I would rather see more classes and spread the spells and abilities out.Of course the alternative is 6 class and very few spells and abilities,a pretty simplistic game design follows.
Doesn't have to be. It seems to me that people are ascribing depth to numerical amounts of "things".
Depth has nothing to do with how many of something you have. You could have scores of skills and not have them really be that different or even useful.
What if a class had no more than 6 skills. That's it. But when used in certain combinations and even with combinations of a few other classes, then different effects or possibilities open up. Surely that would lend to depth?
look at guild wars. Though there are many skills a person can only bring 8 onto the field. So it's the choosing of those 8 in conjunction (sometimes) with your party members that can lead to interesting combinations.
I do agree with you on the needless clutter of skills and hotbars.
Quite frankly, I just find the fewest amount of skills that i need and I just use those. I believe there is a greater elegance in simplicity.
As far as classes, I don't really think you need more than the 4 archetypes and then allow the player to specialize.
I've never agreed with the whole "tank can take damage but can't give it". That's one of the worst and most ridiculous things I've ever seen. So game devs are trying to tell me that this indiviudual is physically able to take heaps of damage but doesn't have the strength to dish out damage? A better method would be to allow for greater bulk and muscle mass = large but slow damage.
Mages should be able to pick from different schools though with a penalty to the more schools they pick. So they can be jack of all trades and a master of none if they so choose over someone who specializes in death magic or elemental magic or healing magic.
I suppose I'm more of a proponent to allow class archetypes and then a carefully controlled skill based system.
If a fighter wants to be fast and untouchable but do small amounts of damage over time then that could easily be a choice over the player who wields a giant 2 hander who does mamoth amounts of damage but swings extremley slowly.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I like as many as possible. The more choices the more optimization a player can have. i understand the support of that decision, but peeps are dying for their own class. Give me as many choices as possible and I'll make one of each.
Why have classes at all? Why not simply make it so that the user can make their own class, and for those who dislike such customization can have a few preset classes.
"For the Angel of Death spread his wings on the blast, And breathed in the face of the foe as he passed: And the eyes of the sleepers waxed deadly and chill, And their hearts but once heaved, and for ever grew still!" ~Lord George Gordon Byron
A game that can properly pull off a skill based system gets my vote, however, a class based game can do just as well. If I had my say, there'd be the following types of classes:
Warrior - You'd begin as a Warrior and choose your specialization later. All Warrior subclasses will specialize in front-line combat. Hybrid subclasses will do less physical tanking and dps than their pure sublcass counterparts, but make up the difference with magic abilities.
* Tank (ie. Knight)
* Tank/Magic Hybrid (ie. Paladin)
* Melee DPS (ie. Blademaster)
* Melee DPS/Magic Hybrid (ie. Battlemage)
Rogue - This class would be a positional fighter.
* Melee DPS (ie. Assassin)
* Melee DPS/Magic Hybrid (ie. Bard)
* Ranged DPS (ie. Scout)
* Ranged DPS/Melee Hybrid (ie. Ranger)
Mage - This class would be the offensive and defensive spellcasters
* Crowd Control (ie. Enchanter)
* Healer (ie. Priest)
* Magic DPS (ie. Wizard)
* Magic/Melee DPS (ie. Spellsword)
I think everyone gets the idea. Basically you start off with a very simple path. What do you want to do, in other words. If you want to fight on the front lines, face to face with the baddies, then a Warrior is your choice. If you prefer to fight with a bow, or from the sides or behind the enemy, choose a Rogue. If you prefer to primarily cast magic, be a Mage. There's a subclass for practically every playstyle and all of them fill either a tank, dps, or healer role. If one would prefer, having talent specializations instead of subclasses would work just as well.
doragon86: "Why have classes at all? Why not simply make it so that the user can make their own class, and for those who dislike such customization can have a few preset classes."
