Originally posted by Azirophos 2.) Casual vs. hardcore-gamer: FPS style games promote those that can play more have more "training" and react better. This leaves casual gamers at a disadvantage. The current systems even out the ground a bit.
Doesn't have to be This may be entirely the opposite of what the OP ment, or what anyone would want in an MMO for that matter .. but .. Check out the demo for Full Spectrum Warrior, it has a combat system that is similar to rpgs in that you tell you're charachter what to do rather than physically doing it yourself, doesn't revolve around dicethrows and isn't an fps (minus the grenades and precision fire) . Just as an example
You talk about Diablo not being a clickfest is funny, because thats ALL Diablo was, it was click fest HEAVEN.
And I have arthritis too, and it can get really bad in my hands for writing. Pressing buttons isn't ever much of a problem, with a targeting system like Star Wars Galaxies (Pre-CU), or EVE-Online. You could get by solely by pressing only a few buttons at at time.
The way Star Wars Galaxies did it Pre-CU was also interesting after you locked on and started firing, you always fired, the only difference is you could fire off specials that did different things.
Baff, I can see where you're coming from wanting an automatic option.
My signature that you highlighted in yellow refers to the prevalence of gold sellers, and power leveling services rather than automated combat. I didn't mean it to refer to the computer automating things for the player, but I can see how you got that impression.
I actually thought the Diablo games were huge clickfests, and I played a warrior. Even most MMOs are more involved than one click. WoW, and old school SWG had auto attacks, but it was in your interest to use your special abilities if you wanted to survive.
The system I'm thinking of wouldn't work very well with an auto attack option since actually reacting to your foe would be necessary. Even if you macroed a bunch of commands to one key things could go awry if the enemy reacts differently than what you expect to your attack. For instance if you macro a chain of three attacks together on one key that could get you in trouble if the enemy decides to counter-attack in between your strokes because your character will still be following through on his attack when the foe comes at him, and blocking will not be an option.
The only reason the AI could fight automatically is because it reacts to the player like AI in almost any game except an MMO. Most mobs in MMOs are about as stupid as game AI gets.
Throwing in a switch to automate combat in a system like this would defeat the whole purpose of what I'm proposing; more involved combat. I'm not saying the entire genre of MMOs should move in this direction. I just would like to see at least one game try this approach to see how it works.
When people will pay others to play a game for them it might be a sign the game isn't all that fun.
Originally posted by freebirdpat You talk about Diablo not being a clickfest is funny, because thats ALL Diablo was, it was click fest HEAVEN. And I have arthritis too, and it can get really bad in my hands for writing. Pressing buttons isn't ever much of a problem, with a targeting system like Star Wars Galaxies (Pre-CU), or EVE-Online. You could get by solely by pressing only a few buttons at at time. The way Star Wars Galaxies did it Pre-CU was also interesting after you locked on and started firing, you always fired, the only difference is you could fire off specials that did different things.
I only have arthritus in my mouse finger. It was the act of clicking like a bastard in COH that did it. And then Clicking like a bastard in WOW finished another. I have always favoured the most brainless of all available character classes long before this was a problem for me.
Diablo was a clickfest, but there was a no brainer option with the warrior. The combat was much simplified if you chose to play the brainless one.
I've played games with auto fire. Like what you describe in Star Wars, and it didn't cut it because of the special moves. Too much of your power is invested in these.
If there was an auto attack in Diablo the warrior with his one attack move would be sorted. An autofire is not enough in this example as you must keep acquiring new targets. The AI should be able to assist in this process. In COH there was a limited Auto-target. Obviously manual targeting was more combat effective, but the automation never overrode manual control.
Essentially I feel that if you can program an AI enemy to use a combination of moves to automatically fight, then you can easily use the same AI on your Player character.
If one of your player classes special moves are all passives then it is easy to include a low click no brainer class into even the most complex of fight routines such as found in Tekken. The computer is easily able to calculate the combat of two AI's and you can see it do this in demonstration mode.
The challenge is then reduced to knowing your enemy. Knowing when to fight and when to run, when to pull the whole mob or when to try and split one off.
In this way people who really want to have a combat workout are able to, while those who are nodding off all droopy eyed and sleep deprived don't just die but may also compete at their own level. Sometimes I do want to fight like a bastard and ninja and powermove my way through combat on my reflexes and versatile tactics, but if it's an intresting MMO, I'm going to be playing this game for 20-60 hours straight. I cannot physically maintain that level of concentration and adrenalin for that long and neither do I want to. Relaxation is factor.
