I have been reading a lot recently about how the 'holy trinity' needs to disappear from mmo's. I know the idea has been tossed around for years but never in such force. Now, developers and games have started to make the shift.
I guess my question is: Is this the problem with MMO's today, the Holy Trinity, and by eliminating it will the MMO's be better?
Idea of having dedicated healer, tank, infantry,... etc. is something most natural to real world. But, you know, you have 1 healer and 1 tank and 3 or more dps (infantry) for certain tasks so it is obvious there is no problem for employment of healers and tanks.
So angry infrantry (read dps) come with idea to eliminate them and go to fight on their own into the battle. Unfortunately game designers listened to them.
To be honest, I preffered to play mainly as dps and healer, much less tank. And did not enjoy to wait as healer 3 mins to get into the group and 60 mins as dps. But this is how things are. Main reason? Because is very hard to be tank, to be healer ... compared to simple minded dps that just want to press buttons, rush into the battle when tank is close to die, when healer himself is close to die ... but our dps hero just badly want to engage new group of mobs ... wow ....
Only way to have more healers and tanks is to make their job much less difficult but then overall experience might suffer. Loved Wotlk kind of heroics ... hated after that. Left permanently after. I do not care if dps were careless, tanks were bad or healers ... just was not fun to die at all times (at start) from hands or claws of first group of trivial mobs. At that time wow lost me as end game player. Fortunately good games come along in last years so I had plenty to do. I return to play wow when new expansion come and will play up to the momement all my 10 alts (Alliance) are leveled to max ... then wait next expansion.
I see few solutions. Or make job easier for tanks and healers so we have more of them. Or decrease number of dps needed (like in swtor, which is pure joy to me as endgame; sometimes agree to easy but fun as hell). Or adapt gameplay like gw2 where true tanks and healers are not really needed but they can come handy. Dps just must make sure it does change targets often enough. Good thing there is everyone can ressurect player and in middle of fight.
Without the trinity role system.. and when I say that, I don't mean just taunt and heals, I'm talking about CLASS DEFINING ROLES.. You have problems with squishies being vulnerable and dead much more often.. Without some form of control, whether that control be CC or tauting, you end up with chaos in where every person is out for themselves trying to survive a battle.. How else do you plan to save and protect the weak classes? UNLESS you wish to make the game where there is little difference between a cloth and plate..
Using EQN as the new example of non-trinity, people argue that a smart AI knows who the weakest link is.. Well 1) I sure as hell hope there is no such thing as smart wolves and bears.. They are stupid animals that has no clue what or who a healer is.. 2).. Assuming the mobs is a smart humanoid and goes after the weakest link, how do you protect and prevent that? You have 3 options and 3 options only..
You CC the mob using root, barriers or some form of stuns.. Well there you go.. Just another artificial program mechanic that replaced the taunt button.. Root becomes the new taunt.. or stuns become the new taunt.. You can call it what you will, implicated it however you like, but the end result is still the same.. KEEP mob off squishy..
You DPS zerg the mob before they kill your squishy that has agro.. IF the squishy is able to run some, then you end up with kiting, and once again you use kiting as the NEW taunt mechanic..
Squishy is strong enough to become the tank himself and needs no help.. WHY even bother grouping them? At this point it's a solo game then, occasional events where a bunch of solo people get together.. and zerg the hard mobs.. Oh sure you can toss in a small amount of role features like a defense shield that last 3 seconds.. or some AOE heal that is 5% effective, but those roles are basically only cosmetic only..
The only problem that trinity role system had was HOW it was implemented by the devs into the game.. Bliizzard was the worst offender in this.. With the overuse of AOE taunting that was OP, it turned the trinity into a faceroll.. That doe sneed to be addressed, but in no way should be the poster child example why trinity fails..
The idea of team or group interaction HAS to be role driven doesn't hold either.. Just look at todays pro sports.. The 4 biggest US sports Football, Baseball, Basketball and Hockey are all formed around and operate using ROLES.. If you remove those roles, the sports fail to be those sports.. I always joked around that if you remove roles from Football you end up with Rugby.. Rugby is a fine sport, but it truly is just a group of individuals resembling a team playing keep a way from the other team.. LOL But to say that ROLES in Football is stupid and they should be abolished is crazy..
You still seem to be confusing the desire for a different system other than taunt-based combat with some kind of interest in eradicating roles. People who dislike the trinity are asking for the former, not the latter. How are you this far into the conversation and still struggling with that, man?
Absolutely Rydeson you should stop poking holes in Lok's arguments with concise explanations, its derailing the pace of anti trinity arguments, thats not allowed.
Groups as a concept are bad enough in todays solo friendly MMO's, but if you need to have specific roles that only makes it worse. Even worse, back in the day, you had some classes that were better at soloing or grouping. But lets put this in some historical context:
Classes better at one type of play were the first to go, classes were made equal in soloing and grouping. Gaming companies could not have our darling new players from the console generation who only played solo oriented classes feel in any way underpowered. Including underpowered in a group situation!
After that they removed the need to group at any time apart from group instance dungeons and raiding.
In recent years they have decided to bin the holy trinity, as they see that as a problem to players who come from a solo background. If you have no role then it is easier for such players to fit in straight away.