Because classes are the most convenient way to constrain gameplay. Gameplay constraints are necessary for combat to have a tight, fun design to it. Games can survive without tight, fun combat but it's a serious hit against the game for most players.
nate1980: "Basically you start off with a very simple path."
Yeah, that's definitely one of the smartest ways to design classes/roles in a game. A lot of RPGs are moving away from the terrible systems of the past where the most important decisions in the game were being made at character creation (when you know the least about the game.) It's a good shift.
The one caveat is that games still somehow have to convey how much depth they have later on. Haven't really seen a game (MMO or otherwise) really tackle this problem that well. The main thing is to ensure your starting systems are deep by themselves I suppose.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
You know, one thing that I haven't seen discussed in this thread much, is simply how do you determine the amount of classes? I actually think I am the only one who voted for the 16-19 class range. It seems as if, the majority of people are on the opposite side of the spectrum. (20+ or 9 or fewer).
How does a designer determine the amount of classes? What does he look for in design? I am among one of many home designers who have an actual great design of classes for their own personal dream mmo. (The ones who like class based games). I determined my amount of classes by having 3 of each archetype. Each class within that archetype is very unique and plays differently according to that theme of the class. However my customization is somewhat different than what you would see commonly. My classes actually complement the combat mechanics, excelling of that as well as many diverse abilities. I also only allow 20 abilities actiavted at one time. Sometimes when you limit you cause more customization with strategy. Each class has two roles, primary and secondary. The primary roles are focused on the trinity and the secondary as support.
I just finished my necromancer class' ability set and let some friends theory test it. With allowing only 20 activate abilities on your hotbar gave some interesting customization. My only question was to the testers was simply, "if you was a high level necro what abilities would you use in a high level dungeon and why?" Came to find out, three of the friends picked totatally different abilities to fit to thier play style. One also noted that, this system is better then implementing 9 or fewer classes with the possible "spec" system because all you do is go to your spell book/ect to change your own personal playstyle instead of just specing. However, each play style is focused to that archetype. I just wanted to share that customization can be done differentlly, rather then what you would normally see in a sandbox game.
How does this fit in with the amount of classes? I feel like if you can balance the quantity with quality but focus on quality, you have your self a very in-depth strategic skillful class system.
Classes are so boring. Best is a sandbox game where you can learn any skill, independent of your predetermined "class".
Did you read the OP? You don't even explain your self. Bah. I like classes because you know what to expect and it's far more easier to balance. I just really believe we haven't seen many mmo's with compelling classes to give that hmfph factor. Not everyone is the same. I just feel like classes add more flavor, consistencey to gameplay.
Originally posted by pojung Hrmm. I don't think a statement of 25 'well designed' classes fits with my intuition. I agree that there are a great number of ways you can develop classes. My baseline starts with roles and functions. Yours starts with lore. We both touch on each other's concepts (which is good! it shows a big picture understanding!), but we approach it differently. Nothing wrong with that! Less is still more. Even from a lore perspective, you will end up fumbling for unique, distinct, fun mechanics that truly differentiate one class from another. If you approached from a lore perspective, and develop a 'warlock' who is a 'magic user, ranged attacks, offensive minded, deals with demons' and then deveop a 'necromancer' who is a 'magic user, ranged attacks, offensive minded, deals with undead' then from a functional point of view there's just too much overlap. You can tweak other things, of course, such as make one a pet class and not the other, and you would have a distinct feel for sure. But too many common denominators and everything starts blurring together, and despite all the thought and creativity, it's all bland. I am inspired by your 'lore first' approach. It's often an element that is forgotten when you view the current line of products (queue FFXIV reform?). I think we all agree we want distinction without repitition. Cheers!
I am a roleplayer first, regardless of the game I am playing, so lore plays into any decision that a good game makes in my mind. I like what you say about warlocks vs. necromancers. This is a problem that comes into play, for example, in AoC. You have primarily dots and you have pets, and even though they serve different purposes, and the themes are different, they play very similarly. This is why it boils down good design, and why I think you need to start with lore.
