The concept of letting players fill a wider range of roles is a positive.. BUT... the simple fact that they stick to a system where players HAVE to fit pre-determined group roles is not good.
Let's move past the holy trinity concept. It provided a good starting point for game design a decade ago, but we need to start moving on to newer and better concepts. I don't want to hear anymore about group roles and archetypes....
By all means, suggest a better concept. Too many people complain about things they want to have changed, but have no intention of taking a hand personally in that change.
Completely remove the ability to tank (especially taunts) and healers. GW2 is doing that and a lot of people are looking forward to it.
People would just end up wiping because everyone would just dps and no one would pay enough attention to heal themselves.
We'll see. But at least it would be better to wipe as a group and realize you guys aren't good enough then end up blaming the tank because he coudn't taunt fast enough to keep aggro or the healer couldn't spam his heals fast enough.
Bioware may possibly have shot themselves in the foot by extending the number of roles in each class. If I'm a Sith Inquisitor, I now have the option to Melee DPS or Tank - Ranged DPS or heal - depending on which Adv Class I chose. Why bother to re-roll to Sith Warrior to tank as I can already do it. The point of 'different storyline for different classes' will probably no longer be a factor as players will either put on their 'tanking gear' or respec to the other role whenever they need to.
It would have been better to have a single class having a single role... this would ensure the games replayablity for Bioware.
Bioware may possibly have shot themselves in the foot by extending the number of roles in each class. If I'm a Sith Inquisitor, I now have the option to Melee DPS or Tank - Ranged DPS or heal - depending on which Adv Class I chose. Why bother to re-roll to Sith Warrior to tank as I can already do it. The point of 'different storyline for different classes' will probably no longer be a factor as players will either put on their 'tanking gear' or respec to the other role whenever they need to.
It would have been better to have a single class having a single role... this would ensure the games replayablity for Bioware.
Because even though the classes would have similar roles, they would probably perform the role in a different way adding flavor to the class and the role.
Bioware may possibly have shot themselves in the foot by extending the number of roles in each class. If I'm a Sith Inquisitor, I now have the option to Melee DPS or Tank - Ranged DPS or heal - depending on which Adv Class I chose. Why bother to re-roll to Sith Warrior to tank as I can already do it. The point of 'different storyline for different classes' will probably no longer be a factor as players will either put on their 'tanking gear' or respec to the other role whenever they need to.
It would have been better to have a single class having a single role... this would ensure the games replayablity for Bioware.
You have a point and this could actually hint on them having more confidence in retaining subs with the end game SWTOR has to offer ^_^
But if they are smart there will be a lot of difference in viability of overlapping roles between encounters: for instance It looks like there will be three kinds of tanking: ranged, evasion / force and melee / close range. I can very much imagine one of those being much better against boss A while another kind of tank is preferable against boss B. Same goes for healing types and ranged or melee dps.
It all depends on how encounters are implemented and how class balance turns out in pvp but my guess is they will want to avoid "one class for everything" characters for the reasons you gave
Completely remove the ability to tank (especially taunts) and healers. GW2 is doing that and a lot of people are looking forward to it.
Exactly (well... not sure about the GW2 part but I am following it). How silly is the whole "Tank/Taunt" concept? I mean seriously... a grouo of 5 is going to stand around and beat on some gut in full plate armor with a shield and ignore his 2 buddies in robes healing him and/or the guy stabbing them from behind?
Or having the "Tank" pull the "boss" into a corner so he can only attack the one guy while his 5 buddies kill the boss from behind.
Is that really the best we can do over a decade later? Look at how far graphics have developed in the same timeframe...
It was a great concept many years ago, but instead of being just one way of playing... it became the default standard unpon which 99% of the later games have been built on. I want my RPG to mean playing the role of my Character.... not filling some pre-determined role in a group.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Bioware may possibly have shot themselves in the foot by extending the number of roles in each class. If I'm a Sith Inquisitor, I now have the option to Melee DPS or Tank - Ranged DPS or heal - depending on which Adv Class I chose. Why bother to re-roll to Sith Warrior to tank as I can already do it. The point of 'different storyline for different classes' will probably no longer be a factor as players will either put on their 'tanking gear' or respec to the other role whenever they need to.
It would have been better to have a single class having a single role... this would ensure the games replayablity for Bioware.
