Originally posted by Dullahan Interviewer:To the people that are talking about specialization vs utility: If everyone can be a healer, if everyone can be a warrior, how do I make my real niche and stand out?Georgeson:So, um-um--[pause]We'd -We're not getting rid of the old roles[pause]um --there are still--uhb--[sigh][pause]-- how to put this. Every situation is going to need different kinds of roles to participate in it. You are going to want people that caaan[pause] stand in front of--uh[pause]in -uh-stand in fr--in-stand in front of the group and shield them against damage. You're gonna want to find people that are willing to support other people by-- uhm--iee-uhhya- throwing up buffs on them or being able touh--eh-- or byuh-- occasionally heal and do different things...
Funniest post I've seen in a while, rofl.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon. In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
Originally posted by ignore_me ugh. Where combat is concerned MMO players have been thrown under the bus to attract the MOBA crowd. He says it in the interview. Money-wise this makes sense, but it's a dick move to be honest.
The two first EQ, but also WoW, Rift, LotRO and many more all have traditional MMO combat. You can still play those, most for free. It's not a "dick move" to not want to make all games the same.
Exactly right, JLP.
Chances are, SOE isn't making EQ:N for anyone who is reading this. The traditional MMORPG player isn't the target audience for EQ:N. SOE is trying to expand its customer base, not move revenue from EQ1/EQ2/Vanguard/FR/Planetside/etc. games into a new game. They want to grab new money from new customers, and making a new game for existing customers doesn't accomplish their business goal.
MOBAs are pure PVP. So if SOE wants to attract those players they're going to have to go for open-world PVP. Which is acceptable if they are focusing on a new audience as you said.
You could be right, Bidwood. I've no problem with MMOFPS or MMORTS or MOBAs; they are all about a PvP experience. It's when the PvP is wedged into an MMORPG that I have issues.
And let's not forget we might both be wrong, and SOE is after a market that is completely outside the typical MMO or MOBA player. Maybe they've convinced themselves they can attract the Tetris market with EQ:N.
With all of the cryptic stuff they're saying, we could always be wrong.
As for your comment about PVP... are you saying it only belongs in those other MMO genres and is always "wedged in" to MMORPGs? Or did I misinterpret?
With all of the cryptic stuff they're saying, we could always be wrong.
As for your comment about PVP... are you saying it only belongs in those other MMO genres and is always "wedged in" to MMORPGs? Or did I misinterpret?
To me, RP games have never been about a player-vs-player experience. Since I started in 1975, role-playing was all about beating the encounters thrown at you by a GM. The content by the game was everything. And, in all too many cases, players fighting players resulted in bad behavior. I even saw a guy ruin someone's very expensive lawn because they didn't get their way. This focus on player versus environment continued beyond the PnP days into the CRPGs. And MMORPGs carry on that tradition.
As I pointed out in my earlier post, there are a variety of other types of games where the player versus player experience is much more important. There's little focus on the environment, and most other genres treat the environment as either a scenic backdrop, or in the case of RTS games, some kind of non-replenishing resource. These games pit the player against similar foes, either propelled by AI or another human opponent.
When PvP is added to an MMORPG, it dilutes the RP tradition somewhat. Because every MMORPG to date has initially built a PvE experience as its core, the PvP frequently feels tacked on. It tends to be unsatisfactory to all parties. The pure PvE player doesn't enjoy the disruptions of the PvP environment, and the pure PvP player almost always balks at limitations or restrictions that allow others the option on not participating in the PvP play.
I'd rather see PvP venues remain in the other game genres. They do an exceptional job of providing that type experience. Leave the MMORPG genre to follow the long-standing traditions established in the earliest days of role-playing games.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Originally posted by Mendelher propelled by AI or another human opponent.
When PvP is added to an MMORPG, it dilutes the RP tradition somewhat.
The RP tradition has been on a steep steep decline since WoW came out. Role Players are probably the smallest niche left in MMO's...they make great servers though...I always roll up on the RP server because it is full of some of the best and most social players in the game...
UO had strong RP communities, so did SWG, Wow has a few but probably a much smaller percentage of the player base than anything before it...and everything after WoW has been miniscule at best. Most people don't even understand that aspect of the game anymore.
I do not think PvP is the problem though, not at all actually as UO had full on PvP and a great community on Catskill shard.
Originally posted by Mendelher propelled by AI or another human opponent.
When PvP is added to an MMORPG, it dilutes the RP tradition somewhat.
The RP tradition has been on a steep steep decline since WoW came out. Role Players are probably the smallest niche left in MMO's...they make great servers though...I always roll up on the RP server because it is full of some of the best and most social players in the game...
Agreed. But I do think there are plenty of other genre games that cater to the PvP crowd. Only the various RP type games cater to the PvE crowd. And that is the RP tradition I was referencing, not the hardcore RP gamer. We are a niche market.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Originally posted by Mendelher propelled by AI or another human opponent.
When PvP is added to an MMORPG, it dilutes the RP tradition somewhat.
The RP tradition has been on a steep steep decline since WoW came out. Role Players are probably the smallest niche left in MMO's...they make great servers though...I always roll up on the RP server because it is full of some of the best and most social players in the game...
Agreed. But I do think there are plenty of other genre games that cater to the PvP crowd. Only the various RP type games cater to the PvE crowd. And that is the RP tradition I was referencing, not the hardcore RP gamer. We are a niche market.
