Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
A case for a deep high skill ceiling combat system.
How much thought are you guys putting into your core combat mechanics? When it comes to world mechanics, just based off of watching your kickstarter videos, i know you guys will do a great job there because you are attacking the problem with the right mindset, you guys are thinking critically about the problem, and are looking at it from a big picture stand point.
But I've seen little from you regarding your combat system.
I'd argue for you guys to make your combat system as deep as possible, with a very high skill ceiling, not dependent on lvl or gear, but entirely on the players personal skill that they have developed. I think the process of achieving mastery in a complex system is more valuable and meaningful than simply grinding to make a number on your character bigger. I understand the problem that comes when making a deep combat system, it comes in trying to also make a system that can appeal to the most amount of people, most people don't like hard things, its a fact of life. But i'd argue meaning and deep immersion comes from doing the hard things, not the easy things. I'd argue that risking having a smaller audience is worth it if that audience is far more dedicated and immersed into your world. Games with a deep combat system and a high skill ceiling like Dota are an example of this, i've met multiple people with upwards to 7k hours in games like Dota even though the game essentially consists of playing the same maps with the same characters. The reason why is due to how deep the system actually is. The people that play it, play it religiously, they get deeply immersed into the gameplay, because they are able to achieve a flow state.
I also want to reference this psychology wikipidea article to back up my argument.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(psychology)
The first sentence on that wikipidea page is: 'In positive psychology, flow, also known as the zone, is the mental state of operation in which a person performing an activity is fully immersed in a feeling of energized focus, full involvement, and enjoyment in the process of the activity. In essence, flow is characterized by complete absorption in what one does.'
With that said, i think this is the right direction we want to go in thinking about solving this problem. Because i would argue the above is exactly what we wish to achieve.
here's an image of a graph on that page. On the graph you see a correlation between challenge level and skill level, the higher the challenge and the higher skill one can achieve, the more flow and immersion one can have in an activity. I think psychology is important here, because i'd argue that good games, are good, because they take advantage of human psychology
But I've seen little from you regarding your combat system.
I'd argue for you guys to make your combat system as deep as possible, with a very high skill ceiling, not dependent on lvl or gear, but entirely on the players personal skill that they have developed. I think the process of achieving mastery in a complex system is more valuable and meaningful than simply grinding to make a number on your character bigger. I understand the problem that comes when making a deep combat system, it comes in trying to also make a system that can appeal to the most amount of people, most people don't like hard things, its a fact of life. But i'd argue meaning and deep immersion comes from doing the hard things, not the easy things. I'd argue that risking having a smaller audience is worth it if that audience is far more dedicated and immersed into your world. Games with a deep combat system and a high skill ceiling like Dota are an example of this, i've met multiple people with upwards to 7k hours in games like Dota even though the game essentially consists of playing the same maps with the same characters. The reason why is due to how deep the system actually is. The people that play it, play it religiously, they get deeply immersed into the gameplay, because they are able to achieve a flow state.
I also want to reference this psychology wikipidea article to back up my argument.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(psychology)
The first sentence on that wikipidea page is: 'In positive psychology, flow, also known as the zone, is the mental state of operation in which a person performing an activity is fully immersed in a feeling of energized focus, full involvement, and enjoyment in the process of the activity. In essence, flow is characterized by complete absorption in what one does.'
With that said, i think this is the right direction we want to go in thinking about solving this problem. Because i would argue the above is exactly what we wish to achieve.
here's an image of a graph on that page. On the graph you see a correlation between challenge level and skill level, the higher the challenge and the higher skill one can achieve, the more flow and immersion one can have in an activity. I think psychology is important here, because i'd argue that good games, are good, because they take advantage of human psychology
<br>I bring this up, because MMO's are known for having shallow combat systems. It plagues the genre so much, and i would argue it's one the reasons the genre is in it's current state of decay. There's only a few MMO's with somewhat high skill ceilings. Like Blade and Soul.