I agree with what you are saying here, but I do think it could go either way, depending on how all they classes are designed. I'm not too excited about the idea of classes being able to fulfill every roll for many of the reasons you mentioned. I think the main problem I have with it is that it would net let your character feel as important or unique. However, if each class does indeed play a lot differently from the others, maybe that would give enough seperation and also reason to re-roll and play another class, even if your main character could already spec to fulfill the other roll. This will give players more freedom to choose a main class based off of their style of play or love for the story behind that class. They won't have to worry as much about their favorite class not being able to fulfill the roll they wanted in a group.
I'm not sure how this will pan out in the end. I guess we will just have to wait and see what happens when BIoware releases this beast.
It would have been better to have a single class having a single role... this would ensure the games replayablity for Bioware.
I'm sorry, I was under the impression the fact that every class has a unique storyline with multiple branching choices within that line would be the replayability RATHER than allowing people to play their classes like THEY want.
People would just end up wiping because everyone would just dps and no one would pay enough attention to heal themselves.
We'll see. But at least it would be better to wipe as a group and realize you guys aren't good enough then end up blaming the tank because he coudn't taunt fast enough to keep aggro or the healer couldn't spam his heals fast enough.
You know that just bring up an interesting thought and something I never really paid attention to until i saw this video recently. But whenever there's a wipe, everyone always blames the healer or sometimes the tank; never the DPSers who are always just there, spamming their macros and nothing else. So yeah, it would be great to see a game do away with them and have everyone take the blame for a wipe, not just that healer or tank.
The concept of letting players fill a wider range of roles is a positive.. BUT... the simple fact that they stick to a system where players HAVE to fit pre-determined group roles is not good.
Let's move past the holy trinity concept. It provided a good starting point for game design a decade ago, but we need to start moving on to newer and better concepts. I don't want to hear anymore about group roles and archetypes....
I always find it odd that people complain about roles. Roles bring order from chaos and even games that claim they have no trinity you know the players will just assign roles to group members.
Having role's is a good thing. However the Holy Trinity is NOT the only way to break down roles..... that particular implimentation of roles is getting beyond tired by now.
The concept of letting players fill a wider range of roles is a positive.. BUT... the simple fact that they stick to a system where players HAVE to fit pre-determined group roles is not good.
Let's move past the holy trinity concept. It provided a good starting point for game design a decade ago, but we need to start moving on to newer and better concepts. I don't want to hear anymore about group roles and archetypes....
I always find it odd that people complain about roles. Roles bring order from chaos and even games that claim they have no trinity you know the players will just assign roles to group members.
Having role's is a good thing. However the Holy Trinity is NOT the only way to break down roles..... that particular implimentation of roles is getting beyond tired by now.
agree 100%
One of the issues is that people are so conditioned to use the strict trinity role system that people can't conceive of another way. Take a clue from real life and try to impliment that into a game. Going along with the player roles is the fact that npc AI in almost all mmos are beyond stupid. We have over 20 years of playing and developing these games and nobody can or wants to improve that? Halo has better enemy AI than every mmo in existence. How are these two connected? Having better AI will eliminate the classic trinity setup thereby forcing players to change their habit. I just wish some developers would have some balls to change it up.
Maybe I missed it, but I don't remember anyone mentioning the fact that some classes, even though they can technically "tank", aren't the #1 class to do so.
Take Warcraft for example; a Deathknight can tank if they're in a small group, that can't find a warrior, but never in a raid would the DK be the main tank.
If more than one class, or advanced class, can fill the same roll as others, I want them to be on equal playing ground. Maybe each "tank" advanced class could have their own set of weaknesses/strengths, but not to the point that one would always be prefered to the others.
Unfortunately this Warcraft example is totally a wrong example as any of the tank classes in Warcraft can tank anything when geared & talented in any enviroment, be it a raid or a small instance.
The concept of letting players fill a wider range of roles is a positive.. BUT... the simple fact that they stick to a system where players HAVE to fit pre-determined group roles is not good.
Let's move past the holy trinity concept. It provided a good starting point for game design a decade ago, but we need to start moving on to newer and better concepts. I don't want to hear anymore about group roles and archetypes....
I always find it odd that people complain about roles. Roles bring order from chaos and even games that claim they have no trinity you know the players will just assign roles to group members.