We have probably derailed the hell out this thread but,
as a counter to your argument, I would point out that the most sucesfull RP lands in Second Life also incorporate a PvP system of some type in them, as this is entirely optional...as anything in second life is up to the land owners, one has to look for the reasoning behind it.
The primary reason is that in any RP disagreement such a combat system allows for a valid no argument way to solve disputes, without some kind of system like this in play it allows for people who are unwilling to bend to assume whatever position of power they feel like having, and justify it in the RP system.
for instance Joe, feels the wraith in the blow aimed at his face but due to his yearly intake of ambrosia laughs off the effects of the sledge hammer and summons a cow on top of barnie's head.
Such outrageous things are not unknown in that community when the system has no way of controlling them. Not that such conflicts should be the center of attention in any game, rp or not, but they do occur and systems that provide a resolution are often better than dealing with Joe: the guy who has a reason for always coming out on top.
God, this is the wrong forum for this conversation.
To the people that are talking about specialization vs utility: If everyone can be a healer, if everyone can be a warrior, how do I make my real niche and stand out?
Georgeson:
So, um-
um--
[pause]
We'd -
We're not getting rid of the old roles
[pause]
um --
there are still
--uhb--
[sigh]
[pause]
-- how to put this.
Every situation is going to need different kinds of roles to participate in it.
You are going to want people that caaan
[pause]
stand in front of
--uh
[pause]
in -
uh-
stand in fr--
in-
stand in front of the group and shield them against damage.
You're gonna want to find people that are willing to support other people by
-- uhm
--iee
-uhhya-
throwing up buffs on them or being able to
uh--
eh-- or by
uh--
occasionally heal and do different things...
Funniest post I've seen in a while, rofl.
Glad someone has a sense of humor.
Roles are obviously a touchy subject. Their proposed class and combat system is, and will only continue to be, problematic for a serious mmorpg with any kind of depth or intelligent combat - contrary to what they say. They don't even know what to say right now with all the skepticism and scrutiny over these ideas.
To the people that are talking about specialization vs utility: If everyone can be a healer, if everyone can be a warrior, how do I make my real niche and stand out?
Georgeson:
So, um-
um--
[pause]
We'd -
We're not getting rid of the old roles
[pause]
um --
there are still
--uhb--
[sigh]
[pause]
-- how to put this.
Every situation is going to need different kinds of roles to participate in it.
You are going to want people that caaan
[pause]
stand in front of
--uh
[pause]
in -
uh-
stand in fr--
in-
stand in front of the group and shield them against damage.
You're gonna want to find people that are willing to support other people by
-- uhm
--iee
-uhhya-
throwing up buffs on them or being able to
uh--
eh-- or by
uh--
occasionally heal and do different things...
Funniest post I've seen in a while, rofl.
Glad someone has a sense of humor.
Roles are obviously a touchy subject. Their proposed class and combat system is, and will only continue to be, problematic for a serious mmorpg with any kind of depth or intelligent combat - contrary to what they say. They don't even know what to say right now with all the skepticism and scrutiny over these ideas.
...so that came out. And I lawled.
Don't know about "intelligent combat" but I think it's going to be a TON of fun and take a good deal of skill to excel at.
Don't know about "intelligent combat" but I think it's going to be a TON of fun and take a good deal of skill to excel at.
I agree. I think his slow and uncertain tone was from trying not to reveal too much. But I really like the idea of a tank having to physically be between the mob and casters to block damage... or a caster teleporting people out of harms way. It's going to take a lot more skill and thoughtfulness to excel in EQ:N than typical MMORPGs where you just mash taunt and AOE dmg/threat skill. That being said, a lot of people will complain when a pack of orcs outsmarts them because they don't know how to use positioning/environment to gain an advantage.
I played a Moba one time (wasnt league of legend never played that one) where the "tanks" could drop an aoe containment field...well thats what I am calling it....basically it was a short duration effect that locked everything else inside it for 5 seconds or so.
Skills like that could certainly allow for tanking without taunts, or skills that pushed things back like the mesmer ability in GW2 (the two handed sword last skill) combined with a slow..even though we would call that CC ability if combined with other abilities that denied a mobs ability to go after anything but the tank, and an AI that would switch targets to go after what it could actually hit.....well this probably isn't whats in EQnext but there are other solutions besides taunt to keep something attention focused on you.
CC abilities, health transfer to the tank abilities (so that it is quicker to kill the tank...this was used on some mobs in Lotro Skirmishes I believe), physical impediment abilities.... They all make more sense than the taunt.
Special: Defence Aura (-50% All incoming damage to nearby enemies)
Comments: Kill him first to make others using his aura easier to kill, but watch out for his disarm skill. In Small Fellowships and Fellowhsips, the defense boost will be increased to -60% and -70%, respectively.
When this guy pops up you try and kill him even though he isn't doing the most damage and his health pool by itself is larger than the other mobs, it just takes too long to kill the little guys with him putting on this buff..
Truth be told, I personally find the old systems pretty boring. I tried Neverwinter with it's one-weapon, 6 button setup (That's how I remember it anyway) which to me is an awful system, and though GW2 has ten primary buttons (plus F keys) it still gets a bit stale at times. I don't know why the idea is lately always more restriction. If you want to offer a default 8-button setup then cool, but allow for enough flexibility that players can run more buttons if they want. Even if those are essentially just consumable, or non-combat buttons.