And all this fits the agenda to dumb MMOs down as much as possible of course. There must be nothing that confuses new players, nothing new they have to learn. Supposedly new players will be turned away if there is any sort of learning curve at all. I do not think people who play consoles or mobile games are that stupid but this is designing for the lowest common denominator. You could see the same process happening right across gaming since the millennium as it all became about brands and ensuring the LCD was catered for. As the ex CEO of EA said 'we will make games so simple your mum could play them'.
For the future look at mobile/cell phone games, what do people who play those games expect to see? Well whatever the gaming companies decided they expect to see will be coming to you in your MMO from this year onwards.
Without the trinity role system.. and when I say that, I don't mean just taunt and heals, I'm talking about CLASS DEFINING ROLES.. You have problems with squishies being vulnerable and dead much more often.. Without some form of control, whether that control be CC or tauting, you end up with chaos in where every person is out for themselves trying to survive a battle.. How else do you plan to save and protect the weak classes? UNLESS you wish to make the game where there is little difference between a cloth and plate..
Using EQN as the new example of non-trinity, people argue that a smart AI knows who the weakest link is.. Well 1) I sure as hell hope there is no such thing as smart wolves and bears.. They are stupid animals that has no clue what or who a healer is.. 2).. Assuming the mobs is a smart humanoid and goes after the weakest link, how do you protect and prevent that? You have 3 options and 3 options only..
You CC the mob using root, barriers or some form of stuns.. Well there you go.. Just another artificial program mechanic that replaced the taunt button.. Root becomes the new taunt.. or stuns become the new taunt.. You can call it what you will, implicated it however you like, but the end result is still the same.. KEEP mob off squishy..
You DPS zerg the mob before they kill your squishy that has agro.. IF the squishy is able to run some, then you end up with kiting, and once again you use kiting as the NEW taunt mechanic..
Squishy is strong enough to become the tank himself and needs no help.. WHY even bother grouping them? At this point it's a solo game then, occasional events where a bunch of solo people get together.. and zerg the hard mobs.. Oh sure you can toss in a small amount of role features like a defense shield that last 3 seconds.. or some AOE heal that is 5% effective, but those roles are basically only cosmetic only..
The only problem that trinity role system had was HOW it was implemented by the devs into the game.. Bliizzard was the worst offender in this.. With the overuse of AOE taunting that was OP, it turned the trinity into a faceroll.. That doe sneed to be addressed, but in no way should be the poster child example why trinity fails..
The idea of team or group interaction HAS to be role driven doesn't hold either.. Just look at todays pro sports.. The 4 biggest US sports Football, Baseball, Basketball and Hockey are all formed around and operate using ROLES.. If you remove those roles, the sports fail to be those sports.. I always joked around that if you remove roles from Football you end up with Rugby.. Rugby is a fine sport, but it truly is just a group of individuals resembling a team playing keep a way from the other team.. LOL But to say that ROLES in Football is stupid and they should be abolished is crazy..
You still seem to be confusing the desire for a different system other than taunt-based combat with some kind of interest in eradicating roles. People who dislike the trinity are asking for the former, not the latter. How are you this far into the conversation and still struggling with that, man?
Absolutely Rydeson you should stop poking holes in Lok's arguments with concise explanations, its derailing the pace of anti trinity arguments, thats not allowed.
LOL!
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Without the trinity role system.. and when I say that, I don't mean just taunt and heals, I'm talking about CLASS DEFINING ROLES.. You have problems with squishies being vulnerable and dead much more often.. Without some form of control, whether that control be CC or tauting, you end up with chaos in where every person is out for themselves trying to survive a battle.. How else do you plan to save and protect the weak classes? UNLESS you wish to make the game where there is little difference between a cloth and plate..
Using EQN as the new example of non-trinity, people argue that a smart AI knows who the weakest link is.. Well 1) I sure as hell hope there is no such thing as smart wolves and bears.. They are stupid animals that has no clue what or who a healer is.. 2).. Assuming the mobs is a smart humanoid and goes after the weakest link, how do you protect and prevent that? You have 3 options and 3 options only..
You CC the mob using root, barriers or some form of stuns.. Well there you go.. Just another artificial program mechanic that replaced the taunt button.. Root becomes the new taunt.. or stuns become the new taunt.. You can call it what you will, implicated it however you like, but the end result is still the same.. KEEP mob off squishy..
You DPS zerg the mob before they kill your squishy that has agro.. IF the squishy is able to run some, then you end up with kiting, and once again you use kiting as the NEW taunt mechanic..
Squishy is strong enough to become the tank himself and needs no help.. WHY even bother grouping them? At this point it's a solo game then, occasional events where a bunch of solo people get together.. and zerg the hard mobs.. Oh sure you can toss in a small amount of role features like a defense shield that last 3 seconds.. or some AOE heal that is 5% effective, but those roles are basically only cosmetic only..
The only problem that trinity role system had was HOW it was implemented by the devs into the game.. Bliizzard was the worst offender in this.. With the overuse of AOE taunting that was OP, it turned the trinity into a faceroll.. That doe sneed to be addressed, but in no way should be the poster child example why trinity fails..