Having role's is a good thing. However the Holy Trinity is NOT the only way to break down roles..... that particular implimentation of roles is getting beyond tired by now.
agree 100%
One of the issues is that people are so conditioned to use the strict trinity role system that people can't conceive of another way. Take a clue from real life and try to impliment that into a game. Going along with the player roles is the fact that npc AI in almost all mmos are beyond stupid. We have over 20 years of playing and developing these games and nobody can or wants to improve that? Halo has better enemy AI than every mmo in existence. How are these two connected? Having better AI will eliminate the classic trinity setup thereby forcing players to change their habit. I just wish some developers would have some balls to change it up.
I don't see how better AI will change the need or want, for class roles. When you are in any squad based game that revolves around specific classes, it doesn't matter what the AI is like. In FPS games this is different because most FPS games.. well...
1) Require some kind of rudimentary skill that is somewhat a handicap that most MMOs don't use as they have auto attack. (even GW2 only uses a medium in that some attacks are positional, but many appear to still use the same targeting, as does DCUO, TERA is a little different, but that will not be spoken about here)
2) Rarely have the need for healing as almost all FPS games are arena based, and usually have time limits imposed.
In the end, roles are a good thing, and removing them won't make combat any better necessarily. I'm one for faster paced, skill based combat, and I like playing hybrid roles because - to me - being able to do a little of everything is more important then focusing on any one thing. Many times people CHOOSE to force themselves into the farthest role they can go.
For instance, DCUO people always had a choice of DPS or a secondary role of control, healing, or tanking. Everyone chose either one or the other and spec'd fully into it, but skillfully I usually played a DPS character that had enough heals for secondary support which kept both me and others alive while dealing more damage than healers ever could. Often times that would be enough to support those that needed it but not enough to be dedicated to doing ONLY DPS, or ONLY healing.
What I'm trying ot say by this, is, sure a game like TOR will have defined roles, but that doesn't mean people HAVE to use these defined roles, its that people will CHOOSE to use these defined roles. AI won't change this.
The concept of letting players fill a wider range of roles is a positive.. BUT... the simple fact that they stick to a system where players HAVE to fit pre-determined group roles is not good.
Let's move past the holy trinity concept. It provided a good starting point for game design a decade ago, but we need to start moving on to newer and better concepts. I don't want to hear anymore about group roles and archetypes....
I always find it odd that people complain about roles. Roles bring order from chaos and even games that claim they have no trinity you know the players will just assign roles to group members.
Having role's is a good thing. However the Holy Trinity is NOT the only way to break down roles..... that particular implimentation of roles is getting beyond tired by now.
agree 100%
One of the issues is that people are so conditioned to use the strict trinity role system that people can't conceive of another way. Take a clue from real life and try to impliment that into a game. Going along with the player roles is the fact that npc AI in almost all mmos are beyond stupid. We have over 20 years of playing and developing these games and nobody can or wants to improve that? Halo has better enemy AI than every mmo in existence. How are these two connected? Having better AI will eliminate the classic trinity setup thereby forcing players to change their habit. I just wish some developers would have some balls to change it up.
I don't see how better AI will change the need or want, for class roles. When you are in any squad based game that revolves around specific classes, it doesn't matter what the AI is like. In FPS games this is different because most FPS games.. well...
1) Require some kind of rudimentary skill that is somewhat a handicap that most MMOs don't use as they have auto attack. (even GW2 only uses a medium in that some attacks are positional, but many appear to still use the same targeting, as does DCUO, TERA is a little different, but that will not be spoken about here)
2) Rarely have the need for healing as almost all FPS games are arena based, and usually have time limits imposed.
In the end, roles are a good thing, and removing them won't make combat any better necessarily. I'm one for faster paced, skill based combat, and I like playing hybrid roles because - to me - being able to do a little of everything is more important then focusing on any one thing. Many times people CHOOSE to force themselves into the farthest role they can go.
For instance, DCUO people always had a choice of DPS or a secondary role of control, healing, or tanking. Everyone chose either one or the other and spec'd fully into it, but skillfully I usually played a DPS character that had enough heals for secondary support which kept both me and others alive while dealing more damage than healers ever could. Often times that would be enough to support those that needed it but not enough to be dedicated to doing ONLY DPS, or ONLY healing.
What I'm trying ot say by this, is, sure a game like TOR will have defined roles, but that doesn't mean people HAVE to use these defined roles, its that people will CHOOSE to use these defined roles. AI won't change this.