But 7 or 8 is just using what the average person can store in short-term memory. If you don't have to access long-term or intermediate memory then you are doing something by habit or at least with very little cognition. When people say Dumbing it Down, they are quite literally right.
Oh please enough of your crap.
When you play Chess how many distinct moves are there?
Pawn can move 1 forward.
Bishop can move diagonal.
Castle can move in a striaght line.
Knight can move in an L formation.
King can move 1 space in any direction.
Queen can move in any direction.
6 total moves. Is Chess a dumbed down game?
Look back at the first streetfighter games, they only had 4 buttons.
The number of buttons to press has nothing to do with complexity, memory retention or any of the rest of the crap you mention.
How you can use the skills available and how they interact with the environment, other friendly players, enemy mons, enemy players...that is where the complexity comes in.
If you think the number of buttons to mash equates to how good the combat will be then you have a very limited mix of intelligence and experience.
Bad move on your part, as you are confusing the tasks and the context. In the chess example you are making deliberate decisions, which if you are good, are a part of several contingent sequences based on the possibilities of moves. That is nothing like the simplistic poking of the keyboard required for MMO action combat.
Argument from Analogy fail. Hah I also like the way you brought in street fighter, nice one Kasparov. Was I supposed to be in awe of the amazing thought and strategy that goes into your twitching thumbs, mashing those buttons are 400 presses per minute while you watch a 2d cartoon strobe in front of your drooling face?
Truth be told, I personally find the old systems pretty boring. I tried Neverwinter with it's one-weapon, 6 button setup (That's how I remember it anyway) which to me is an awful system, and though GW2 has ten primary buttons (plus F keys) it still gets a bit stale at times. I don't know why the idea is lately always more restriction. If you want to offer a default 8-button setup then cool, but allow for enough flexibility that players can run more buttons if they want. Even if those are essentially just consumable, or non-combat buttons.
But 7 or 8 is just using what the average person can store in short-term memory. If you don't have to access long-term or intermediate memory then you are doing something by habit or at least with very little cognition. When people say Dumbing it Down, they are quite literally right.
Oh please enough of your crap.
When you play Chess how many distinct moves are there?
Pawn can move 1 forward.
Bishop can move diagonal.
Castle can move in a striaght line.
Knight can move in an L formation.
King can move 1 space in any direction.
Queen can move in any direction.
6 total moves. Is Chess a dumbed down game?
Look back at the first streetfighter games, they only had 4 buttons.
The number of buttons to press has nothing to do with complexity, memory retention or any of the rest of the crap you mention.
How you can use the skills available and how they interact with the environment, other friendly players, enemy mons, enemy players...that is where the complexity comes in.
If you think the number of buttons to mash equates to how good the combat will be then you have a very limited mix of intelligence and experience.
I would have approached it a little less agressively, but this is a good way to look at the combat setup.
Meh I've posted harmless stuff and got banned for it so why should I bother trying to censor myself, they will ban me either way. The point is, he is constantly talking crap (or lying, or not telling the truth, or hinding the facts....take your pick as to which one you think is PC enough) and he is either doing it to troll people or believes it. If he is a troll then he should get more of a ban then me. if he is not a troll and believes what he writes then he is just dense.
lol why don't you calm down lady. Nerd raging is always effective in making your point, which in this case seems to be to try and get everyone to agree with you or something. I like the way you assert that I don't know what I'm talking about but you have no intelligent argument to offer. I always love the "shut up" defense.
Truth be told, I personally find the old systems pretty boring. I tried Neverwinter with it's one-weapon, 6 button setup (That's how I remember it anyway) which to me is an awful system, and though GW2 has ten primary buttons (plus F keys) it still gets a bit stale at times. I don't know why the idea is lately always more restriction. If you want to offer a default 8-button setup then cool, but allow for enough flexibility that players can run more buttons if they want. Even if those are essentially just consumable, or non-combat buttons.
But 7 or 8 is just using what the average person can store in short-term memory. If you don't have to access long-term or intermediate memory then you are doing something by habit or at least with very little cognition. When people say Dumbing it Down, they are quite literally right.
Oh please enough of your crap.
When you play Chess how many distinct moves are there?
Pawn can move 1 forward.
Bishop can move diagonal.
Castle can move in a striaght line.
Knight can move in an L formation.
King can move 1 space in any direction.
Queen can move in any direction.
6 total moves. Is Chess a dumbed down game?
Look back at the first streetfighter games, they only had 4 buttons.
The number of buttons to press has nothing to do with complexity, memory retention or any of the rest of the crap you mention.
How you can use the skills available and how they interact with the environment, other friendly players, enemy mons, enemy players...that is where the complexity comes in.
If you think the number of buttons to mash equates to how good the combat will be then you have a very limited mix of intelligence and experience.
Bad move on your part, as you are confusing the tasks and the context. In the chess example you are making deliberate decisions, which if you are good, are a part of several contingent sequences based on the possibilities of moves. That is nothing like the simplistic poking of the keyboard required for MMO action combat.
Argument from Analogy fail. Hah I also like the way you brought in street fighter, nice one Kasparov. Was I supposed to be in awe of the amazing thought and strategy that goes into your twitching thumbs, mashing those buttons are 400 presses per minute while you watch a 2d cartoon strobe in front of your drooling face?