I like cruise control. The option just to coast.
I don't see this as in anyway mutually exclusive of an advanced combat system, but rather a choice extension to one.
Originally posted by baff Originally posted by freebirdpat Sometimes I do want to fight like a bastard and ninja and powermove my way through combat on my reflexes and versatile tactics, but if it's an intresting MMO, I'm going to be playing this game for 20-60 hours straight. I cannot physically maintain that level of concentration and adrenalin for that long and neither do I want to.
20-60 hours straight? Thats your problem, not the problem of the devs. Why should they change their game for the top 1% powergamers that play that long and make it worse for others?
I don't know what your situation is baff, but 20-60 hours straight? That will take a toll on a person no matter what they are doing. If you can't maintain interest in playing the game for that long yourself why would you want to stick it on autopilot?
When people will pay others to play a game for them it might be a sign the game isn't all that fun.
baff seems out there on this one. Reading his stuff, I feel he is making it up, or something feels <i>wrong</i> about what he is talking about.
The issues with an autopilot are numerous, Star Wars Galaxies Pre-CU had macros which pretty much allowed you to grind xp over night while you slept if you had the right macro and spawn point for a enemy.
The game you are looking for exists by the way, its called Progress Quest. Its incredibly boring watching a character on "AUTOPILOT". So essentially it seems you want a game that after you press one button it plays the game for you. Which I find to be quite boring. Since for the most part there would be no real control over the fight, it would just be numbers vs numbers, you might win, you might lose, but you really have no affect on the outcome of the battle.
Also the programs behind AI enemies are notoriously weak, and even in singleplayer games. The typical way to make a enemy tougher is simply to increase hitpoints, damage output, and stats, even far beyond what the player could ever achieve.
I would hate to not have any control and just have an "autocombat" mode. Lots of games have offered that in the past, and almost all of the time, if you took the time play the combat out, you would actually be more successful in the battle, either by using less potions, or a party member not dieing, or not losing a ship or whatever.
In MMORPG's an autopilot mode would ruin things more often than not, since it would make it easier for someone to grind a character out over night.
I just really don't like the idea of a character being able to go into a battle and sit there and hit no keys and do pretty much nothing actively to win a battle.
I gotta agree with freebirdpat. The last thing I want in an MMO is less interactive combat. Boring combat is one of my major beefs with the genre as it is. I don't know if baff is just trying to rattle my cage, but it is obvious were are polar opposites on this issue.
When people will pay others to play a game for them it might be a sign the game isn't all that fun.
I'll start with what I see as problems with this concept (mostly handled already)
Lag: MMORPGs are massive, and send data through thousands of connections at once.
Ping: I believe this has to do with server/client location? MMORPGs games tend to have people from faraway places playing on the same servers, where FPS online games are more localized.
Twitch: More involved combat is (usually) more demanding.
The two first problems are always relevant, the third isn't unless you wish for a game that attracts non-twitch players. However, all of the above could probably be solved, and I'm not much of a twitch myself, so I'd like to see it done.
Lag: Dunno what I'd be doing about it. Ping: Dunno. However, the impact of both these problems could be lessened by the solution to the third.
Twitch: Simply keep it slow. The OP didn't specify the need for fast combat, only involved combat, and I think it was meant that way. Not very slow, not painfully slow, just slow enough that you can look at your keyboard and pick the assigned button for the desired move. I would want a little "extra" delay upon completion of each action. In this time nothing could be done. That way, slow and outpinged people won't be wasting too time compared to the faster players.
I'm trying to figure out an archery system I like. Firstly, I find some sort of automated aiming to be required. Reason: There are some physics involved in the movement of that arrow/bolt, as well as a strong twitch element in aiming. So it'll be some sort of target lock. But maybe not the conventional one.
I'm thinking target lock with manual adjustment ability and update rate based on character archery skill. You pick a target, and are not instantly ready to fire. Maybe a red target marker to indicate that your aim is not currently correct. The marker moves with the target, and its relative position can be modified by arrow keys (if you are not able to move while aiming a bow).
When the update time has elapsed, you have a true aim, symbolized by a yellow marker. If its position matches your desired aim (red marker) they display as a single green marker. Target acquired. If the target moves, so does the red marker, while the yellow one (true aim) remains until next update.