What I think he's trying to say, is that the average AI of NPCs in MMORPGs is so... braindead... that it can be handled by a group of five persons of which the damage dealers share one role, DPS, with very little variation between them. The only challenge can be found in their high health total and/or high damage/healing output A more advanced AI would not be fooled by a group using the Tank'n'spank formula, and would swiftly send them back to Wipeville.
What I think he's trying to say, is that the average AI of NPCs in MMORPGs is so... braindead... that it can be handled by a group of five persons of which the damage dealers share one role, DPS, with very little variation between them. The only challenge can be found in their high health total and/or high damage/healing output A more advanced AI would not be fooled by a group using the Tank'n'spank formula, and would swiftly send them back to Wipeville.
Hmm, while I might be able to see that, I think it would only require better tanking abilities. (maybe not "better" per se, but , "different", to compensate) I do feel that the majority of AI is braindead for MMOs, but I think better AI could also breed better use of classes too. I'm all for better AI, I just can't see how changing the AI would force a change in the need for classes.
I really can't think of a formula for a specific mob that would remove the class restriction. I think that would rely more on the type of combat rather than AI.
The concept of letting players fill a wider range of roles is a positive.. BUT... the simple fact that they stick to a system where players HAVE to fit pre-determined group roles is not good.
Let's move past the holy trinity concept. It provided a good starting point for game design a decade ago, but we need to start moving on to newer and better concepts. I don't want to hear anymore about group roles and archetypes....
I always find it odd that people complain about roles. Roles bring order from chaos and even games that claim they have no trinity you know the players will just assign roles to group members.
Having role's is a good thing. However the Holy Trinity is NOT the only way to break down roles..... that particular implimentation of roles is getting beyond tired by now.
agree 100%
One of the issues is that people are so conditioned to use the strict trinity role system that people can't conceive of another way. Take a clue from real life and try to impliment that into a game. Going along with the player roles is the fact that npc AI in almost all mmos are beyond stupid. We have over 20 years of playing and developing these games and nobody can or wants to improve that? Halo has better enemy AI than every mmo in existence. How are these two connected? Having better AI will eliminate the classic trinity setup thereby forcing players to change their habit. I just wish some developers would have some balls to change it up.
I don't see how better AI will change the need or want, for class roles. When you are in any squad based game that revolves around specific classes, it doesn't matter what the AI is like. In FPS games this is different because most FPS games.. well...
1) Require some kind of rudimentary skill that is somewhat a handicap that most MMOs don't use as they have auto attack. (even GW2 only uses a medium in that some attacks are positional, but many appear to still use the same targeting, as does DCUO, TERA is a little different, but that will not be spoken about here)
2) Rarely have the need for healing as almost all FPS games are arena based, and usually have time limits imposed.
In the end, roles are a good thing, and removing them won't make combat any better necessarily. I'm one for faster paced, skill based combat, and I like playing hybrid roles because - to me - being able to do a little of everything is more important then focusing on any one thing. Many times people CHOOSE to force themselves into the farthest role they can go.
For instance, DCUO people always had a choice of DPS or a secondary role of control, healing, or tanking. Everyone chose either one or the other and spec'd fully into it, but skillfully I usually played a DPS character that had enough heals for secondary support which kept both me and others alive while dealing more damage than healers ever could. Often times that would be enough to support those that needed it but not enough to be dedicated to doing ONLY DPS, or ONLY healing.
What I'm trying ot say by this, is, sure a game like TOR will have defined roles, but that doesn't mean people HAVE to use these defined roles, its that people will CHOOSE to use these defined roles. AI won't change this.
What I think he's trying to say, is that the average AI of NPCs in MMORPGs is so... braindead... that it can be handled by a group of five persons of which the damage dealers share one role, DPS, with very little variation between them. The only challenge can be found in their high health total and/or high damage/healing output A more advanced AI would not be fooled by a group using the Tank'n'spank formula, and would swiftly send them back to Wipeville.
This pretty much. I didn't mean there would be an elimination of roles but that they would change from the static form of the trinity gameplay. Artificial game mechanics like taunt are old fashioned. Ask yourself this, you are in a fight against a heavly armored foe, a wizard throwing dangerous spells about, some dude in the back healing all of them, and perhaps some archer in the back. Would the slow moving, weak hitting, heavy armored guy be your primary target? I mean by him saying that he farts in your general direction really going to make him your priority? Would you really stand out in the open waiting for those ranged abilities to hit you?