The idea of team or group interaction HAS to be role driven doesn't hold either.. Just look at todays pro sports.. The 4 biggest US sports Football, Baseball, Basketball and Hockey are all formed around and operate using ROLES.. If you remove those roles, the sports fail to be those sports.. I always joked around that if you remove roles from Football you end up with Rugby.. Rugby is a fine sport, but it truly is just a group of individuals resembling a team playing keep a way from the other team.. LOL But to say that ROLES in Football is stupid and they should be abolished is crazy..
You still seem to be confusing the desire for a different system other than taunt-based combat with some kind of interest in eradicating roles. People who dislike the trinity are asking for the former, not the latter. How are you this far into the conversation and still struggling with that, man?
I give you an example.. Trinity ROLES= Football..... Non Trinity roles = Rugby..... Have you ever watched the two.. IF you have seen one rugby game you have seen them all.. There is NO diversity in how rugby is played.. There are no forward passes, no punts, no reverse options, no kick offs.. Rugby plays very much like a dps zerg as we have in GW2.. There is next to NO strategy in playing rugby..
And why do you KEEP the taunt base combat as YOUR only argument.. I am NOT.. I"m advocating class defined ROLES.. whether they be someone who taunts (correctly) CC, debuffing, kiting.. They are all roles.. HELL. I would be ok if Mr squishy could FD and lost agro, but will that be an option in EQN.. I think not.. There are ONLY two options in gaming.. MANY roles or NO roles.. Which one are you for?
Originally posted by NagelRitter Anyone who has a brain and wants to use it to come up with their own strategies instead of constantly having one forced on them.
Ironically, the more freedom you have in coming up with strategies, the less those strategies matter.
Trivially easy difficulty: Nearly every strategy is viable. Tremendous strategic freedom.
Moderate difficulty: Some strategies viable. Moderate strategic freedom.
Challenging difficulty: Few strategies viable. Very limited strategic freedom.
Some people use "jumping through hoops" as a negative criticism of bosses, but give me a fiery, narrow hoop any day compared with a 30-foot-wide hoop you can casually walk through. There's genuine accomplishment in one (despite only a very limited set of strategies working) -- the other just feels pointless to me.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Without the trinity role system.. and when I say that, I don't mean just taunt and heals, I'm talking about CLASS DEFINING ROLES.. You have problems with squishies being vulnerable and dead much more often.. Without some form of control, whether that control be CC or tauting, you end up with chaos in where every person is out for themselves trying to survive a battle.. How else do you plan to save and protect the weak classes? UNLESS you wish to make the game where there is little difference between a cloth and plate..
Using EQN as the new example of non-trinity, people argue that a smart AI knows who the weakest link is.. Well 1) I sure as hell hope there is no such thing as smart wolves and bears.. They are stupid animals that has no clue what or who a healer is.. 2).. Assuming the mobs is a smart humanoid and goes after the weakest link, how do you protect and prevent that? You have 3 options and 3 options only..
You CC the mob using root, barriers or some form of stuns.. Well there you go.. Just another artificial program mechanic that replaced the taunt button.. Root becomes the new taunt.. or stuns become the new taunt.. You can call it what you will, implicated it however you like, but the end result is still the same.. KEEP mob off squishy..
You DPS zerg the mob before they kill your squishy that has agro.. IF the squishy is able to run some, then you end up with kiting, and once again you use kiting as the NEW taunt mechanic..
Squishy is strong enough to become the tank himself and needs no help.. WHY even bother grouping them? At this point it's a solo game then, occasional events where a bunch of solo people get together.. and zerg the hard mobs.. Oh sure you can toss in a small amount of role features like a defense shield that last 3 seconds.. or some AOE heal that is 5% effective, but those roles are basically only cosmetic only..
The only problem that trinity role system had was HOW it was implemented by the devs into the game.. Bliizzard was the worst offender in this.. With the overuse of AOE taunting that was OP, it turned the trinity into a faceroll.. That doe sneed to be addressed, but in no way should be the poster child example why trinity fails..
The idea of team or group interaction HAS to be role driven doesn't hold either.. Just look at todays pro sports.. The 4 biggest US sports Football, Baseball, Basketball and Hockey are all formed around and operate using ROLES.. If you remove those roles, the sports fail to be those sports.. I always joked around that if you remove roles from Football you end up with Rugby.. Rugby is a fine sport, but it truly is just a group of individuals resembling a team playing keep a way from the other team.. LOL But to say that ROLES in Football is stupid and they should be abolished is crazy..
You still seem to be confusing the desire for a different system other than taunt-based combat with some kind of interest in eradicating roles. People who dislike the trinity are asking for the former, not the latter. How are you this far into the conversation and still struggling with that, man?
I give you an example.. Trinity ROLES= Football..... Non Trinity roles = Rugby..... Have you ever watched the two.. IF you have seen one rugby game you have seen them all.. There is NO diversity in how rugby is played.. There are no forward passes, no punts, no reverse options, no kick offs.. Rugby plays very much like a dps zerg as we have in GW2.. There is next to NO strategy in playing rugby..