Someone clearly knows nothing about the fighting game genre :P
Truth be told, I personally find the old systems pretty boring. I tried Neverwinter with it's one-weapon, 6 button setup (That's how I remember it anyway) which to me is an awful system, and though GW2 has ten primary buttons (plus F keys) it still gets a bit stale at times. I don't know why the idea is lately always more restriction. If you want to offer a default 8-button setup then cool, but allow for enough flexibility that players can run more buttons if they want. Even if those are essentially just consumable, or non-combat buttons.
But 7 or 8 is just using what the average person can store in short-term memory. If you don't have to access long-term or intermediate memory then you are doing something by habit or at least with very little cognition. When people say Dumbing it Down, they are quite literally right.
Oh please enough of your crap.
When you play Chess how many distinct moves are there?
Pawn can move 1 forward.
Bishop can move diagonal.
Castle can move in a striaght line.
Knight can move in an L formation.
King can move 1 space in any direction.
Queen can move in any direction.
6 total moves. Is Chess a dumbed down game?
Look back at the first streetfighter games, they only had 4 buttons.
The number of buttons to press has nothing to do with complexity, memory retention or any of the rest of the crap you mention.
How you can use the skills available and how they interact with the environment, other friendly players, enemy mons, enemy players...that is where the complexity comes in.
If you think the number of buttons to mash equates to how good the combat will be then you have a very limited mix of intelligence and experience.
Bad move on your part, as you are confusing the tasks and the context. In the chess example you are making deliberate decisions, which if you are good, are a part of several contingent sequences based on the possibilities of moves. That is nothing like the simplistic poking of the keyboard required for MMO action combat.
Argument from Analogy fail. Hah I also like the way you brought in street fighter, nice one Kasparov. Was I supposed to be in awe of the amazing thought and strategy that goes into your twitching thumbs, mashing those buttons are 400 presses per minute while you watch a 2d cartoon strobe in front of your drooling face?
Someone clearly knows nothing about the fighting game genre :P
Clearly knows =/= good background, from your statement.
It's apparent Ignore_Me has a pretty solid grasp of the situation. It's a sign of weakness of your part to simply disagree without any explanation. (Duh I disagree, duh duh .. I have no reason .. duh duh).
Grats to Markusrind for thinking chess was simple. This person is an obvious mastermind (kidding!), whereas people master GW2 and find it a very trivial game because it's so limited, plus all the PVE solo player BS, ie anti-social. anti-chess.
Chess moves have possibilites that lead into the billions .. GW2 moves? are you kidding me? U don't matter.
And the UI in GW2 (proposed EQN as well) is preschool .. even WoW has way better options to at least make the game complicated (which it does since you can rotate you abilities in and out in dozens of hotbars).
Truth be told, I personally find the old systems pretty boring. I tried Neverwinter with it's one-weapon, 6 button setup (That's how I remember it anyway) which to me is an awful system, and though GW2 has ten primary buttons (plus F keys) it still gets a bit stale at times. I don't know why the idea is lately always more restriction. If you want to offer a default 8-button setup then cool, but allow for enough flexibility that players can run more buttons if they want. Even if those are essentially just consumable, or non-combat buttons.
But 7 or 8 is just using what the average person can store in short-term memory. If you don't have to access long-term or intermediate memory then you are doing something by habit or at least with very little cognition. When people say Dumbing it Down, they are quite literally right.
Oh please enough of your crap.
When you play Chess how many distinct moves are there?
Pawn can move 1 forward.
Bishop can move diagonal.
Castle can move in a striaght line.
Knight can move in an L formation.
King can move 1 space in any direction.
Queen can move in any direction.
6 total moves. Is Chess a dumbed down game?
Look back at the first streetfighter games, they only had 4 buttons.
The number of buttons to press has nothing to do with complexity, memory retention or any of the rest of the crap you mention.
How you can use the skills available and how they interact with the environment, other friendly players, enemy mons, enemy players...that is where the complexity comes in.
If you think the number of buttons to mash equates to how good the combat will be then you have a very limited mix of intelligence and experience.
Bad move on your part, as you are confusing the tasks and the context. In the chess example you are making deliberate decisions, which if you are good, are a part of several contingent sequences based on the possibilities of moves. That is nothing like the simplistic poking of the keyboard required for MMO action combat.
Argument from Analogy fail. Hah I also like the way you brought in street fighter, nice one Kasparov. Was I supposed to be in awe of the amazing thought and strategy that goes into your twitching thumbs, mashing those buttons are 400 presses per minute while you watch a 2d cartoon strobe in front of your drooling face?
Someone clearly knows nothing about the fighting game genre :P
It happens too fast to be applied in the same way as chess moves or the other subject, MMO ability special activation. Fighting games are largely played by quick reactions that are akin to reflex. Think of a skilled guitarist playing through a difficult piece. He is not thinking about what he is doing, he is reacting and acting in accordance with practiced movements that are too fast to be run through any kind of cognitive processes like decision making, etc.
In addition we often perceive fast actions as having been more thought out than they actually were, with the brain imposing an impression of having deliberate thought over what was essentially a pre-determined heuristic.
I just made the drooling comment because he was showing his ass, don't take it personally.
Truth be told, I personally find the old systems pretty boring. I tried Neverwinter with it's one-weapon, 6 button setup (That's how I remember it anyway) which to me is an awful system, and though GW2 has ten primary buttons (plus F keys) it still gets a bit stale at times. I don't know why the idea is lately always more restriction. If you want to offer a default 8-button setup then cool, but allow for enough flexibility that players can run more buttons if they want. Even if those are essentially just consumable, or non-combat buttons.