If the lore calls for the world to have both necromancers and warlocks, it is bad design to only include one. By the same token, it is bad design to have both but have them feel too similar. I think it is important to have many options, but only if they are good options. I, too, would rather see six well-designed classes than 25 classes that are poorly designed or that feel much too similar. This is another reason I think lore is key. If you have a good story to work with, you will have archetypes in it from which you can build classes.
I think most everyone here is having a really good discussion about class design, and I really like that. I do think that some people are complaining about the idea of classes in general, saying that they want zero classes because classes are bad, are simply be contrary for the sake of doing so. Why not tell us what would like to see in a skill-based MMO? What systems do you think work. Classes work so well because you pick a class, and you are given abilities in a theme. Skill systems are much harder to work with because of the myriad options available. How do you propose we make one that works. The problem with skill systems as they stand is the only problem with Ryzom's. People can know too much, be too versatile, or too powerful. I like versatility, and I like variety, but if everyone can know everything, or if there is a build that works too well, than even if you have great design and many options, you lose the flavour that so many enjoy with classes. This is something done right in FE. You can do whatever you like, but you have to pick and choose, so you have to decide what archetype you want to be, and that gives us variety.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
Quality over quantity. The more classes you have the less time the developers have for each class. So, balance, advancement and diversification suffers.
I can understand why you would say that, but it isn't necessarily true. The game might take longer to develop with more classes, but time taken per class is relative.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
All thats needed in games like EQ2, WoW, VG etc are tank, healer, dps and cc and thats it. Tank to take on the damage, healer to heal the tank, dps to melt faces. CC to mez, aoe freeze, sheep, lul or w/e. Thats all thats needed and there are classes in there which do those specific things and do them the best. But it's nice to have hybribs and jack of all trade types of classes too for those who get bored of doing the one roll all the time. Like WoWs class paladin is either a tank, healer or dps and is capable of all 3. Same with WoWs druid can be tank, healer or dps. Theif type classes usualy are a dps / cc hybrid. VGs bard a jack of all trade. VGs psi cc / dps hybrid usualy pure cc type of char. EQ2s templar tank / healer. So, it's good to mix it up a bit otherwise all your stuck doing is tanking, healing or dpsing. Or in some games cc where required.
Whereas games like UO, Runescape etc don't really need classes as your free to do what you want and take whatever path you want to. In RS you can either be warior, archer or mage or all 3 if you chose or even adventurer (skiller) so no classes are required in those cases as everyone pretty much has the same role with exceptions.
So, it depends what type of game your playing as to what classes are required or even if one is required at all.
Eronakis: "How does a designer determine the amount of classes? What does he look for in design?"
Well they take their overall design vision first off, then combine that with data/assumptions on what the target audience wants, then use both of those to decide from amongst their options.
Which in this case includes a lot of the factors myself and others (like Dubhlaith and yourself) have mentioned in this thread, as well as content production considerations (which in the game industry is often more significant than the design considerations.)
Because if the design calls for 20 classes each with distinct art and animations (WAR basically), that's a serious difference in manhours spent on content production compared to a game where all classes share the same generic cast/attack/shoot animations (WOW -- except multipied by how many races are in the game.)
Eronakis: "I also only allow 20 abilities actiavted at one time."
Yeah, that's more what I felt Guild Wars should've been. 8 was too limiting (it made the pre-battle planning that much more important, but it made the mid-battle decisions a lot less interesting and varied.)
Eronakis: "Came to find out, three of the friends picked totatally different abilities to fit to thier play style. One also noted that, this system is better then implementing 9 or fewer classes with the possible "spec" system because all you do is go to your spell book/ect to change your own personal playstyle instead of just specing."
