs are there that actually do full on action combat? Cause GW2 isn't one of them, it's half-in and half out, it can't decide if it wants to go full action or keep one foot in the classic mmo style hotbar spamming combat system, and thus the whole thing feels "off" and disconnected/sloppy,.
There isn't a single fantasy mmorpg, from the ground up, that has went fully action combat and had a decent big budget behind it to do so (to my knowledge).
For example, Dragon's dogma.
Then there's a little game called Severance (aka Blade of Darkness)
Then there's Mount and Blade
There is NO reason a real-=time action-focused combat system can not be both rewarding from an rpg standpoint, having your characters stats/abilities having an affect on how combat is, but also providing the FUN of action combat while still having depth to it and having classes play and feel differently, with them having many variations and advantages/disadvantages that make them useful in a group setting.
Well "Dragon's dogma" is a single player console game
"Blade of Darkness" is a single player game from a studio that failed and "Mount and Blade" is a single player PC game.
What might work on a single player game may not work on a Multi-player game supporting 1,000s of users.
It is very simple: action combat works best for single player games or for low user count multi-player games where the players are located very close to each other and to the server.
Action combat IMHO is just not suited for MMORPGs because users may be on network lags between 40ms and 500ms, nor on high user count servers where server lag becomes an issue. Anyone who has played MMORPGs knows that server lag is a recurring problem on every MMORPG.
It seems to work just fine for PS2, which happens to be a MMOG and runs on the same engine as EQN. And regardless, this response is getting old. Network lags aren't a big issue anymore and you're more than welcome to play on oceanic servers if SOE provides them.
Auto-attack combat just doesn't appeal anymore. If you want that sort of game, go play any one of the hundreds of MMO's out there like it . And if you seriously want that sort of combat in EQN, I would give up hope on it. That ship has sailed
Originally posted by dreamscaper I'm still waiting for a AAA MMORPG that doesn't revolve around combat. As I've said before, it's really sad that we have the ability to create virtual worlds and the best thing we can seem to do with them is make combat simulators.
Truth.
How many different way are people going to do the same thing before they realize its time for something entirely new? Making a deeper combat system doesn't fix the shallow feel of today's AAA mmo.
I really hope SoE does not follow the crowd and go the action combat route. I find it the experience to be only negative - moving and running around like a crazy person in an world that is empty of strategy or depth - it is exhausting and when I am gaming I do not want to feel that way. Perhaps I am an old geezer and I need to retire?
Anyhow, if Everquest Next does decide to do the twitchy game play I will have Pathfinder Online to look forward to. So, not all is lost.
Comments
I like Tera's combat too but other games have defintely done it better. My personal favorite is probably Dragon Nest, which is similar to Tera but more fast-paced.
Difficult games these days get the label of having "bad game design" early and often. Like with Vanguard for example, its the opposite of a hand holding game, yet had it launched even without the bugs I assure you that it wouldnt have much more players than it does now. If people really wanted difficulty, it can be had.
Some gamers have just simply become too savvy as well. This isnt the dark ages of EQ where information was precious and the internets was an infant. Information is now so readily available about every quest or mob that within 2 short months of launch practically the whole game from tutorial to end game is intricately cataloged, allowing even the poorest of players to gain valuable insight and at least pretend to know what they're talking about.
If people really wanted to have to earn everything in the game, have a real old school feel and go bald from pulling their hair out, there are options available but most people arent playing these types of games. I wager most of the people who say they want such a challenge will falter quickly and go back to something more palatable like WoW. Theres a very small percentage of us left at this point that truly wants frustration to be a significant part of our gaming time. Thems the facts kids, and they're not going to change anytime soon.
If SOE puts their money where their mouth is, I'll be happy and lets just leave it to that.
Because they have no intention of shutting down EQ2, and they do not simply want to make a carbon copy of it.
You are talking about a time where the MMORPG gaming populace was maybe 1/10th what it is now, and there were, what, less than 20 games to play.
Different times, Different players.
Games cost tons to make, and most of the money comes from those that care not for the games themselves, but the money. Ergo, games get made for the masses to gobble up. So they had best be "fun".
This^
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
qft
Also, it seems OP wants longevity with long hours invested into the game... but in raids.
So basically he wants an asian grind fest themepark mmos.
I heard final fantasy in the previous iteration was great with that. That is not my cup of tea.
I like a challenge as well, but I also like to feel productive that I accomplish something in that time;
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble
Gw2 and especially Tera are not "button mashing fests".
It is apparently clear who has and hasn't played those games at their endgames.
99.9% of what is wrong with the current action MMO games has NOTHING to do with combat systems they employ. Tera has a severely weak questing system and a lack of content, and features a heavy grind based endgame. GW2 doesn't give the person a carrot to chase and has no trinity system. Those are the faults that prevent those games from being great, not their significantly superior combat systems.
if you combine a game with Tera's combat, TSWs quests/storyline, and Rifts endgame and flexibility; you'd have a monster of a game. Unfortunately the action MMOs just haven't put together a full package yet.