But 7 or 8 is just using what the average person can store in short-term memory. If you don't have to access long-term or intermediate memory then you are doing something by habit or at least with very little cognition. When people say Dumbing it Down, they are quite literally right.
Oh please enough of your crap.
When you play Chess how many distinct moves are there?
Pawn can move 1 forward.
Bishop can move diagonal.
Castle can move in a striaght line.
Knight can move in an L formation.
King can move 1 space in any direction.
Queen can move in any direction.
6 total moves. Is Chess a dumbed down game?
Look back at the first streetfighter games, they only had 4 buttons.
The number of buttons to press has nothing to do with complexity, memory retention or any of the rest of the crap you mention.
How you can use the skills available and how they interact with the environment, other friendly players, enemy mons, enemy players...that is where the complexity comes in.
If you think the number of buttons to mash equates to how good the combat will be then you have a very limited mix of intelligence and experience.
Bad move on your part, as you are confusing the tasks and the context. In the chess example you are making deliberate decisions, which if you are good, are a part of several contingent sequences based on the possibilities of moves. That is nothing like the simplistic poking of the keyboard required for MMO action combat.
Argument from Analogy fail. Hah I also like the way you brought in street fighter, nice one Kasparov. Was I supposed to be in awe of the amazing thought and strategy that goes into your twitching thumbs, mashing those buttons are 400 presses per minute while you watch a 2d cartoon strobe in front of your drooling face?
Someone clearly knows nothing about the fighting game genre :P
Clearly knows =/= good background, from your statement.
It's apparent Ignore_Me has a pretty solid grasp of the situation. It's a sign of weakness of your part to simply disagree without any explanation. (Duh I disagree, duh duh .. I have no reason .. duh duh).
Grats to Markusrind for thinking chess was simple. This person is an obvious mastermind (kidding!), whereas people master GW2 and find it a very trivial game because it's so limited, plus all the PVE solo player BS, ie anti-social. anti-chess.
Chess moves have possibilites that lead into the billions .. GW2 moves? are you kidding me? U don't matter.
And the UI in GW2 (proposed EQN as well) is preschool .. even WoW has way better options to at least make the game complicated (which it does since you can rotate you abilities in and out in dozens of hotbars).
Soo .. uhh /snorefest to the latest and greatest?
Pff reason I didn't bother making an argument is because what he/she said is on it's face stupid. To say something like "SF4 is button mashing" is like saying "the game 'Go' is simple". To make either of those statements shows the person knows nothing about either of those games.
Bad move on your part, as you are confusing the tasks and the context. In the chess example you are making deliberate decisions, which if you are good, are a part of several contingent sequences based on the possibilities of moves. That is nothing like the simplistic poking of the keyboard required for MMO action combat.
Argument from Analogy fail. Hah I also like the way you brought in street fighter, nice one Kasparov. Was I supposed to be in awe of the amazing thought and strategy that goes into your twitching thumbs, mashing those buttons are 400 presses per minute while you watch a 2d cartoon strobe in front of your drooling face?
the amazing thought and strategy that goes into your twitching thumbs, mashing those buttons
Truth be told, I personally find the old systems pretty boring. I tried Neverwinter with it's one-weapon, 6 button setup (That's how I remember it anyway) which to me is an awful system, and though GW2 has ten primary buttons (plus F keys) it still gets a bit stale at times. I don't know why the idea is lately always more restriction. If you want to offer a default 8-button setup then cool, but allow for enough flexibility that players can run more buttons if they want. Even if those are essentially just consumable, or non-combat buttons.
But 7 or 8 is just using what the average person can store in short-term memory. If you don't have to access long-term or intermediate memory then you are doing something by habit or at least with very little cognition. When people say Dumbing it Down, they are quite literally right.
Oh please enough of your crap.
When you play Chess how many distinct moves are there?
Pawn can move 1 forward.
Bishop can move diagonal.
Castle can move in a striaght line.
Knight can move in an L formation.
King can move 1 space in any direction.
Queen can move in any direction.
6 total moves. Is Chess a dumbed down game?
Look back at the first streetfighter games, they only had 4 buttons.
The number of buttons to press has nothing to do with complexity, memory retention or any of the rest of the crap you mention.
How you can use the skills available and how they interact with the environment, other friendly players, enemy mons, enemy players...that is where the complexity comes in.
If you think the number of buttons to mash equates to how good the combat will be then you have a very limited mix of intelligence and experience.
Bad move on your part, as you are confusing the tasks and the context. In the chess example you are making deliberate decisions, which if you are good, are a part of several contingent sequences based on the possibilities of moves. That is nothing like the simplistic poking of the keyboard required for MMO action combat.
Argument from Analogy fail. Hah I also like the way you brought in street fighter, nice one Kasparov. Was I supposed to be in awe of the amazing thought and strategy that goes into your twitching thumbs, mashing those buttons are 400 presses per minute while you watch a 2d cartoon strobe in front of your drooling face?
Someone clearly knows nothing about the fighting game genre :P
Clearly knows =/= good background, from your statement.
It's apparent Ignore_Me has a pretty solid grasp of the situation. It's a sign of weakness of your part to simply disagree without any explanation. (Duh I disagree, duh duh .. I have no reason .. duh duh).