And why do you KEEP the taunt base combat as YOUR only argument.. I am NOT.. I"m advocating class defined ROLES.. whether they be someone who taunts (correctly) CC, debuffing, kiting.. They are all roles.. HELL. I would be ok if Mr squishy could FD and lost agro, but will that be an option in EQN.. I think not.. There are ONLY two options in gaming.. MANY roles or NO roles.. Which one are you for?
Because that is what defined the Trinity. Without taunt, the Trinity does not exist. I know you aren't stupid, so I will just write this off as some kind of odd mental block on your part and drop it. I won't even touch your "rugby has no strategy" or "only two options, many roles or no roles" as I doubt you believe either statement. If you do, all the more reason to simply end the conversation here.
Best of luck to you.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I give you an example.. Trinity ROLES= Football..... Non Trinity roles = Rugby..... Have you ever watched the two.. IF you have seen one rugby game you have seen them all.. There is NO diversity in how rugby is played.. There are no forward passes, no punts, no reverse options, no kick offs.. Rugby plays very much like a dps zerg as we have in GW2.. There is next to NO strategy in playing rugby..
And why do you KEEP the taunt base combat as YOUR only argument.. I am NOT.. I"m advocating class defined ROLES.. whether they be someone who taunts (correctly) CC, debuffing, kiting.. They are all roles.. HELL. I would be ok if Mr squishy could FD and lost agro, but will that be an option in EQN.. I think not.. There are ONLY two options in gaming.. MANY roles or NO roles.. Which one are you for?
Games with non-trinity roles which are polished, deep, and fun:
League of Legends (and most MOBAs)
Team Fortress 2 (and some other class-based FPSes)
Natural Selection
Puzzle Pirates
None of these games are DPS zergs, yet they all have unique takes on role specialization. (They aren't the trinity.)
...at least this assumes you understood his point that he's not calling for the removal of role specialization, but instead to have non-trinity games with their own forms of role specialization (like the games above.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
My problem with the trinity is that it's become the *only* interdependency between characters, and has made MMOs that are built around it tedious.
I'd even go as far as to say that the trinity is what has made a lot of people prefer soloing to grouping, simply because soloing can often demand more thought over how you approach a fight than steamrolling in with a trinity group. That depends a lot on the game of course, as many seem to be taking the point of soloing away by making it too easy.
Where games like GW2 went wrong is in just dumping the trinity without working dependencies in elsewhere. I think the way forward isn't dropping the trinity altogether but developing an AI and character skills to create new and more interesting ways of characters working together.
I give you an example.. Trinity ROLES= Football..... Non Trinity roles = Rugby..... Have you ever watched the two.. IF you have seen one rugby game you have seen them all.. There is NO diversity in how rugby is played.. There are no forward passes, no punts, no reverse options, no kick offs.. Rugby plays very much like a dps zerg as we have in GW2.. There is next to NO strategy in playing rugby..
And why do you KEEP the taunt base combat as YOUR only argument.. I am NOT.. I"m advocating class defined ROLES.. whether they be someone who taunts (correctly) CC, debuffing, kiting.. They are all roles.. HELL. I would be ok if Mr squishy could FD and lost agro, but will that be an option in EQN.. I think not.. There are ONLY two options in gaming.. MANY roles or NO roles.. Which one are you for?
Games with non-trinity roles which are polished, deep, and fun:
League of Legends (and most MOBAs)
Team Fortress 2 (and some other class-based FPSes)
Natural Selection
Puzzle Pirates
None of these games are DPS zergs, yet they all have unique takes on role specialization. (They aren't the trinity.)
...at least this assumes you understood his point that he's not calling for the removal of role specialization, but instead to have non-trinity games with their own forms of role specialization (like the games above.)
I think the idea of a game with NO strategy sounds horrible....you get 4 or 5 dps together all off healing, taking agro from each other playing ping pong with mob's...what is the point of an MMO if no one has a defined roll? How do you discriminate between good and bad players if everyone can do the same thing. Do you really want to watch all 25 people in a raid to see who sucks? or just the 4 or 5 healers or 1-2 tanks and know who to bring...no Trinity sounds terrible...just my 2 cents.
My problem with the trinity is that it's become the *only* interdependency between characters, and has made MMOs that are built around it tedious.
I'd even go as far as to say that the trinity is what has made a lot of people prefer soloing to grouping, simply because soloing can often demand more thought over how you approach a fight than steamrolling in with a trinity group. That depends a lot on the game of course, as many seem to be taking the point of soloing away by making it too easy.
Where games like GW2 went wrong is in just dumping the trinity without working dependencies in elsewhere. I think the way forward isn't dropping the trinity altogether but developing an AI and character skills to create new and more interesting ways of characters working together.
Gib, I'm someone who enjoys playing Hunter/Ranger/Archer type classes, so you've pretty much nailed why I prefer solo play over the trinity group thing in modern MMOs. Just firing at the mob fixated on the tank usually means a lot less activity and a lot less decision making for me. Heading out there with my pet and managing both dps and aggro in WoW was a far more engaging experience than my group experiences. The same with Aion, especially during raids.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
My problem with the trinity is that it's become the *only* interdependency between characters, and has made MMOs that are built around it tedious.