Well the number of classes you settle on is going to result in how many playstyles you need to worry about balancing with one another. If the differences between class playstyles are smaller, you can balance a crapton of classes with each other. However the more distinct the differences between classes, the harder it will be to balance and make them all viable. And each additional class added will multiply the difficulty of keeping them all balanced and distinct.
I sometimes imagine design decisions as a bunch of sliders, where manipulating one of them affects many others.
So if you move the ClassCount slider up to more than 9, and the PlaystylesPerClass count to 3 (or more), that will have caused the DifficultyToBalance slider to move up into dangerous territory. If you also increase the ClassDistinction slider, then DifficultyToBalance goes up even higher. Increasing ClassDistinction isn't free either, since you actually have to come up with each of the distinct playstyles along with a plan of how they're going to be balanced with existing ones.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Erokanis: "How does a designer determine the amount of classes? What does he look for in design?" Well they take their overall design vision first off, then combine that with data/assumptions on what the target audience wants, then use both of those to decide from amongst their options. Which in this case includes a lot of the factors myself and others (like Dubhlaith and yourself) have mentioned in this thread, as well as content production considerations (which in the game industry is often more significant than the design considerations.) Because if the design calls for 20 classes each with distinct art and animations (WAR basically), that's a serious difference in manhours spent on content production compared to a game where all classes share the same generic cast/attack/shoot animations (WOW -- except multipied by how many races are in the game.)
Thanks, I already knew the answer, hence I am designing one my self =D
I dunno maybe they should do something like the original Star Wars Galaxies. Have 5 original classes......and be able to make 4 or 5 subclasses out of the main class. Make the trees changeable so people can change up some of their choices and even be different then their neighbors. I admit I want a set class, but I'll want to tweek it to fit my game play style.
Most of my experience is with WoW, so I'm coming from that angle. I am against the idea of classes being limited to one or two of the three primary roles. You can have hundreds of classes to give the impression of a wide variety of play-style, but it is all an illusion if the classes can only perform 1/3 or 2/3 of what is required. Where that is an issue with the classes, it will ALWAYS boil down to what roles you can fulfill versus your class. The bottom line is the only thing that matters.
Get past that, and we can talk.
___________________ Sadly, I see storm clouds on the horizon. A faint stench of Vanguard is in the air.-Kien
Eronakis: "How does a designer determine the amount of classes? What does he look for in design?" Well they take their overall design vision first off, then combine that with data/assumptions on what the target audience wants, then use both of those to decide from amongst their options. Which in this case includes a lot of the factors myself and others (like Dubhlaith and yourself) have mentioned in this thread, as well as content production considerations (which in the game industry is often more significant than the design considerations.) Because if the design calls for 20 classes each with distinct art and animations (WAR basically), that's a serious difference in manhours spent on content production compared to a game where all classes share the same generic cast/attack/shoot animations (WOW -- except multipied by how many races are in the game.) Eronakis: "I also only allow 20 abilities actiavted at one time." Yeah, that's more what I felt Guild Wars should've been. 8 was too limiting (it made the pre-battle planning that much more important, but it made the mid-battle decisions a lot less interesting and varied.) Yeah, I really believe by limiting somethings can create some substantial strategy for various diverse situations. Yes, I do have a level cap, but there is a reason and purpose! Basically each class has roughly 45-55 different abilities, obtaining 3-5 abilities every 5 levels...so I think 20 is good because, essentially you know what to expect from a class but then, each player who plays that one class has their own play style and just alternating abilities away from changing a "spec". Eronakis: "Came to find out, three of the friends picked totatally different abilities to fit to thier play style. One also noted that, this system is better then implementing 9 or fewer classes with the possible "spec" system because all you do is go to your spell book/ect to change your own personal playstyle instead of just specing." Well the number of classes you settle on is going to result in how many playstyles you need to worry about balancing with one another. If the differences between class playstyles are smaller, you can balance a crapton of classes with each other. However the more distinct the differences between classes, the harder it will be to balance and make them all viable. And each additional class added will multiply the difficulty of keeping them all balanced and distinct. I sometimes imagine design decisions as a bunch of sliders, where manipulating one of them affects many others. So if you move the ClassCount slider up to more than 9, and the PlaystylesPerClass count to 3 (or more), that will have caused the DifficultyToBalance slider to move up into dangerous territory. If you also increase the ClassDistinction slider, then DifficultyToBalance goes up even higher. Increasing ClassDistinction isn't free either, since you actually have to come up with each of the distinct playstyles along with a plan of how they're going to be balanced with existing ones. Interesting way to think of it. Basically, I designed my classes on how those classes should complement their theme, allowing that class to have their own play style. Maybe I did the polar opposite where the class fits the player style, rather than the player style fitting the class. As back to the theme of the post, there are several ways of implementing on how to determine the amount of classes one should have in their game. I think it all comes down on how you want gameplay to flow with your perference.