Grats to Markusrind for thinking chess was simple. This person is an obvious mastermind (kidding!), whereas people master GW2 and find it a very trivial game because it's so limited, plus all the PVE solo player BS, ie anti-social. anti-chess.
Chess moves have possibilites that lead into the billions .. GW2 moves? are you kidding me? U don't matter.
And the UI in GW2 (proposed EQN as well) is preschool .. even WoW has way better options to at least make the game complicated (which it does since you can rotate you abilities in and out in dozens of hotbars).
Soo .. uhh /snorefest to the latest and greatest?
Pff reason I didn't bother making an argument is because what he/she said is on it's face stupid. To say something like "SF4 is button mashing" is like saying "the game 'Go' is simple". To make either of those statements shows the person knows nothing about either of those games.
RE3 is way simpler than SF4, it takes less energy to store also without all the binar manipulations.
Someone clearly knows nothing about the fighting game genre :P
Clearly knows =/= good background, from your statement.
It's apparent Ignore_Me has a pretty solid grasp of the situation. It's a sign of weakness of your part to simply disagree without any explanation. (Duh I disagree, duh duh .. I have no reason .. duh duh).
Grats to Markusrind for thinking chess was simple. This person is an obvious mastermind (kidding!), whereas people master GW2 and find it a very trivial game because it's so limited, plus all the PVE solo player BS, ie anti-social. anti-chess.
Chess moves have possibilites that lead into the billions .. GW2 moves? are you kidding me? U don't matter.
And the UI in GW2 (proposed EQN as well) is preschool .. even WoW has way better options to at least make the game complicated (which it does since you can rotate you abilities in and out in dozens of hotbars).
Soo .. uhh /snorefest to the latest and greatest?
Pff reason I didn't bother making an argument is because what he/she said is on it's face stupid. To say something like "SF4 is button mashing" is like saying "the game 'Go' is simple". To make either of those statements shows the person knows nothing about either of those games.
lol. I've clearly angered the Street Fighter anti-defamation lobby. Wasn't the classical guitarist reference enough of an ego salve? Oh well, it's a fucking fighting game, you weren't performing surgery, or flying a jetliner into LAX.
Ganker = dps that can take out side mobs real quick, but can't melt major mobs
Diasabler = CC/debuffs
Nuker = Big spells that can change the course of a battle (think big AoE vs carry melting things)
Initiator = Tanky class that goes in first and might have some cc/debuff, but not to the degree that the disabler does.
Jungler = Really good are self sufficiency and taking on smaller adds (aka off tank with some dps)
Pusher = Hmm, not sure about this, usually a class that takes down towers really well, sometimes can summon or control minions.
Support = heals/buff/cc/utility
So a fight would start with the Initiator going in to draw early fire, the jungler and ganker looking for stragglers the whole time, the Carry and nuker start burning down mobs, and the disablers CC anything that looks like it might get to the carry/nuker. And support is there to help whoever needs help.
Hmm, sounds like trinity but with more classes/roles needed. Seems to have a similar gameplan as trinity group.
Someone clearly knows nothing about the fighting game genre :P
Clearly knows =/= good background, from your statement.
It's apparent Ignore_Me has a pretty solid grasp of the situation. It's a sign of weakness of your part to simply disagree without any explanation. (Duh I disagree, duh duh .. I have no reason .. duh duh).
Grats to Markusrind for thinking chess was simple. This person is an obvious mastermind (kidding!), whereas people master GW2 and find it a very trivial game because it's so limited, plus all the PVE solo player BS, ie anti-social. anti-chess.
Chess moves have possibilites that lead into the billions .. GW2 moves? are you kidding me? U don't matter.
And the UI in GW2 (proposed EQN as well) is preschool .. even WoW has way better options to at least make the game complicated (which it does since you can rotate you abilities in and out in dozens of hotbars).
Soo .. uhh /snorefest to the latest and greatest?
Pff reason I didn't bother making an argument is because what he/she said is on it's face stupid. To say something like "SF4 is button mashing" is like saying "the game 'Go' is simple". To make either of those statements shows the person knows nothing about either of those games.
lol. I've clearly angered the Street Fighter anti-defamation lobby. Wasn't the classical guitarist reference enough of an ego salve? Oh well, it's a fucking fighting game, you weren't performing surgery, or flying a jetliner into LAX.
heh don't know why you think it's so personal to me. Don't worry guy we have all said something stupid from time to time on forums and had it pointed out to us. Life will go on. So... um.... don't take it personal :P
Someone clearly knows nothing about the fighting game genre :P
Clearly knows =/= good background, from your statement.
It's apparent Ignore_Me has a pretty solid grasp of the situation. It's a sign of weakness of your part to simply disagree without any explanation. (Duh I disagree, duh duh .. I have no reason .. duh duh).
Grats to Markusrind for thinking chess was simple. This person is an obvious mastermind (kidding!), whereas people master GW2 and find it a very trivial game because it's so limited, plus all the PVE solo player BS, ie anti-social. anti-chess.
Chess moves have possibilites that lead into the billions .. GW2 moves? are you kidding me? U don't matter.
And the UI in GW2 (proposed EQN as well) is preschool .. even WoW has way better options to at least make the game complicated (which it does since you can rotate you abilities in and out in dozens of hotbars).
Soo .. uhh /snorefest to the latest and greatest?