What I think he's trying to say, is that the average AI of NPCs in MMORPGs is so... braindead... that it can be handled by a group of five persons of which the damage dealers share one role, DPS, with very little variation between them. The only challenge can be found in their high health total and/or high damage/healing output A more advanced AI would not be fooled by a group using the Tank'n'spank formula, and would swiftly send them back to Wipeville.
Hmm, while I might be able to see that, I think it would only require better tanking abilities. (maybe not "better" per se, but , "different", to compensate) I do feel that the majority of AI is braindead for MMOs, but I think better AI could also breed better use of classes too. I'm all for better AI, I just can't see how changing the AI would force a change in the need for classes.
I really can't think of a formula for a specific mob that would remove the class restriction. I think that would rely more on the type of combat rather than AI.
If an enemy NPC would focus on the player keeping the tank alive, or doing the most damage, or having the lowest armor or health, then I think that would make tanking impossible. And I don't think it's incorrect to say that an NPC doing that would have a more advanced AI than the usual which can be found in most MMORPGs.
Edit: arenasb basically said the same thing. Note: need to read more.
This pretty much. I didn't mean there would be an elimination of roles but that they would change from the static form of the trinity gameplay. Artificial game mechanics like taunt are old fashioned. Ask yourself this, you are in a fight against a heavly armored foe, a wizard throwing dangerous spells about, some dude in the back healing all of them, and perhaps some archer in the back. Would the slow moving, weak hitting, heavy armored guy be your primary target? I mean by him saying that he farts in your general direction really going to make him your priority? Would you really stand out in the open waiting for those ranged abilities to hit you?
I agree with you here. I just don't know how this would really be countered, I mean, a taunt can make sense, but not indefinitely. Keeping aggro is something I never really liked, but it makes sense in some situations.
Healers that gain threat by healing is a mechanic that isn't necessarily new, and extremely high DPS gaining aggro is also something that MMOs have had for years. I think if AI would ONLY rely on executing a single strategy, then yes, that would likely create a system that would force players to do things differently. It would likely create PvE that is much more like PvP.
Mobs would always focus the healer, leave the low damage tank until the end, but most systems use threat now. In that sense we see more of a trade off in the Taral V videos, where you have the basic tank that taunts, but also an off tank DPS character, a healer, and a backup healer, and the main focus was to juggle rather then just tank n spank or focus one and then the other.
You are right though, I do see what you mean with the AI now.
I am very happy about this personally. It just means that the situation I have encountered in many other games where my group has been unable to find a tank or healer to start an instance won't happen...
I also imagine it will lead to some very interesting advanced class specs and will probably allow people to switch between roles as situations dictate. I fail to see how that can be a bad thing.
In the E3 preview I was really scared to see a smuggler as healer, it didn't fit my personal ideal for that class, but now it all makes sense! While allowing players to focus on many diverse focus, the game becomes more... uh.. "organic"?
Still waiting to see the final product to make conclusions, but some of my fears are gone now!
The Star Wars universe doesn't have healers or tanks or DPSers. Trying to squeeze this crap into the game is lame and stupid.
There was no one in any of the movies, books, or cartoons whose sole job was to stand around waving his hands to keep someone's health bar from getting to zero. Han Solo never hid behind a rock to heal Luke. Ditch in-combat healing completely.
There has been no one in any of the movies, books, or cartoons whose sole job was to call his enemy names while getting whacked on over and over. Storm Troopers wear armor, but they don't stand there getting blasted over and over again. Ditch the idea of tanking.
In fact, the overwhelming majority of fights in the Star Wars Universe were decided by two hits or less. There were no "DPSers". It was kill or be killed. A very few fights lasted up to ten minutes but the majority were decided by one shot in a split second. It doesn't take more than one decently placed light saber or blaster hit to kill any humanoid.
I just don't understand why anyone would pay to play this game. The only relation it has to the original IP is the fashion. I want to live and breathe and fight in the Star Wars universe, not play dress up in a WoW clone.
The Star Wars universe doesn't have healers or tanks or DPSers. Trying to squeeze this crap into the game is lame and stupid.
There was no one in any of the movies, books, or cartoons whose sole job was to stand around waving his hands to keep someone's health bar from getting to zero. Han Solo never hid behind a rock to heal Luke. Ditch in-combat healing completely.
There has been no one in any of the movies, books, or cartoons whose sole job was to call his enemy names while getting whacked on over and over. Storm Troopers wear armor, but they don't stand there getting blasted over and over again. Ditch the idea of tanking.