Any short-range firing is likely to hit if you aim straight on target, given the speed of an arrow. But if you lob those arrows high into the air to send them far away, or aim at a swift rider on horseback, you might need the adjustment feature. Also, you might find that your aim is not perfect, but reasonable, and have the option of firing if it is "as good as it gets" with a very mobile enemy.
Bonuses that don't apply to hit anymore: Transfer them to action speed? Be careful though. Speed differences should be very subtle, or they'll make a huge impact on the game. (If you're twice as fast as your opponent, and he gets hit by every attack he doesn't actively dodge, he'll get hit every now and then, and never have a moment to strike back).
Perhaps defensive maneuvers... Hmm... Block and parry could be made out to "last" until your next action, so that if your opponent actually gets two attacks every time you parry, you get one parry, and one less efficient parry (strong damage mitigation).
Also, there should be some basic move that allows you to attack while maintaining your guard and allowing you to reduce damage taken. I am thinking: Mild randomization of weapon damage, constant or near constant damage mitigation on the various defensive items/moves.
An off-hand item should allow you to carry out a secondary action, although it will treat you as if you are of lower skill (slower, less efficient). You could equip a shield, which should be very efficient for blocking, and activate blocking on your off-hand. Since I've defined blocking as an action that remains in effect after its first resolution (although the benefits of secondary blocks would be slightly reduced) you can maintain a constant defence while attacking with your primary hand/weapon.
Your primary hand should always check if you are currently performing an offhand action, and if so, apply a penalty (not one comparable to the left-hand penalty) dependent on what is wielded/done offhand.
I like this game. Too bad it probably doesn't exist.
The future: Adellion Common flaw in MMORPGs: The ability to die casually Advantages of Adellion: Dynamic world (affected by its inhabitants) Player-driven world (beasts won't be an endless supply of mighty swords, gold will come from mines, not dragonly dens) Player-driven world (Leadership is the privilege of a player, not an npc)
Yeah, what about them? The question seems rather unspecific. Should they roll hits while nobody else does?
So.. what is the question about healers in this case? Is it
Will there be healers? (or rather "should", as this is a concept, not a project)
Will healing spells (if healers use spells) target as ranged weapons?
I thought maybe I could think of more questions you could have meant, but I couldn't find any. And none of the two above questions have much bearing on the topic, I think. If we come to the point where we give form and substance to a full game, rather than just its attack/defence system, then those two questions would both be highly relevant.
But maybe you were wondering something else?
The future: Adellion Common flaw in MMORPGs: The ability to die casually Advantages of Adellion: Dynamic world (affected by its inhabitants) Player-driven world (beasts won't be an endless supply of mighty swords, gold will come from mines, not dragonly dens) Player-driven world (Leadership is the privilege of a player, not an npc)
Comments
Doesn't have to be
(minus the grenades and precision fire) .
This may be entirely the opposite of what the OP ment, or what anyone would want in an MMO for that matter .. but ..
Check out the demo for Full Spectrum Warrior, it has a combat system that is similar to rpgs in that you tell you're charachter what to do rather than physically doing it yourself, doesn't revolve around dicethrows and isn't an fps
Just as an example
You talk about Diablo not being a clickfest is funny, because thats ALL Diablo was, it was click fest HEAVEN.
And I have arthritis too, and it can get really bad in my hands for writing. Pressing buttons isn't ever much of a problem, with a targeting system like Star Wars Galaxies (Pre-CU), or EVE-Online. You could get by solely by pressing only a few buttons at at time.
The way Star Wars Galaxies did it Pre-CU was also interesting after you locked on and started firing, you always fired, the only difference is you could fire off specials that did different things.
Baff, I can see where you're coming from wanting an automatic option.
My signature that you highlighted in yellow refers to the prevalence of gold sellers, and power leveling services rather than automated combat. I didn't mean it to refer to the computer automating things for the player, but I can see how you got that impression.
I actually thought the Diablo games were huge clickfests, and I played a warrior. Even most MMOs are more involved than one click. WoW, and old school SWG had auto attacks, but it was in your interest to use your special abilities if you wanted to survive.
The system I'm thinking of wouldn't work very well with an auto attack option since actually reacting to your foe would be necessary. Even if you macroed a bunch of commands to one key things could go awry if the enemy reacts differently than what you expect to your attack. For instance if you macro a chain of three attacks together on one key that could get you in trouble if the enemy decides to counter-attack in between your strokes because your character will still be following through on his attack when the foe comes at him, and blocking will not be an option.