Pff reason I didn't bother making an argument is because what he/she said is on it's face stupid. To say something like "SF4 is button mashing" is like saying "the game 'Go' is simple". To make either of those statements shows the person knows nothing about either of those games.
lol. I've clearly angered the Street Fighter anti-defamation lobby. Wasn't the classical guitarist reference enough of an ego salve? Oh well, it's a fucking fighting game, you weren't performing surgery, or flying a jetliner into LAX.
heh don't know why you think it's so personal to me. Don't worry guy we have all said something stupid from time to time on forums and had it pointed out to us. Life will go on. So... um.... don't take it personal :P
I liked Mortal Kombat more anyways, I think the genre peaked at MK2. Then it was just clones afterwards with nothing new ever added. SF was lame to me from the start.
Oh well, choke it up to personal opinion.
If EQN is anything like either game though I'm going to pass. EQ1 rules, and well if SOE wants to stick it to oldschool fans and go a new direction, fine .. it won't be with me though, it will instead with the same crowd that thought GW2 was going to rule.
This says something about customer loyalty right there. If you don't understand, look deeper.
Someone clearly knows nothing about the fighting game genre :P
lol. I've clearly angered the Street Fighter anti-defamation lobby. Wasn't the classical guitarist reference enough of an ego salve? Oh well, it's a fucking fighting game, you weren't performing surgery, or flying a jetliner into LAX.
heh don't know why you think it's so personal to me. Don't worry guy we have all said something stupid from time to time on forums and had it pointed out to us. Life will go on. So... um.... don't take it personal :P
Same defense. I said something stupid, but you can't articulate how it was stupid or even false. You want to champion the Street Fighter franchise go ahead man.
Comments
Funniest post I've seen in a while, rofl.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
With all of the cryptic stuff they're saying, we could always be wrong.
As for your comment about PVP... are you saying it only belongs in those other MMO genres and is always "wedged in" to MMORPGs? Or did I misinterpret?
To me, RP games have never been about a player-vs-player experience. Since I started in 1975, role-playing was all about beating the encounters thrown at you by a GM. The content by the game was everything. And, in all too many cases, players fighting players resulted in bad behavior. I even saw a guy ruin someone's very expensive lawn because they didn't get their way. This focus on player versus environment continued beyond the PnP days into the CRPGs. And MMORPGs carry on that tradition.
As I pointed out in my earlier post, there are a variety of other types of games where the player versus player experience is much more important. There's little focus on the environment, and most other genres treat the environment as either a scenic backdrop, or in the case of RTS games, some kind of non-replenishing resource. These games pit the player against similar foes, either propelled by AI or another human opponent.
When PvP is added to an MMORPG, it dilutes the RP tradition somewhat. Because every MMORPG to date has initially built a PvE experience as its core, the PvP frequently feels tacked on. It tends to be unsatisfactory to all parties. The pure PvE player doesn't enjoy the disruptions of the PvP environment, and the pure PvP player almost always balks at limitations or restrictions that allow others the option on not participating in the PvP play.
I'd rather see PvP venues remain in the other game genres. They do an exceptional job of providing that type experience. Leave the MMORPG genre to follow the long-standing traditions established in the earliest days of role-playing games.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
The RP tradition has been on a steep steep decline since WoW came out. Role Players are probably the smallest niche left in MMO's...they make great servers though...I always roll up on the RP server because it is full of some of the best and most social players in the game...
UO had strong RP communities, so did SWG, Wow has a few but probably a much smaller percentage of the player base than anything before it...and everything after WoW has been miniscule at best. Most people don't even understand that aspect of the game anymore.
I do not think PvP is the problem though, not at all actually as UO had full on PvP and a great community on Catskill shard.
Agreed. But I do think there are plenty of other genre games that cater to the PvP crowd. Only the various RP type games cater to the PvE crowd. And that is the RP tradition I was referencing, not the hardcore RP gamer. We are a niche market.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
We have probably derailed the hell out this thread but,
as a counter to your argument, I would point out that the most sucesfull RP lands in Second Life also incorporate a PvP system of some type in them, as this is entirely optional...as anything in second life is up to the land owners, one has to look for the reasoning behind it.
The primary reason is that in any RP disagreement such a combat system allows for a valid no argument way to solve disputes, without some kind of system like this in play it allows for people who are unwilling to bend to assume whatever position of power they feel like having, and justify it in the RP system.
for instance Joe, feels the wraith in the blow aimed at his face but due to his yearly intake of ambrosia laughs off the effects of the sledge hammer and summons a cow on top of barnie's head.
Such outrageous things are not unknown in that community when the system has no way of controlling them. Not that such conflicts should be the center of attention in any game, rp or not, but they do occur and systems that provide a resolution are often better than dealing with Joe: the guy who has a reason for always coming out on top.
God, this is the wrong forum for this conversation.
Glad someone has a sense of humor.
Roles are obviously a touchy subject. Their proposed class and combat system is, and will only continue to be, problematic for a serious mmorpg with any kind of depth or intelligent combat - contrary to what they say. They don't even know what to say right now with all the skepticism and scrutiny over these ideas.
...so that came out. And I lawled.
Don't know about "intelligent combat" but I think it's going to be a TON of fun and take a good deal of skill to excel at.