In fact, the overwhelming majority of fights in the Star Wars Universe were decided by two hits or less. There were no "DPSers". It was kill or be killed. A very few fights lasted up to ten minutes but the majority were decided by one shot in a split second. It doesn't take more than one decently placed light saber or blaster hit to kill any humanoid.
I just don't understand why anyone would pay to play this game. The only relation it has to the original IP is the fashion. I want to live and breathe and fight in the Star Wars universe, not play dress up in a WoW clone.
You won't ever find a star wars game like that. The closest you'd likely get is Battlefront, and even then you had classes that would drop heals, and jedis, while able to kille you in a couple hits, still ended up dying by the hands of troopers all the time.
In the end this is a game, and one hit kills are not fun. If BioWare plans on making money on this game, they are going to need to appeal to a broader audience which mean people will actually be able to stay alive, focus on a specific gameplay type if they want to, and enjoy themselves rather then getting one shotted by blasters or cut in half every time they engage a jedi.
True, but here's a idea why cant star wars battle front be a template for what warzone pvp should be like? Instead of fighting over control of one big gun, why cant they.offer multiple.control points?
The concept of letting players fill a wider range of roles is a positive.. BUT... the simple fact that they stick to a system where players HAVE to fit pre-determined group roles is not good.
Let's move past the holy trinity concept. It provided a good starting point for game design a decade ago, but we need to start moving on to newer and better concepts. I don't want to hear anymore about group roles and archetypes....
I understand it can be annoyning if you're looking for a non-trinity MMO in the current day market but can we please stop acting like the trinity is some sort of horrible design choice?
Yes, there are way too many trinity MMOs. No, that doesn't make the trinity a bad system. It just makes you somebody who's had enough of the trinity and is now blaming the trinity because there's no alternatives around.
The holy trinity is a fine system that works. It wouldn't still be here if it wasn't.
The problem is that there's a shortage on alternate systems. Skill-based systems are often a nightmare to balance and can easily lead to everyone having the same build. Non-trinity class systems will also be harder to balance and it's much harder to give such a class a clear character without also giving them a role.
The problem is not that the trinity is a bad system.
We are the bunny. Resistance is futile. ''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\ ( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o) (")("),,(")("),(")(")
Comments
We'll see. But at least it would be better to wipe as a group and realize you guys aren't good enough then end up blaming the tank because he coudn't taunt fast enough to keep aggro or the healer couldn't spam his heals fast enough.
In my opinion what bioware is doing is a great idea. I plan on pick up a trooper healer.
Bioware may possibly have shot themselves in the foot by extending the number of roles in each class. If I'm a Sith Inquisitor, I now have the option to Melee DPS or Tank - Ranged DPS or heal - depending on which Adv Class I chose. Why bother to re-roll to Sith Warrior to tank as I can already do it. The point of 'different storyline for different classes' will probably no longer be a factor as players will either put on their 'tanking gear' or respec to the other role whenever they need to.
It would have been better to have a single class having a single role... this would ensure the games replayablity for Bioware.
Because even though the classes would have similar roles, they would probably perform the role in a different way adding flavor to the class and the role.
In Bioware we trust!
You have a point and this could actually hint on them having more confidence in retaining subs with the end game SWTOR has to offer ^_^
But if they are smart there will be a lot of difference in viability of overlapping roles between encounters: for instance It looks like there will be three kinds of tanking: ranged, evasion / force and melee / close range. I can very much imagine one of those being much better against boss A while another kind of tank is preferable against boss B. Same goes for healing types and ranged or melee dps.
It all depends on how encounters are implemented and how class balance turns out in pvp but my guess is they will want to avoid "one class for everything" characters for the reasons you gave
My brand new bloggity blog.
i will pick an evil sith,and then i will gather flowers and feed cute rabbits and i will help bears in the forest.
i think i wait and see what they can deliver.
Generation P
Exactly (well... not sure about the GW2 part but I am following it). How silly is the whole "Tank/Taunt" concept? I mean seriously... a grouo of 5 is going to stand around and beat on some gut in full plate armor with a shield and ignore his 2 buddies in robes healing him and/or the guy stabbing them from behind?
Or having the "Tank" pull the "boss" into a corner so he can only attack the one guy while his 5 buddies kill the boss from behind.
Is that really the best we can do over a decade later? Look at how far graphics have developed in the same timeframe...