Man you took my color! lol Thanks for the comments. Mine will be in orange.
I prefer around 10-12. Too many classes is hard to balance and you run the risk of redundancy. I mean how many different ways can you shoot fireballs or fire arrows before it becomes redundant?
I prefer around 10-12. Too many classes is hard to balance and you run the risk of redundancy. I mean how many different ways can you shoot fireballs or fire arrows before it becomes redundant?
That my friend is how I figured out how to omit alot of redundancy. And the answer is not within the class =D
However, there will always be redundancy in mmos, but diquising it, allowing players different ways with out limit but with design guidience is the key =D
It's all up to what kind of MMo it is you just can't say hey all MMo's shouldn't have this many class's in it cause well it could work better with more or less.
I prerfer to have... no classes. The best option is creating a character in a skill based system - player is choosing only skills that wanna have and he create own speciality ( like in eve online)
It's not the number of classes that are important.
It's the amount of diversity you have. Champions doesn't have classes, they have powersets. The more you got, the more diverse builds you have, and thus a more personalized experience you have.
That right there is a key ingredient to success for a game.
I have been playing Dragon Age... while single player, and a couple of classes, it is very diverse.
Comments
Doesn't have to be. It seems to me that people are ascribing depth to numerical amounts of "things".
Depth has nothing to do with how many of something you have. You could have scores of skills and not have them really be that different or even useful.
What if a class had no more than 6 skills. That's it. But when used in certain combinations and even with combinations of a few other classes, then different effects or possibilities open up. Surely that would lend to depth?
look at guild wars. Though there are many skills a person can only bring 8 onto the field. So it's the choosing of those 8 in conjunction (sometimes) with your party members that can lead to interesting combinations.
I do agree with you on the needless clutter of skills and hotbars.
Quite frankly, I just find the fewest amount of skills that i need and I just use those. I believe there is a greater elegance in simplicity.
As far as classes, I don't really think you need more than the 4 archetypes and then allow the player to specialize.
I've never agreed with the whole "tank can take damage but can't give it". That's one of the worst and most ridiculous things I've ever seen. So game devs are trying to tell me that this indiviudual is physically able to take heaps of damage but doesn't have the strength to dish out damage? A better method would be to allow for greater bulk and muscle mass = large but slow damage.
Mages should be able to pick from different schools though with a penalty to the more schools they pick. So they can be jack of all trades and a master of none if they so choose over someone who specializes in death magic or elemental magic or healing magic.
I suppose I'm more of a proponent to allow class archetypes and then a carefully controlled skill based system.
If a fighter wants to be fast and untouchable but do small amounts of damage over time then that could easily be a choice over the player who wields a giant 2 hander who does mamoth amounts of damage but swings extremley slowly.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Where is the ZERO Classes option?
Classes sucks! No Classes rules!
Bs thread.
I like as many as possible. The more choices the more optimization a player can have. i understand the support of that decision, but peeps are dying for their own class. Give me as many choices as possible and I'll make one of each.