I'd even go as far as to say that the trinity is what has made a lot of people prefer soloing to grouping, simply because soloing can often demand more thought over how you approach a fight than steamrolling in with a trinity group. That depends a lot on the game of course, as many seem to be taking the point of soloing away by making it too easy.
Where games like GW2 went wrong is in just dumping the trinity without working dependencies in elsewhere. I think the way forward isn't dropping the trinity altogether but developing an AI and character skills to create new and more interesting ways of characters working together.
Gib, I'm someone who enjoys playing Hunter/Ranger/Archer type classes, so you've pretty much nailed why I prefer solo play over the trinity group thing in modern MMOs. Just firing at the mob fixated on the tank usually means a lot less activity and a lot less decision making for me. Heading out there with my pet and managing both dps and aggro in WoW was a far more engaging experience than my group experiences. The same with Aion, especially during raids.
I suppose you played a ranger in GW2 too (a non-trinity game) ?
My son went with Ranger. I went with Engineer. A viking chick with two pistols and a missile turret? HELL YEAH!!!!
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
You know the funny thing tho.. I remember one of the ego strung EQN devs saying, "Whack a Mole was fun when he was 7".. as he was referring to hot key watching and pressing....... Little did Mr EQN dev realize is that "whack a mole" can refer to the brain dead lack luster skill of bonking mobs as they spawn, as they are in GW2.. and as I'm sure they will be in EQN as well.. Pot meet Kettle..
I think the idea of a game with NO strategy sounds horrible....you get 4 or 5 dps together all off healing, taking agro from each other playing ping pong with mob's...what is the point of an MMO if no one has a defined roll? How do you discriminate between good and bad players if everyone can do the same thing. Do you really want to watch all 25 people in a raid to see who sucks? or just the 4 or 5 healers or 1-2 tanks and know who to bring...no Trinity sounds terrible...just my 2 cents.
Well determining good and bad players along a single axis is actually still possible. It's just a really flat (shallow) type of game, which means for many players it'll get old really fast.
But as has been stated over and over, nobody's suggesting that (or maybe you were just joking by being the 10th person in the thread to say not having roles would suck?)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
My problem with the trinity is that it's become the *only* interdependency between characters, and has made MMOs that are built around it tedious.
I'd even go as far as to say that the trinity is what has made a lot of people prefer soloing to grouping, simply because soloing can often demand more thought over how you approach a fight than steamrolling in with a trinity group. That depends a lot on the game of course, as many seem to be taking the point of soloing away by making it too easy.
Where games like GW2 went wrong is in just dumping the trinity without working dependencies in elsewhere. I think the way forward isn't dropping the trinity altogether but developing an AI and character skills to create new and more interesting ways of characters working together.
Gib, I'm someone who enjoys playing Hunter/Ranger/Archer type classes, so you've pretty much nailed why I prefer solo play over the trinity group thing in modern MMOs. Just firing at the mob fixated on the tank usually means a lot less activity and a lot less decision making for me. Heading out there with my pet and managing both dps and aggro in WoW was a far more engaging experience than my group experiences. The same with Aion, especially during raids.
I find it ironic that you say you dislike the trinity and yet your favorite class was the Hunter.
My problem with the trinity is that it's become the *only* interdependency between characters, and has made MMOs that are built around it tedious.
I'd even go as far as to say that the trinity is what has made a lot of people prefer soloing to grouping, simply because soloing can often demand more thought over how you approach a fight than steamrolling in with a trinity group. That depends a lot on the game of course, as many seem to be taking the point of soloing away by making it too easy.
Where games like GW2 went wrong is in just dumping the trinity without working dependencies in elsewhere. I think the way forward isn't dropping the trinity altogether but developing an AI and character skills to create new and more interesting ways of characters working together.
Gib, I'm someone who enjoys playing Hunter/Ranger/Archer type classes, so you've pretty much nailed why I prefer solo play over the trinity group thing in modern MMOs. Just firing at the mob fixated on the tank usually means a lot less activity and a lot less decision making for me. Heading out there with my pet and managing both dps and aggro in WoW was a far more engaging experience than my group experiences. The same with Aion, especially during raids.
I find it ironic that you say you dislike the trinity and yet your favorite class was the Hunter.
Ha Ha .. me too .. Pet TANKS and he pew pews.. yet he dislikes the trinity.. POT meet KETTTLE..lol
It has to do with making MMOs even more solo friendly. If there is no interdependence between classes than there is no need to group at all except for raiding. This has taken MMOs even further down the road to single player games. The really sad part of it is it seems to be what the majority of today's MMO gamers want so they will continue to add mechanics that will make MMO even more single player. In today's MMOs the vast majority of the content is designed for a single player to accomplish. Isn't that the very definition of a single player game?
Bren
This is because the mmorpg market today is filled with mostly casuals that do not have the time required for a mmorpg. As such the devs keep catering to them which has lead way to them removing the trinity of tank, dps and heals, to make it easier for casuals to get stuff done. Personally I, myself prefer the trinity because it mostly just works.
Where games like GW2 went wrong is in just dumping the trinity without working dependencies in elsewhere. I think the way forward isn't dropping the trinity altogether but developing an AI and character skills to create new and more interesting ways of characters working together.