It was a great concept many years ago, but instead of being just one way of playing... it became the default standard unpon which 99% of the later games have been built on. I want my RPG to mean playing the role of my Character.... not filling some pre-determined role in a group.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
I agree with what you are saying here, but I do think it could go either way, depending on how all they classes are designed. I'm not too excited about the idea of classes being able to fulfill every roll for many of the reasons you mentioned. I think the main problem I have with it is that it would net let your character feel as important or unique. However, if each class does indeed play a lot differently from the others, maybe that would give enough seperation and also reason to re-roll and play another class, even if your main character could already spec to fulfill the other roll. This will give players more freedom to choose a main class based off of their style of play or love for the story behind that class. They won't have to worry as much about their favorite class not being able to fulfill the roll they wanted in a group.
I'm not sure how this will pan out in the end. I guess we will just have to wait and see what happens when BIoware releases this beast.
I'm sorry, I was under the impression the fact that every class has a unique storyline with multiple branching choices within that line would be the replayability RATHER than allowing people to play their classes like THEY want.
You know that just bring up an interesting thought and something I never really paid attention to until i saw this video recently. But whenever there's a wipe, everyone always blames the healer or sometimes the tank; never the DPSers who are always just there, spamming their macros and nothing else. So yeah, it would be great to see a game do away with them and have everyone take the blame for a wipe, not just that healer or tank.
Having role's is a good thing. However the Holy Trinity is NOT the only way to break down roles..... that particular implimentation of roles is getting beyond tired by now.
agree 100%
One of the issues is that people are so conditioned to use the strict trinity role system that people can't conceive of another way. Take a clue from real life and try to impliment that into a game. Going along with the player roles is the fact that npc AI in almost all mmos are beyond stupid. We have over 20 years of playing and developing these games and nobody can or wants to improve that? Halo has better enemy AI than every mmo in existence. How are these two connected? Having better AI will eliminate the classic trinity setup thereby forcing players to change their habit. I just wish some developers would have some balls to change it up.
Unfortunately this Warcraft example is totally a wrong example as any of the tank classes in Warcraft can tank anything when geared & talented in any enviroment, be it a raid or a small instance.
I don't see how better AI will change the need or want, for class roles. When you are in any squad based game that revolves around specific classes, it doesn't matter what the AI is like. In FPS games this is different because most FPS games.. well...
1) Require some kind of rudimentary skill that is somewhat a handicap that most MMOs don't use as they have auto attack. (even GW2 only uses a medium in that some attacks are positional, but many appear to still use the same targeting, as does DCUO, TERA is a little different, but that will not be spoken about here)
2) Rarely have the need for healing as almost all FPS games are arena based, and usually have time limits imposed.
In the end, roles are a good thing, and removing them won't make combat any better necessarily. I'm one for faster paced, skill based combat, and I like playing hybrid roles because - to me - being able to do a little of everything is more important then focusing on any one thing. Many times people CHOOSE to force themselves into the farthest role they can go.
For instance, DCUO people always had a choice of DPS or a secondary role of control, healing, or tanking. Everyone chose either one or the other and spec'd fully into it, but skillfully I usually played a DPS character that had enough heals for secondary support which kept both me and others alive while dealing more damage than healers ever could. Often times that would be enough to support those that needed it but not enough to be dedicated to doing ONLY DPS, or ONLY healing.
What I'm trying ot say by this, is, sure a game like TOR will have defined roles, but that doesn't mean people HAVE to use these defined roles, its that people will CHOOSE to use these defined roles. AI won't change this.
What I think he's trying to say, is that the average AI of NPCs in MMORPGs is so... braindead... that it can be handled by a group of five persons of which the damage dealers share one role, DPS, with very little variation between them. The only challenge can be found in their high health total and/or high damage/healing output A more advanced AI would not be fooled by a group using the Tank'n'spank formula, and would swiftly send them back to Wipeville.
Hmm, while I might be able to see that, I think it would only require better tanking abilities. (maybe not "better" per se, but , "different", to compensate) I do feel that the majority of AI is braindead for MMOs, but I think better AI could also breed better use of classes too. I'm all for better AI, I just can't see how changing the AI would force a change in the need for classes.
I really can't think of a formula for a specific mob that would remove the class restriction. I think that would rely more on the type of combat rather than AI.