The only reason the AI could fight automatically is because it reacts to the player like AI in almost any game except an MMO. Most mobs in MMOs are about as stupid as game AI gets.
Throwing in a switch to automate combat in a system like this would defeat the whole purpose of what I'm proposing; more involved combat. I'm not saying the entire genre of MMOs should move in this direction. I just would like to see at least one game try this approach to see how it works.
When people will pay others to play a game for them it might be a sign the game isn't all that fun.
Gouki, take a look at this preview:
http://www.1up.com/do/previewPage?pager.offset=0&cId=3148768
It definitely sounds like what you're looking for.
I only have arthritus in my mouse finger. It was the act of clicking like a bastard in COH that did it. And then Clicking like a bastard in WOW finished another. I have always favoured the most brainless of all available character classes long before this was a problem for me.
Diablo was a clickfest, but there was a no brainer option with the warrior. The combat was much simplified if you chose to play the brainless one.
I've played games with auto fire. Like what you describe in Star Wars, and it didn't cut it because of the special moves. Too much of your power is invested in these.
If there was an auto attack in Diablo the warrior with his one attack move would be sorted. An autofire is not enough in this example as you must keep acquiring new targets. The AI should be able to assist in this process. In COH there was a limited Auto-target. Obviously manual targeting was more combat effective, but the automation never overrode manual control.
Essentially I feel that if you can program an AI enemy to use a combination of moves to automatically fight, then you can easily use the same AI on your Player character.
If one of your player classes special moves are all passives then it is easy to include a low click no brainer class into even the most complex of fight routines such as found in Tekken. The computer is easily able to calculate the combat of two AI's and you can see it do this in demonstration mode.
The challenge is then reduced to knowing your enemy. Knowing when to fight and when to run, when to pull the whole mob or when to try and split one off.
In this way people who really want to have a combat workout are able to, while those who are nodding off all droopy eyed and sleep deprived don't just die but may also compete at their own level. Sometimes I do want to fight like a bastard and ninja and powermove my way through combat on my reflexes and versatile tactics, but if it's an intresting MMO, I'm going to be playing this game for 20-60 hours straight. I cannot physically maintain that level of concentration and adrenalin for that long and neither do I want to. Relaxation is factor.
I like cruise control. The option just to coast.
I don't see this as in anyway mutually exclusive of an advanced combat system, but rather a choice extension to one.
20-60 hours straight? Thats your problem, not the problem of the devs.
Why should they change their game for the top 1% powergamers that play that long and make it worse for others?
Thanks for the link, Aphex.
I don't know what your situation is baff, but 20-60 hours straight? That will take a toll on a person no matter what they are doing. If you can't maintain interest in playing the game for that long yourself why would you want to stick it on autopilot?
When people will pay others to play a game for them it might be a sign the game isn't all that fun.
baff seems out there on this one. Reading his stuff, I feel he is making it up, or something feels <i>wrong</i> about what he is talking about.
The issues with an autopilot are numerous, Star Wars Galaxies Pre-CU had macros which pretty much allowed you to grind xp over night while you slept if you had the right macro and spawn point for a enemy.
The game you are looking for exists by the way, its called Progress Quest. Its incredibly boring watching a character on "AUTOPILOT".
So essentially it seems you want a game that after you press one button it plays the game for you. Which I find to be quite boring. Since for the most part there would be no real control over the fight, it would just be numbers vs numbers, you might win, you might lose, but you really have no affect on the outcome of the battle.
Also the programs behind AI enemies are notoriously weak, and even in singleplayer games. The typical way to make a enemy tougher is simply to increase hitpoints, damage output, and stats, even far beyond what the player could ever achieve.
I would hate to not have any control and just have an "autocombat" mode. Lots of games have offered that in the past, and almost all of the time, if you took the time play the combat out, you would actually be more successful in the battle, either by using less potions, or a party member not dieing, or not losing a ship or whatever.
In MMORPG's an autopilot mode would ruin things more often than not, since it would make it easier for someone to grind a character out over night.
I just really don't like the idea of a character being able to go into a battle and sit there and hit no keys and do pretty much nothing actively to win a battle.
I gotta agree with freebirdpat. The last thing I want in an MMO is less interactive combat. Boring combat is one of my major beefs with the genre as it is. I don't know if baff is just trying to rattle my cage, but it is obvious were are polar opposites on this issue.
When people will pay others to play a game for them it might be a sign the game isn't all that fun.