+1
I am not anti-trinity. I'm just against every battle being trinity-oriented. I'd love to see some battles need to take a different approach to tactics. This is why EQN has me excited because the prospect of destructible terrain means that you might not need a tank to keep mobs off of squishy spellcasters and healers. On the other hand, tank battles might be necessary in open terrain against less intelligent mobs who are susceptible to taunts. I am all for variety in battle styles and I hope that the trinity is just one of several different possible ways to approach different types of battles.
as always, the issue that has plagued the genre for years now is: lets improve something. that something actually gets nerfed into the ground for some people, and nothing is ADDED to take it's place. Spamming trade for groups sucks. As someone who is 10000% opposed to lfd (at least the x-server/port to dungeon part of it), I can honestly say that finding a tank sucks. But, it took time, and it generated relationships. That time and those relationships were nerfed and nothing has been added to take their place. As such people end up totally geared without saying a word to another person, and in 1/2 the time, so they quit. there is nothing left to do and no relationships keeping them there.
removing trinity would be fine if it was actually replaced with something of equal value which sofar could not be further from the truth. all we get is some guy telling us that enhanced UI will be awesome ... blah blah blah. after hearing 1000 devs tell us 1000s of ways in which they are going to improve things only to be handed a long line of shallow drivel ... most of us aren't interested in soft facts like that anymore. eqn could make a game with no trinity that actually plays better than a game with trinity. it's possible .. in theory .. but im not holding my breath at this point.
add to that the fact that the genre is now full of people who would seem to prefer rolling a character and finishing the game in a month of 1 hour days ... and, well ... here we are.
LFD tools are great for cramming people into content, but quality > quantity. I am, usually on the sandbox .. more "hardcore" side of things, but I also do just want to have fun. So lighten up already
I have been reading a lot recently about how the 'holy trinity' needs to disappear from mmo's. I know the idea has been tossed around for years but never in such force. Now, developers and games have started to make the shift.
I guess my question is: Is this the problem with MMO's today, the Holy Trinity, and by eliminating it will the MMO's be better?
It started from people bitching about having to look for healers and tanks to run groups with. This No Trinity movement is nothing more then the collected masses of those individuals. And then you need to ask yourself "Who are these individuals".
I have a guess. Its the first wave of console gamers that found their way over into the MMO world. They didnt understand what it ment to group or be social to get things done. They didnt want to wait to do the things they could do in their console world.
I think the idea of a game with NO strategy sounds horrible....you get 4 or 5 dps together all off healing, taking agro from each other playing ping pong with mob's...what is the point of an MMO if no one has a defined roll? How do you discriminate between good and bad players if everyone can do the same thing. Do you really want to watch all 25 people in a raid to see who sucks? or just the 4 or 5 healers or 1-2 tanks and know who to bring...no Trinity sounds terrible...just my 2 cents.
Maybe you should expand your horizons and actually try one of those games instead of rambling around in terror making wildly incorrect assumptions about something you clearly know nothing about? LoL and Dota 2 are both free.
The "metagame" (ergo, the general strategy used) in those games floats a lot, but they definitely have roles.
I'm sorry, but to those of us who have actually played them what you're saying sounds beyond dumb. It's not your 2 cents. It's pure willful ignorance.
Favorite MMO: Vanilla WoW Currently playing: GW2, EVE Excited for: Wildstar, maybe?
My problem with the trinity is that it's become the *only* interdependency between characters, and has made MMOs that are built around it tedious.
I'd even go as far as to say that the trinity is what has made a lot of people prefer soloing to grouping, simply because soloing can often demand more thought over how you approach a fight than steamrolling in with a trinity group. That depends a lot on the game of course, as many seem to be taking the point of soloing away by making it too easy.
Where games like GW2 went wrong is in just dumping the trinity without working dependencies in elsewhere. I think the way forward isn't dropping the trinity altogether but developing an AI and character skills to create new and more interesting ways of characters working together.
Gib, I'm someone who enjoys playing Hunter/Ranger/Archer type classes, so you've pretty much nailed why I prefer solo play over the trinity group thing in modern MMOs. Just firing at the mob fixated on the tank usually means a lot less activity and a lot less decision making for me. Heading out there with my pet and managing both dps and aggro in WoW was a far more engaging experience than my group experiences. The same with Aion, especially during raids.
I find it ironic that you say you dislike the trinity and yet your favorite class was the Hunter.
Ha Ha .. me too .. Pet TANKS and he pew pews.. yet he dislikes the trinity.. POT meet KETTTLE..lol
The only ranged class I played that had a pet was the one in WOW. The only reason I used the pet was because there was really no option for archer without a pet. I even mentioned in another recent post that I went engineer instead of the pet ranged in GW2.
But... hey, if this is some kind of odd victory for you two, more power to you.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
This is going to be my only post in this thread. All of you who are praising EQN for putting the sword to the trinity with its "advanced AI" first off, its not gonna be nearly as advanced as they're trying to make it sound. Second off, i'm gonna enjoy your tears of frustration at your fellow party members who can't even handle archaic and simple ai of todays mmos in a trinity game where the tank holds the aggro yet people still manage to die.