You call EQ2's combat "not broken"? I guess it's a preference thing but I thought it was the WORST part of what was otherwise a solid game... well that and the character models, but I could overlook those. If EQN's combat is like EQ2's, I'll just skip it.
I am pretty sure that had more to do with the fact that dungeons were a lot harder in the old days than todays cookie cutter dungeons together with the fact that you couldn't check any game wikis in the late 90s.
Even FPS styled combat with a few attacks takes skill and groupwork if the content is hard enough but now the games have at best a few raid dungeons that needs that kind skill, usually they substitute skill with gear now.
Compare GW1 and GW2 at launch. Neither had trinity but the first game actually took hard work early while the second ones difficulty got so nerfed after the first 2 betaweeks that combat suddenly takes very little skill.
I don't think we really can blame a specific combat mechanics for this, modern trinity games are as bad as none trinity games. For a game to really last long term it must have at least 25% really hard content which forces you to play a little better all the time instead of just farming better gear.
I mean, come on. Everytime a MMO have launched the last 5+ years someone already maxed a character out within 3 days or less. You just couldn't do that with games like Meridian 59, Lineage or Everquest back in the days.
What kills the long term value of a game is not the "fun" part and neither the combat mechanics but the difficulty.
They make the games for people who play MMOs 3-4 hours each week with not that much skill and want them to max out a character in a few months anyways. Real MMO fans that put that many hours or more each day can't really be satified long terms with that.
I had to log in just to post something...
Add-ons & macros should not be utilized in EQN. Me saying this comes from experience. I never played WoW to the fashion that an add-on or macro would have helped me but Rift, the macro made life easy to make my max dps occur to get into the best group/raid going on at that moment...
Agreed but for that to work do we need to reintroduce an old mechanic: Timing.
You don't need that many skills, you need to use each one at the exact right time to do plenty DPS and that timing needs to be based on what the mob or player you are hitting is doing.
That makes macroing really hard, otherwise people will just get an add for it if it isn't in the game itself. Macroing in itself isn't the problem, it is the stupid skill rotation people can use that makes it effective.
Finishing a game quickly should not be an indication of how easy the game is throughout.
I agree there should be w challenge but practically speaking in an mmo alternative content means that there is going to be easy solo content. Which is bad since in PUGs it means there could be a bad player that made it to end game, but the upside is a larger community.
so challenge should exist like nightmare dungeons at end game. Pvp early on and end game is a challenge.
Also devs should put an effort for solo hard mode lvling, and even group content early on that is challenging. Problem is it takes time to do this, and it might be better to give more attention to end game rather than put content only done in lvl 10, or lvl 15, etc.
For example, even with easy end game flashpoint people can try to solo them. Unfortunately the rewards for succeeding are normally the standard rewards and no recognition for it, which would be nice.
edit: even in WoW it allowed for people to create their own challenge in PVE, by kiting or aoe'ing large mobs. The challenge for each area would be too see how large group of npc's a person could down.
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble
when you have 20 skills , you need macros dude .
And even with macros people you still have about 8 keys to press at the right time in the right order .
And then there are the situational buffs and abilities ... 5-6 of those on a hotbar.
Yeah so macros are meant to help people make the game a bit more playable .
I agree with the OP to some degree, but you made me think. There's this growing line of thinking I've seen (not anything you said) that only endgame is expected to be difficult and challenging, and that the content used to get there should be nice and easy.
I've never understood it. The most enjoyment I've ever had in MMOs were ones were the challenge and the coordination requirements started early, so by the time you hit the hard end game, you had already experienced tons and tons of levels and content that drilled into your head your party role, responsibilities, and how to go about them.
But now leveling content is easy, so when people hit end game in certain MMOs, suddenly it's like the way the game has been letting them play is suddenly all wrong. It's no wonder there's been such a rise for the hatred of pugs and instant finger pointing when that playstyle suddenly no longer works.
That's not to mention all the people you lose along the way due to boredom. Tera I enjoyed, but I could not get to the end game. It grew so incredibly boring at around 40 as I either facerolled everything or spent 10 minutes poking down a BAM's health (I did play Lancer, though I play a tank in every MMO i've gamed in).
I agree, but there's a difference between challenge and time-sink tedium. Just because you can do something quickly doesn't automatically make it easy. Just because something takes a long time to do doesn't automatically make it hard. Most MMORPGs are lacking in challenge, but offer plenty of tedious nonsense.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
He answered you. It's about timing, not the too many skills aspect. There were about (on my mage in Rift) 8 total skills and it was about the order that macro's make the game playable.
Where do I start?