Pcgamingvet
Why have classes at all? Why not simply make it so that the user can make their own class, and for those who dislike such customization can have a few preset classes.
"For the Angel of Death spread his wings on the blast,
And breathed in the face of the foe as he passed:
And the eyes of the sleepers waxed deadly and chill,
And their hearts but once heaved, and for ever grew still!"
~Lord George Gordon Byron
A game that can properly pull off a skill based system gets my vote, however, a class based game can do just as well. If I had my say, there'd be the following types of classes:
Warrior - You'd begin as a Warrior and choose your specialization later. All Warrior subclasses will specialize in front-line combat. Hybrid subclasses will do less physical tanking and dps than their pure sublcass counterparts, but make up the difference with magic abilities.
* Tank (ie. Knight)
* Tank/Magic Hybrid (ie. Paladin)
* Melee DPS (ie. Blademaster)
* Melee DPS/Magic Hybrid (ie. Battlemage)
Rogue - This class would be a positional fighter.
* Melee DPS (ie. Assassin)
* Melee DPS/Magic Hybrid (ie. Bard)
* Ranged DPS (ie. Scout)
* Ranged DPS/Melee Hybrid (ie. Ranger)
Mage - This class would be the offensive and defensive spellcasters
* Crowd Control (ie. Enchanter)
* Healer (ie. Priest)
* Magic DPS (ie. Wizard)
* Magic/Melee DPS (ie. Spellsword)
I think everyone gets the idea. Basically you start off with a very simple path. What do you want to do, in other words. If you want to fight on the front lines, face to face with the baddies, then a Warrior is your choice. If you prefer to fight with a bow, or from the sides or behind the enemy, choose a Rogue. If you prefer to primarily cast magic, be a Mage. There's a subclass for practically every playstyle and all of them fill either a tank, dps, or healer role. If one would prefer, having talent specializations instead of subclasses would work just as well.
doragon86: "Why have classes at all? Why not simply make it so that the user can make their own class, and for those who dislike such customization can have a few preset classes."
Because classes are the most convenient way to constrain gameplay. Gameplay constraints are necessary for combat to have a tight, fun design to it. Games can survive without tight, fun combat but it's a serious hit against the game for most players.
nate1980: "Basically you start off with a very simple path."
Yeah, that's definitely one of the smartest ways to design classes/roles in a game. A lot of RPGs are moving away from the terrible systems of the past where the most important decisions in the game were being made at character creation (when you know the least about the game.) It's a good shift.
The one caveat is that games still somehow have to convey how much depth they have later on. Haven't really seen a game (MMO or otherwise) really tackle this problem that well. The main thing is to ensure your starting systems are deep by themselves I suppose.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Classes are so boring.
Best is a sandbox game where you can learn any skill, independent of your predetermined "class".
You know, one thing that I haven't seen discussed in this thread much, is simply how do you determine the amount of classes? I actually think I am the only one who voted for the 16-19 class range. It seems as if, the majority of people are on the opposite side of the spectrum. (20+ or 9 or fewer).
How does a designer determine the amount of classes? What does he look for in design? I am among one of many home designers who have an actual great design of classes for their own personal dream mmo. (The ones who like class based games). I determined my amount of classes by having 3 of each archetype. Each class within that archetype is very unique and plays differently according to that theme of the class. However my customization is somewhat different than what you would see commonly. My classes actually complement the combat mechanics, excelling of that as well as many diverse abilities. I also only allow 20 abilities actiavted at one time. Sometimes when you limit you cause more customization with strategy. Each class has two roles, primary and secondary. The primary roles are focused on the trinity and the secondary as support.