I agree. I think his slow and uncertain tone was from trying not to reveal too much. But I really like the idea of a tank having to physically be between the mob and casters to block damage... or a caster teleporting people out of harms way. It's going to take a lot more skill and thoughtfulness to excel in EQ:N than typical MMORPGs where you just mash taunt and AOE dmg/threat skill. That being said, a lot of people will complain when a pack of orcs outsmarts them because they don't know how to use positioning/environment to gain an advantage.
I played a Moba one time (wasnt league of legend never played that one) where the "tanks" could drop an aoe containment field...well thats what I am calling it....basically it was a short duration effect that locked everything else inside it for 5 seconds or so.
Skills like that could certainly allow for tanking without taunts, or skills that pushed things back like the mesmer ability in GW2 (the two handed sword last skill) combined with a slow..even though we would call that CC ability if combined with other abilities that denied a mobs ability to go after anything but the tank, and an AI that would switch targets to go after what it could actually hit.....well this probably isn't whats in EQnext but there are other solutions besides taunt to keep something attention focused on you.
CC abilities, health transfer to the tank abilities (so that it is quicker to kill the tank...this was used on some mobs in Lotro Skirmishes I believe), physical impediment abilities.... They all make more sense than the taunt.
edit:
This is the one I was thinking about in Lotro
Defender of the Vile
Bad move on your part, as you are confusing the tasks and the context. In the chess example you are making deliberate decisions, which if you are good, are a part of several contingent sequences based on the possibilities of moves. That is nothing like the simplistic poking of the keyboard required for MMO action combat.
Argument from Analogy fail. Hah I also like the way you brought in street fighter, nice one Kasparov. Was I supposed to be in awe of the amazing thought and strategy that goes into your twitching thumbs, mashing those buttons are 400 presses per minute while you watch a 2d cartoon strobe in front of your drooling face?
Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011
lol why don't you calm down lady. Nerd raging is always effective in making your point, which in this case seems to be to try and get everyone to agree with you or something. I like the way you assert that I don't know what I'm talking about but you have no intelligent argument to offer. I always love the "shut up" defense.
Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011
Someone clearly knows nothing about the fighting game genre :P
Clearly knows =/= good background, from your statement.
It's apparent Ignore_Me has a pretty solid grasp of the situation. It's a sign of weakness of your part to simply disagree without any explanation. (Duh I disagree, duh duh .. I have no reason .. duh duh).
Grats to Markusrind for thinking chess was simple. This person is an obvious mastermind (kidding!), whereas people master GW2 and find it a very trivial game because it's so limited, plus all the PVE solo player BS, ie anti-social. anti-chess.
Chess moves have possibilites that lead into the billions .. GW2 moves? are you kidding me? U don't matter.
And the UI in GW2 (proposed EQN as well) is preschool .. even WoW has way better options to at least make the game complicated (which it does since you can rotate you abilities in and out in dozens of hotbars).
Soo .. uhh /snorefest to the latest and greatest?
Want a nice understanding of life? Try Spirit Science: "The Human History"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8NNHmV3QPw&feature=plcp
Recognize the voice? Yep sounds like Penny Arcade's Extra Credits.
It happens too fast to be applied in the same way as chess moves or the other subject, MMO ability special activation. Fighting games are largely played by quick reactions that are akin to reflex. Think of a skilled guitarist playing through a difficult piece. He is not thinking about what he is doing, he is reacting and acting in accordance with practiced movements that are too fast to be run through any kind of cognitive processes like decision making, etc.
In addition we often perceive fast actions as having been more thought out than they actually were, with the brain imposing an impression of having deliberate thought over what was essentially a pre-determined heuristic.
I just made the drooling comment because he was showing his ass, don't take it personally.
Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011
Pff reason I didn't bother making an argument is because what he/she said is on it's face stupid. To say something like "SF4 is button mashing" is like saying "the game 'Go' is simple". To make either of those statements shows the person knows nothing about either of those games.
RE3 is way simpler than SF4, it takes less energy to store also without all the binar manipulations.
Want a nice understanding of life? Try Spirit Science: "The Human History"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8NNHmV3QPw&feature=plcp
Recognize the voice? Yep sounds like Penny Arcade's Extra Credits.
lol. I've clearly angered the Street Fighter anti-defamation lobby. Wasn't the classical guitarist reference enough of an ego salve? Oh well, it's a fucking fighting game, you weren't performing surgery, or flying a jetliner into LAX.
Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011
Hmm, sounds like trinity but with more classes/roles needed. Seems to have a similar gameplan as trinity group.
heh don't know why you think it's so personal to me. Don't worry guy we have all said something stupid from time to time on forums and had it pointed out to us. Life will go on. So... um.... don't take it personal :P
I liked Mortal Kombat more anyways, I think the genre peaked at MK2. Then it was just clones afterwards with nothing new ever added. SF was lame to me from the start.
Oh well, choke it up to personal opinion.
If EQN is anything like either game though I'm going to pass. EQ1 rules, and well if SOE wants to stick it to oldschool fans and go a new direction, fine .. it won't be with me though, it will instead with the same crowd that thought GW2 was going to rule.
This says something about customer loyalty right there. If you don't understand, look deeper.
Want a nice understanding of life? Try Spirit Science: "The Human History"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8NNHmV3QPw&feature=plcp
Recognize the voice? Yep sounds like Penny Arcade's Extra Credits.
Same defense. I said something stupid, but you can't articulate how it was stupid or even false. You want to champion the Street Fighter franchise go ahead man.
Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011