So enjoy your parades at the death of the trinity for now because you will come crashing back to reality as soon as this game is released when you realize how wrong all of you truly were to think this could possibly be a good idea. The quote "becareful what you wish for" has never been more true.
Comments
Idea of having dedicated healer, tank, infantry,... etc. is something most natural to real world. But, you know, you have 1 healer and 1 tank and 3 or more dps (infantry) for certain tasks so it is obvious there is no problem for employment of healers and tanks.
So angry infrantry (read dps) come with idea to eliminate them and go to fight on their own into the battle. Unfortunately game designers listened to them.
To be honest, I preffered to play mainly as dps and healer, much less tank. And did not enjoy to wait as healer 3 mins to get into the group and 60 mins as dps. But this is how things are. Main reason? Because is very hard to be tank, to be healer ... compared to simple minded dps that just want to press buttons, rush into the battle when tank is close to die, when healer himself is close to die ... but our dps hero just badly want to engage new group of mobs ... wow ....
Only way to have more healers and tanks is to make their job much less difficult but then overall experience might suffer. Loved Wotlk kind of heroics ... hated after that. Left permanently after. I do not care if dps were careless, tanks were bad or healers ... just was not fun to die at all times (at start) from hands or claws of first group of trivial mobs. At that time wow lost me as end game player. Fortunately good games come along in last years so I had plenty to do. I return to play wow when new expansion come and will play up to the momement all my 10 alts (Alliance) are leveled to max ... then wait next expansion.
I see few solutions. Or make job easier for tanks and healers so we have more of them. Or decrease number of dps needed (like in swtor, which is pure joy to me as endgame; sometimes agree to easy but fun as hell). Or adapt gameplay like gw2 where true tanks and healers are not really needed but they can come handy. Dps just must make sure it does change targets often enough. Good thing there is everyone can ressurect player and in middle of fight.
Absolutely Rydeson you should stop poking holes in Lok's arguments with concise explanations, its derailing the pace of anti trinity arguments, thats not allowed.
Groups as a concept are bad enough in todays solo friendly MMO's, but if you need to have specific roles that only makes it worse. Even worse, back in the day, you had some classes that were better at soloing or grouping. But lets put this in some historical context:
Classes better at one type of play were the first to go, classes were made equal in soloing and grouping. Gaming companies could not have our darling new players from the console generation who only played solo oriented classes feel in any way underpowered. Including underpowered in a group situation!
After that they removed the need to group at any time apart from group instance dungeons and raiding.
In recent years they have decided to bin the holy trinity, as they see that as a problem to players who come from a solo background. If you have no role then it is easier for such players to fit in straight away.
And all this fits the agenda to dumb MMOs down as much as possible of course. There must be nothing that confuses new players, nothing new they have to learn. Supposedly new players will be turned away if there is any sort of learning curve at all. I do not think people who play consoles or mobile games are that stupid but this is designing for the lowest common denominator. You could see the same process happening right across gaming since the millennium as it all became about brands and ensuring the LCD was catered for. As the ex CEO of EA said 'we will make games so simple your mum could play them'.
For the future look at mobile/cell phone games, what do people who play those games expect to see? Well whatever the gaming companies decided they expect to see will be coming to you in your MMO from this year onwards.
LOL!
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I give you an example.. Trinity ROLES= Football..... Non Trinity roles = Rugby..... Have you ever watched the two.. IF you have seen one rugby game you have seen them all.. There is NO diversity in how rugby is played.. There are no forward passes, no punts, no reverse options, no kick offs.. Rugby plays very much like a dps zerg as we have in GW2.. There is next to NO strategy in playing rugby..
And why do you KEEP the taunt base combat as YOUR only argument.. I am NOT.. I"m advocating class defined ROLES.. whether they be someone who taunts (correctly) CC, debuffing, kiting.. They are all roles.. HELL. I would be ok if Mr squishy could FD and lost agro, but will that be an option in EQN.. I think not.. There are ONLY two options in gaming.. MANY roles or NO roles.. Which one are you for?
Ironically, the more freedom you have in coming up with strategies, the less those strategies matter.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Because that is what defined the Trinity. Without taunt, the Trinity does not exist. I know you aren't stupid, so I will just write this off as some kind of odd mental block on your part and drop it. I won't even touch your "rugby has no strategy" or "only two options, many roles or no roles" as I doubt you believe either statement. If you do, all the more reason to simply end the conversation here.
Best of luck to you.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Games with non-trinity roles which are polished, deep, and fun:
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
My problem with the trinity is that it's become the *only* interdependency between characters, and has made MMOs that are built around it tedious.
I'd even go as far as to say that the trinity is what has made a lot of people prefer soloing to grouping, simply because soloing can often demand more thought over how you approach a fight than steamrolling in with a trinity group. That depends a lot on the game of course, as many seem to be taking the point of soloing away by making it too easy.
Where games like GW2 went wrong is in just dumping the trinity without working dependencies in elsewhere. I think the way forward isn't dropping the trinity altogether but developing an AI and character skills to create new and more interesting ways of characters working together.