I just finished my necromancer class' ability set and let some friends theory test it. With allowing only 20 activate abilities on your hotbar gave some interesting customization. My only question was to the testers was simply, "if you was a high level necro what abilities would you use in a high level dungeon and why?" Came to find out, three of the friends picked totatally different abilities to fit to thier play style. One also noted that, this system is better then implementing 9 or fewer classes with the possible "spec" system because all you do is go to your spell book/ect to change your own personal playstyle instead of just specing. However, each play style is focused to that archetype. I just wanted to share that customization can be done differentlly, rather then what you would normally see in a sandbox game.
How does this fit in with the amount of classes? I feel like if you can balance the quantity with quality but focus on quality, you have your self a very in-depth strategic skillful class system.
Did you read the OP? You don't even explain your self. Bah. I like classes because you know what to expect and it's far more easier to balance. I just really believe we haven't seen many mmo's with compelling classes to give that hmfph factor. Not everyone is the same. I just feel like classes add more flavor, consistencey to gameplay.
Variety is the spice of life. 20+ for me.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
I am a roleplayer first, regardless of the game I am playing, so lore plays into any decision that a good game makes in my mind. I like what you say about warlocks vs. necromancers. This is a problem that comes into play, for example, in AoC. You have primarily dots and you have pets, and even though they serve different purposes, and the themes are different, they play very similarly. This is why it boils down good design, and why I think you need to start with lore.
If the lore calls for the world to have both necromancers and warlocks, it is bad design to only include one. By the same token, it is bad design to have both but have them feel too similar. I think it is important to have many options, but only if they are good options. I, too, would rather see six well-designed classes than 25 classes that are poorly designed or that feel much too similar. This is another reason I think lore is key. If you have a good story to work with, you will have archetypes in it from which you can build classes.
I think most everyone here is having a really good discussion about class design, and I really like that. I do think that some people are complaining about the idea of classes in general, saying that they want zero classes because classes are bad, are simply be contrary for the sake of doing so. Why not tell us what would like to see in a skill-based MMO? What systems do you think work. Classes work so well because you pick a class, and you are given abilities in a theme. Skill systems are much harder to work with because of the myriad options available. How do you propose we make one that works. The problem with skill systems as they stand is the only problem with Ryzom's. People can know too much, be too versatile, or too powerful. I like versatility, and I like variety, but if everyone can know everything, or if there is a build that works too well, than even if you have great design and many options, you lose the flavour that so many enjoy with classes. This is something done right in FE. You can do whatever you like, but you have to pick and choose, so you have to decide what archetype you want to be, and that gives us variety.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
WTF? No subscription fee?
I can understand why you would say that, but it isn't necessarily true. The game might take longer to develop with more classes, but time taken per class is relative.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Repeating a post I already posted.
All thats needed in games like EQ2, WoW, VG etc are tank, healer, dps and cc and thats it. Tank to take on the damage, healer to heal the tank, dps to melt faces. CC to mez, aoe freeze, sheep, lul or w/e. Thats all thats needed and there are classes in there which do those specific things and do them the best. But it's nice to have hybribs and jack of all trade types of classes too for those who get bored of doing the one roll all the time. Like WoWs class paladin is either a tank, healer or dps and is capable of all 3. Same with WoWs druid can be tank, healer or dps. Theif type classes usualy are a dps / cc hybrid. VGs bard a jack of all trade. VGs psi cc / dps hybrid usualy pure cc type of char. EQ2s templar tank / healer. So, it's good to mix it up a bit otherwise all your stuck doing is tanking, healing or dpsing. Or in some games cc where required.
Whereas games like UO, Runescape etc don't really need classes as your free to do what you want and take whatever path you want to. In RS you can either be warior, archer or mage or all 3 if you chose or even adventurer (skiller) so no classes are required in those cases as everyone pretty much has the same role with exceptions.
So, it depends what type of game your playing as to what classes are required or even if one is required at all.
This isn't a signature, you just think it is.
Eronakis: "How does a designer determine the amount of classes? What does he look for in design?"