This pretty much. I didn't mean there would be an elimination of roles but that they would change from the static form of the trinity gameplay. Artificial game mechanics like taunt are old fashioned. Ask yourself this, you are in a fight against a heavly armored foe, a wizard throwing dangerous spells about, some dude in the back healing all of them, and perhaps some archer in the back. Would the slow moving, weak hitting, heavy armored guy be your primary target? I mean by him saying that he farts in your general direction really going to make him your priority? Would you really stand out in the open waiting for those ranged abilities to hit you?
If an enemy NPC would focus on the player keeping the tank alive, or doing the most damage, or having the lowest armor or health, then I think that would make tanking impossible. And I don't think it's incorrect to say that an NPC doing that would have a more advanced AI than the usual which can be found in most MMORPGs.
Edit: arenasb basically said the same thing. Note: need to read more.
I agree with you here. I just don't know how this would really be countered, I mean, a taunt can make sense, but not indefinitely. Keeping aggro is something I never really liked, but it makes sense in some situations.
Healers that gain threat by healing is a mechanic that isn't necessarily new, and extremely high DPS gaining aggro is also something that MMOs have had for years. I think if AI would ONLY rely on executing a single strategy, then yes, that would likely create a system that would force players to do things differently. It would likely create PvE that is much more like PvP.
Mobs would always focus the healer, leave the low damage tank until the end, but most systems use threat now. In that sense we see more of a trade off in the Taral V videos, where you have the basic tank that taunts, but also an off tank DPS character, a healer, and a backup healer, and the main focus was to juggle rather then just tank n spank or focus one and then the other.
You are right though, I do see what you mean with the AI now.
I am very happy about this personally. It just means that the situation I have encountered in many other games where my group has been unable to find a tank or healer to start an instance won't happen...
I also imagine it will lead to some very interesting advanced class specs and will probably allow people to switch between roles as situations dictate. I fail to see how that can be a bad thing.
In the E3 preview I was really scared to see a smuggler as healer, it didn't fit my personal ideal for that class, but now it all makes sense! While allowing players to focus on many diverse focus, the game becomes more... uh.. "organic"?
Still waiting to see the final product to make conclusions, but some of my fears are gone now!
The Star Wars universe doesn't have healers or tanks or DPSers. Trying to squeeze this crap into the game is lame and stupid.
There was no one in any of the movies, books, or cartoons whose sole job was to stand around waving his hands to keep someone's health bar from getting to zero. Han Solo never hid behind a rock to heal Luke. Ditch in-combat healing completely.
There has been no one in any of the movies, books, or cartoons whose sole job was to call his enemy names while getting whacked on over and over. Storm Troopers wear armor, but they don't stand there getting blasted over and over again. Ditch the idea of tanking.
In fact, the overwhelming majority of fights in the Star Wars Universe were decided by two hits or less. There were no "DPSers". It was kill or be killed. A very few fights lasted up to ten minutes but the majority were decided by one shot in a split second. It doesn't take more than one decently placed light saber or blaster hit to kill any humanoid.
I just don't understand why anyone would pay to play this game. The only relation it has to the original IP is the fashion. I want to live and breathe and fight in the Star Wars universe, not play dress up in a WoW clone.
You won't ever find a star wars game like that. The closest you'd likely get is Battlefront, and even then you had classes that would drop heals, and jedis, while able to kille you in a couple hits, still ended up dying by the hands of troopers all the time.
In the end this is a game, and one hit kills are not fun. If BioWare plans on making money on this game, they are going to need to appeal to a broader audience which mean people will actually be able to stay alive, focus on a specific gameplay type if they want to, and enjoy themselves rather then getting one shotted by blasters or cut in half every time they engage a jedi.
I understand it can be annoyning if you're looking for a non-trinity MMO in the current day market but can we please stop acting like the trinity is some sort of horrible design choice?
Yes, there are way too many trinity MMOs. No, that doesn't make the trinity a bad system. It just makes you somebody who's had enough of the trinity and is now blaming the trinity because there's no alternatives around.
The holy trinity is a fine system that works. It wouldn't still be here if it wasn't.
The problem is that there's a shortage on alternate systems. Skill-based systems are often a nightmare to balance and can easily lead to everyone having the same build. Non-trinity class systems will also be harder to balance and it's much harder to give such a class a clear character without also giving them a role.
The problem is not that the trinity is a bad system.
We are the bunny.
Resistance is futile.
''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\
( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o)
(")("),,(")("),(")(")