I think the idea of a game with NO strategy sounds horrible....you get 4 or 5 dps together all off healing, taking agro from each other playing ping pong with mob's...what is the point of an MMO if no one has a defined roll? How do you discriminate between good and bad players if everyone can do the same thing. Do you really want to watch all 25 people in a raid to see who sucks? or just the 4 or 5 healers or 1-2 tanks and know who to bring...no Trinity sounds terrible...just my 2 cents.
Gib, I'm someone who enjoys playing Hunter/Ranger/Archer type classes, so you've pretty much nailed why I prefer solo play over the trinity group thing in modern MMOs. Just firing at the mob fixated on the tank usually means a lot less activity and a lot less decision making for me. Heading out there with my pet and managing both dps and aggro in WoW was a far more engaging experience than my group experiences. The same with Aion, especially during raids.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
My son went with Ranger. I went with Engineer. A viking chick with two pistols and a missile turret? HELL YEAH!!!!
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Well determining good and bad players along a single axis is actually still possible. It's just a really flat (shallow) type of game, which means for many players it'll get old really fast.
But as has been stated over and over, nobody's suggesting that (or maybe you were just joking by being the 10th person in the thread to say not having roles would suck?)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I find it ironic that you say you dislike the trinity and yet your favorite class was the Hunter.
Ha Ha .. me too .. Pet TANKS and he pew pews.. yet he dislikes the trinity.. POT meet KETTTLE..lol
This is because the mmorpg market today is filled with mostly casuals that do not have the time required for a mmorpg. As such the devs keep catering to them which has lead way to them removing the trinity of tank, dps and heals, to make it easier for casuals to get stuff done. Personally I, myself prefer the trinity because it mostly just works.
+1
I am not anti-trinity. I'm just against every battle being trinity-oriented. I'd love to see some battles need to take a different approach to tactics. This is why EQN has me excited because the prospect of destructible terrain means that you might not need a tank to keep mobs off of squishy spellcasters and healers. On the other hand, tank battles might be necessary in open terrain against less intelligent mobs who are susceptible to taunts. I am all for variety in battle styles and I hope that the trinity is just one of several different possible ways to approach different types of battles.
I am glad it is boring playing the same class the whole time,
great that we would be able to change it up when we want.
as always, the issue that has plagued the genre for years now is: lets improve something. that something actually gets nerfed into the ground for some people, and nothing is ADDED to take it's place. Spamming trade for groups sucks. As someone who is 10000% opposed to lfd (at least the x-server/port to dungeon part of it), I can honestly say that finding a tank sucks. But, it took time, and it generated relationships. That time and those relationships were nerfed and nothing has been added to take their place. As such people end up totally geared without saying a word to another person, and in 1/2 the time, so they quit. there is nothing left to do and no relationships keeping them there.
removing trinity would be fine if it was actually replaced with something of equal value which sofar could not be further from the truth. all we get is some guy telling us that enhanced UI will be awesome ... blah blah blah. after hearing 1000 devs tell us 1000s of ways in which they are going to improve things only to be handed a long line of shallow drivel ... most of us aren't interested in soft facts like that anymore. eqn could make a game with no trinity that actually plays better than a game with trinity. it's possible .. in theory .. but im not holding my breath at this point.
add to that the fact that the genre is now full of people who would seem to prefer rolling a character and finishing the game in a month of 1 hour days ... and, well ... here we are.
LFD tools are great for cramming people into content, but quality > quantity.
I am, usually on the sandbox .. more "hardcore" side of things, but I also do just want to have fun. So lighten up already
It started from people bitching about having to look for healers and tanks to run groups with. This No Trinity movement is nothing more then the collected masses of those individuals. And then you need to ask yourself "Who are these individuals".
I have a guess. Its the first wave of console gamers that found their way over into the MMO world. They didnt understand what it ment to group or be social to get things done. They didnt want to wait to do the things they could do in their console world.
Again its just my guess.
Maybe you should expand your horizons and actually try one of those games instead of rambling around in terror making wildly incorrect assumptions about something you clearly know nothing about? LoL and Dota 2 are both free.
The "metagame" (ergo, the general strategy used) in those games floats a lot, but they definitely have roles.
I'm sorry, but to those of us who have actually played them what you're saying sounds beyond dumb. It's not your 2 cents. It's pure willful ignorance.
Favorite MMO: Vanilla WoW
Currently playing: GW2, EVE
Excited for: Wildstar, maybe?
The only ranged class I played that had a pet was the one in WOW. The only reason I used the pet was because there was really no option for archer without a pet. I even mentioned in another recent post that I went engineer instead of the pet ranged in GW2.
But... hey, if this is some kind of odd victory for you two, more power to you.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
This is going to be my only post in this thread. All of you who are praising EQN for putting the sword to the trinity with its "advanced AI" first off, its not gonna be nearly as advanced as they're trying to make it sound. Second off, i'm gonna enjoy your tears of frustration at your fellow party members who can't even handle archaic and simple ai of todays mmos in a trinity game where the tank holds the aggro yet people still manage to die.
So enjoy your parades at the death of the trinity for now because you will come crashing back to reality as soon as this game is released when you realize how wrong all of you truly were to think this could possibly be a good idea. The quote "becareful what you wish for" has never been more true.
Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!