Well they take their overall design vision first off, then combine that with data/assumptions on what the target audience wants, then use both of those to decide from amongst their options.
Which in this case includes a lot of the factors myself and others (like Dubhlaith and yourself) have mentioned in this thread, as well as content production considerations (which in the game industry is often more significant than the design considerations.)
Because if the design calls for 20 classes each with distinct art and animations (WAR basically), that's a serious difference in manhours spent on content production compared to a game where all classes share the same generic cast/attack/shoot animations (WOW -- except multipied by how many races are in the game.)
Eronakis: "I also only allow 20 abilities actiavted at one time."
Yeah, that's more what I felt Guild Wars should've been. 8 was too limiting (it made the pre-battle planning that much more important, but it made the mid-battle decisions a lot less interesting and varied.)
Eronakis: "Came to find out, three of the friends picked totatally different abilities to fit to thier play style. One also noted that, this system is better then implementing 9 or fewer classes with the possible "spec" system because all you do is go to your spell book/ect to change your own personal playstyle instead of just specing."
Well the number of classes you settle on is going to result in how many playstyles you need to worry about balancing with one another. If the differences between class playstyles are smaller, you can balance a crapton of classes with each other. However the more distinct the differences between classes, the harder it will be to balance and make them all viable. And each additional class added will multiply the difficulty of keeping them all balanced and distinct.
I sometimes imagine design decisions as a bunch of sliders, where manipulating one of them affects many others.
So if you move the ClassCount slider up to more than 9, and the PlaystylesPerClass count to 3 (or more), that will have caused the DifficultyToBalance slider to move up into dangerous territory. If you also increase the ClassDistinction slider, then DifficultyToBalance goes up even higher. Increasing ClassDistinction isn't free either, since you actually have to come up with each of the distinct playstyles along with a plan of how they're going to be balanced with existing ones.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Thanks, I already knew the answer, hence I am designing one my self =D
I dunno maybe they should do something like the original Star Wars Galaxies. Have 5 original classes......and be able to make 4 or 5 subclasses out of the main class. Make the trees changeable so people can change up some of their choices and even be different then their neighbors. I admit I want a set class, but I'll want to tweek it to fit my game play style.
Pcgamingvet
Most of my experience is with WoW, so I'm coming from that angle. I am against the idea of classes being limited to one or two of the three primary roles. You can have hundreds of classes to give the impression of a wide variety of play-style, but it is all an illusion if the classes can only perform 1/3 or 2/3 of what is required. Where that is an issue with the classes, it will ALWAYS boil down to what roles you can fulfill versus your class. The bottom line is the only thing that matters.
Get past that, and we can talk.
___________________
Sadly, I see storm clouds on the horizon. A faint stench of Vanguard is in the air.-Kien
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/12/13/
Man you took my color! lol Thanks for the comments. Mine will be in orange.
I prefer around 10-12. Too many classes is hard to balance and you run the risk of redundancy. I mean how many different ways can you shoot fireballs or fire arrows before it becomes redundant?
That my friend is how I figured out how to omit alot of redundancy. And the answer is not within the class =D
However, there will always be redundancy in mmos, but diquising it, allowing players different ways with out limit but with design guidience is the key =D
Set Classes? Zero
PLaying: EvE, Ryzom
Waiting For: Earthrise, Perpetuum
It's all up to what kind of MMo it is you just can't say hey all MMo's shouldn't have this many class's in it cause well it could work better with more or less.
As many as the ability of the devs to maintain balance alows.
I prerfer to have... no classes. The best option is creating a character in a skill based system - player is choosing only skills that wanna have and he create own speciality ( like in eve online)
It's not the number of classes that are important.
It's the amount of diversity you have. Champions doesn't have classes, they have powersets. The more you got, the more diverse builds you have, and thus a more personalized experience you have.
That right there is a key ingredient to success for a game.
I have been playing Dragon Age... while single player, and a couple of classes, it is very diverse.