Sigh, first off, how many action mmorpgs are there that actually do full on action combat? Cause GW2 isn't one of them, it's half-in and half out, it can't decide if it wants to go full action or keep one foot in the classic mmo style hotbar spamming combat system, and thus the whole thing feels "off" and disconnected/sloppy,.
Tera and Neverwinter are the closest, but still not fully there. Each of them still focuses on the hotbar/skillbar and spamming it, but both have FAR more fun/better "dodge" and the movement/controls are far far better and more tight feeling compared to Guild Wars 2. Darkfall wants to be, but it's marred by many technical issues and obvious lack of polish and depth.
There isn't a single fantasy mmorpg, from the ground up, that has went fully action combat and had a decent big budget behind it to do so (to my knowledge).
What I really can not stand are people saying that you can't have DEPTH or classes that are "different" when you have real action combat. This is simply not true at all.
There have been many in-depth combat systems that rewarded SKILL and tactics over the more simplified "button mashers" with little/no depth.
For example, Dragon's dogma. If anyone here has played it you know just how different you can make classes feel, each having their own advantages and USES while still retaining an "Action" combat system. From having a nimble and agile fighter who can focus on climbing and using quick blows, to having a ranger who can focus on CC with slnares/slows, among many others.
Then there's a little game called Severance (aka Blade of Darkness) which has probably the BEST melee combat system of any action game. Very in-depth and it does NOT reward "button mashers" at all, as well it also rewards you for using defense, being able to dodge or block incoming attacks is a MUST unless you want to die. You constnatly have to read your enemies movements and determine what attacks to use (as some take longer to pull off and each has advantages/disadvantages) so it's all down to your own strategy and skill.
Then there's Mount and Blade, as far as Mounted combat and Range combat goes there is (imo) none better. The game mixes rpg with action (you build up your character just like any rpg, stats and skills) and this in turn has an affect on your combat. From how long you can hold your bow to shoot before your aim starts getting looser and looser , to many other variations depending on how you've skilled up your character.
There is NO reason a real-=time action-focused combat system can not be both rewarding from an rpg standpoint, having your characters stats/abilities having an affect on how combat is, but also providing the FUN of action combat while still having depth to it and having classes play and feel differently, with them having many variations and advantages/disadvantages that make them useful in a group setting.
I'm still waiting for a AAA MMORPG that doesn't revolve around combat.
As I've said before, it's really sad that we have the ability to create virtual worlds and the best thing we can seem to do with them is make combat simulators.
Well "Dragon's dogma" is a single player console game
"Blade of Darkness" is a single player game from a studio that failed and "Mount and Blade" is a single player PC game.
What might work on a single player game may not work on a Multi-player game supporting 1,000s of users.
It is very simple: action combat works best for single player games or for low user count multi-player games where the players are located very close to each other and to the server.
Action combat IMHO is just not suited for MMORPGs because users may be on network lags between 40ms and 500ms, nor on high user count servers where server lag becomes an issue. Anyone who has played MMORPGs knows that server lag is a recurring problem on every MMORPG.
What does Dragon's Dogma having to be single player have to do with anything? It's your character + two npc party members.
I like how you say blade of darkness is from a studio that failed, implying the game wasn't "good" because obviously they failed s that somehow discredit's it? No it doens't, because the game still stands the test of time as having the best melee combat system (to me at least), better then Jedi Knigh/Rune/dark souls, etc games which are normally praised for their melee combat.
Mount and Blade, you obviously know nothing about because 1. IT'S GOT MULTIPLAYER and 2. It supports up to TWO HUNDRED + people in a single match. All while having Mounted combat, range combat, melee combat going on at once, hell even the newer expansion (napoleonic wars) which has guns.
I understand lag will play a part , it does in ANY online game, rather it be action combat or not, however in this day and age with the increasing broadband and the fact that almost every AAA mmo has servers in NA, Aus, Europe, etc I don't think it's as bad as you might make it out to be.
It seems to work just fine for PS2, which happens to be a MMOG and runs on the same engine as EQN. And regardless, this response is getting old. Network lags aren't a big issue anymore and you're more than welcome to play on oceanic servers if SOE provides them.
Auto-attack combat just doesn't appeal anymore. If you want that sort of game, go play any one of the hundreds of MMO's out there like it . And if you seriously want that sort of combat in EQN, I would give up hope on it. That ship has sailed
Truth.
How many different way are people going to do the same thing before they realize its time for something entirely new? Making a deeper combat system doesn't fix the shallow feel of today's AAA mmo.
I really hope SoE does not follow the crowd and go the action combat route. I find it the experience to be only negative - moving and running around like a crazy person in an world that is empty of strategy or depth - it is exhausting and when I am gaming I do not want to feel that way. Perhaps I am an old geezer and I need to retire?
Anyhow, if Everquest Next does decide to do the twitchy game play I will have Pathfinder Online to look forward to. So, not all is lost.