I'll start with what I see as problems with this concept (mostly handled already)
Lag: MMORPGs are massive, and send data through thousands of connections at once.
Ping: I believe this has to do with server/client location? MMORPGs games tend to have people from faraway places playing on the same servers, where FPS online games are more localized.
Twitch: More involved combat is (usually) more demanding.
The two first problems are always relevant, the third isn't unless you wish for a game that attracts non-twitch players. However, all of the above could probably be solved, and I'm not much of a twitch myself, so I'd like to see it done.
Lag: Dunno what I'd be doing about it. Ping: Dunno. However, the impact of both these problems could be lessened by the solution to the third.
Twitch: Simply keep it slow. The OP didn't specify the need for fast combat, only involved combat, and I think it was meant that way. Not very slow, not painfully slow, just slow enough that you can look at your keyboard and pick the assigned button for the desired move. I would want a little "extra" delay upon completion of each action. In this time nothing could be done. That way, slow and outpinged people won't be wasting too time compared to the faster players.
I'm trying to figure out an archery system I like. Firstly, I find some sort of automated aiming to be required. Reason: There are some physics involved in the movement of that arrow/bolt, as well as a strong twitch element in aiming. So it'll be some sort of target lock. But maybe not the conventional one.
I'm thinking target lock with manual adjustment ability and update rate based on character archery skill. You pick a target, and are not instantly ready to fire. Maybe a red target marker to indicate that your aim is not currently correct. The marker moves with the target, and its relative position can be modified by arrow keys (if you are not able to move while aiming a bow).
When the update time has elapsed, you have a true aim, symbolized by a yellow marker. If its position matches your desired aim (red marker) they display as a single green marker. Target acquired. If the target moves, so does the red marker, while the yellow one (true aim) remains until next update.
Any short-range firing is likely to hit if you aim straight on target, given the speed of an arrow. But if you lob those arrows high into the air to send them far away, or aim at a swift rider on horseback, you might need the adjustment feature. Also, you might find that your aim is not perfect, but reasonable, and have the option of firing if it is "as good as it gets" with a very mobile enemy.
Bonuses that don't apply to hit anymore: Transfer them to action speed? Be careful though. Speed differences should be very subtle, or they'll make a huge impact on the game. (If you're twice as fast as your opponent, and he gets hit by every attack he doesn't actively dodge, he'll get hit every now and then, and never have a moment to strike back).
Perhaps defensive maneuvers... Hmm... Block and parry could be made out to "last" until your next action, so that if your opponent actually gets two attacks every time you parry, you get one parry, and one less efficient parry (strong damage mitigation).
Also, there should be some basic move that allows you to attack while maintaining your guard and allowing you to reduce damage taken. I am thinking: Mild randomization of weapon damage, constant or near constant damage mitigation on the various defensive items/moves.
An off-hand item should allow you to carry out a secondary action, although it will treat you as if you are of lower skill (slower, less efficient). You could equip a shield, which should be very efficient for blocking, and activate blocking on your off-hand. Since I've defined blocking as an action that remains in effect after its first resolution (although the benefits of secondary blocks would be slightly reduced) you can maintain a constant defence while attacking with your primary hand/weapon.
Your primary hand should always check if you are currently performing an offhand action, and if so, apply a penalty (not one comparable to the left-hand penalty) dependent on what is wielded/done offhand.
I like this game. Too bad it probably doesn't exist.
The future: Adellion
Common flaw in MMORPGs: The ability to die casually
Advantages of Adellion: Dynamic world (affected by its inhabitants)
Player-driven world (beasts won't be an endless supply of mighty swords, gold will come from mines, not dragonly dens)
Player-driven world (Leadership is the privilege of a player, not an npc)
What about healers?
Yeah, what about them? The question seems rather unspecific. Should they roll hits while nobody else does?
So.. what is the question about healers in this case? Is it
I thought maybe I could think of more questions you could have meant, but I couldn't find any. And none of the two above questions have much bearing on the topic, I think. If we come to the point where we give form and substance to a full game, rather than just its attack/defence system, then those two questions would both be highly relevant.
But maybe you were wondering something else?
The future: Adellion
Common flaw in MMORPGs: The ability to die casually
Advantages of Adellion: Dynamic world (affected by its inhabitants)
Player-driven world (beasts won't be an endless supply of mighty swords, gold will come from mines, not dragonly dens)
Player-driven world (Leadership is the privilege of a player, not an npc)