But even then bns is actually unbalanced in open world pvp, which is where it actually matters. Also, though it's skill ceiling is high by MMO standards, compared to other non-MMO games, there are plenty of games out there with far more depth and skill than bns.
So i would stress for the team to put as much thought and creativity into their combat mechanics, as they put into their clearly beautiful world mechanics.
Making good combat mechanics that have real depth and skill, is not easy. But it's absolutely integral, to making a world that feels truly alive, and that will continue to feel alive, even after 10,000 hours of playtime.
0
Comments
As for the 7,000+ hours argument, it's a sub based game, so one could get as much or as little play as they want, they're not paying by the hour. I do understand your point of countless hours. I play Dark Souls, have countless hours, but most of that is learning the combat system and adjusting to new enemies. I play mostly offline, but even in online mode I am not in competition with others in the world for resources, like in Ashes.
That said, there is a large number of forum members that want to focus on role-play and crafting. They too, will likely have to fight at some point and they should be able to without having spent hours just practicing combat.
I see your point, but there are other games that do deep difficult combat well and they do have devoted audiences. Ashes should be an MMO for everyone, not just those that really like skill based combat. Ashes will allow some tab-target and some live action options for your characters combat skills. For the challenge you desire, you might decide to stick with the non-tab-targeting combat skills.
That's true, making a deep high skill combat system could prove difficult with the pings normally experienced in MMO's. But difficult things, are the things worth doing. Eve online has come up with some creative solutions such as Time dilation.
I think where there's a will, there's a way.
'I see your point, but there are other games that do deep difficult combat well and they do have devoted audiences.'
There has never been an MMO that has truly done it well. And think that's part of the reason why the genre has been stagnating.
Regarding crafting, trading, and other non combat skills. I think we should strive to make all systems deep, and take skill. Crafting weapons in real life, is a very difficult skill. So why shouldn't crafting in MMO's take skill as well?
Here's an example of a deep crafting system.
https://youtu.be/kBGo-K2xIvs
If you want this world to truly feel alive for countless or even an infinite amount of playtime. then you must seek depth within all systems! The reason ashes of creation is even catching peoples interest, is because of the depth of it's world mechanics. It's the first MMO, to do anything on this scale. Again, it is depth that determines how great a game truly is.
We need as many subs as possible to prevent the unspeakable evil in this threads from occurring. The possibilities of running economic guilds and being artisans that are actually meaningful to the world's development have brought large crowds, likely as big as the PvP crowds, to Ashes.
Depth I totally agree with, required high skill level I am not on board with. Again, it took me 3.5 hours to finally beat the tutorial boss in Dark Souls III, I like challenge and don't mind failure if I can get better. I, however, would not be a fan of dying again and again trying to learn the system while incurring more and more xp debt. For those that, for many reasons, have trouble with that level of required skill this game will be no fun for them.
I think the balance can be depth of all the systems, from nodes to combat and crafting. My argument is only against requiring a high skill level for combat. I don't think it should be easy, but you probably shouldn't die a dozen times before completing the tutorial.
Think mobas. There are characters that vary in mechanical depth. In league, you have characters like yasuo and zedd who have kits that take a lot to master but you also have simple champions like garen and annie. The combat can still have a lot of depth without requiring every player have a lot of mechanical skill.
In ashes, it would be cool to be able to create a build that you are comfortable playing. I'm hoping this is the goal of their hybrid system. Allow players to make builds with different "skill levels."
However, what is meant by "skill"? E.g. I would not want skill to equate twitch based skill where fast reaction time and good aiming is all that counts. For me, a system akin to speed chess would be much better. I.e., player skill lies more in having the right build, and last but not least, using your skills at the right time based on the context and what your opponent is doing. Thinking fast and reaction time also plays into this equation, of course, but it is more based on knowledge, experience and tactics rather than reaction.
Also, both regarding skill and depth, imo it is important that it doesn't affect power too much, where skilled players totally destroy less skilled players without taking a scratch. It is interesting to note McStackersen's reference to Leage of Legends. Some champions require much more skill than others, without necessarily being more powerful. However, they might fit a players style better, and the player's reward lies in making cool plays and mastering something that is difficult. As long as it feels different, it doesn't have to be more powerful.
"Skill" in MMO combat should be knowing which mobs to kill first, which mobs to mez, which mobs to off tank, which mobs have AEs, which mobs run, which mobs heal themselves, etc.
"Deep" MMO combat should be knowing how to interact and/or combo with other classes.
If you want to dodge, duck, dip dive and dodge, go play one of the 1,000 twitch games out there...or dodgeball.
So that winning a battle is less about power and more about strategy.
Complexity like that is what is intriguing, it doesn't have to be an oversimplified basic combat system as long as the system itself has mechanics that help every class synergize with each other. This would create a lot of needed strategy, thus making it complex.
Folks who play skill based twitch games aren't concerned with character progression. They want their skill to be the determining factor (as it should be). In fact, they will be playing a new game in 2 years, so they don't care about character progression at all. That's fine. That's what those games are for.
Folks who play MMOs want their character's progression over years of play time (sometimes 5+ years) to be the determining factor, not how quickly they can point and click their mouse. That's fine. That's the point of those games...to build a character and be part of a gaming world.
Different games, different styles, different goals. If a "boring" MMO isn't for you, then don't play. There are countless twitch games out there that are excellent.
It looks like Pantheon is leaning towards super old school EQ1 style combat with auto attack. The fanbois over there obviously think that's a super idea, but as someone who has pledged $250 for a spot in Alpha, I shudder to think how poorly that game will be received. The EQ1/Pantheon fanbois are mis-remembering a lot about what made EQ1 great, but that isn't really a topic to go into here.
The somewhat out of place "click when the bar moves into the red area" mechanic Ashes stole from the first golf video games is clearly an attempt to inject some skill into combat. I don't think it's a great idea to promote immersion and then force players to focus on a little bar at the bottom of their screen for every attack, but I'm not a game designer.
To me, it would be much more immersive if players had to watch what was going on in the battle and react accordingly. For example, a Rogue staying behind a mob so he can back stab. A Tank using Scorpion's "Get over here" chain attack they stole from Mortal Kombat to control enemies. A Cleric laying down a healing idol in the center of the action to help his allies, and those allies trying to stay in range of that idol. A Ranger keeping his eye open for enemies standing in the fire field created by a Summoner so his explosive arrow can do extra damage.
You know, things like that. Skill based around team work and character development that doesn't require so much twitch.
In your example, a skillful Cleric will be able to contribute DPS and keep the party healed. An unskilled Cleric will probably be forced to focus on healing 100% of the time. A skillful Cleric could allow a group to kill ~10% faster, so skill can definitely play a fairly large role in group success.
I am not sure of any video games that have not "Stolen" based on similar relations. Video games have been in the home for almost 50 years, it's going to be hard to find games that are 100% original.
I like the combat mechanic of using a QTE. Since what we saw was pre-alpha footage, I am sure the bar won't last until release. But this has been discussed in many other threads.
Id hope that it was
skill>Level>Gear
I loved UO and it was not based on gear. Every game I have played after has been crap compared to it.
I also think that using the term stole is too much, in fact many games have similar if not identical abilities and they aren't stolen in particilar.
In regards to the bar I really hope they can do something about it because the idea was very attractive in my opinion, if only the entire focus wasn't on the bar
The idea of the bar can be maintained, yet replaced with a visual cue that more seamlessly fits in the overall action. For example, the bar for the normal attack could be replaced by clicking during the correct part of the swing animation...maybe your character pauses at the top of his back swing.
I'm obviously not creative enough to come up with good game mechanic ideas, but the folks who are making this game probably are. They should be able to come up with something less immersion-breaking than staring at bar "influenced by" a golfing video game from the 90s.
"They have to get it right" is a given. Nobody is debating that point.
There have been several examples of both types of skill given by several posters in this thread. They may not be good solutions since we aren't game designers, but they are certainly good enough to get the point across.
I play BDO and I absolutely hate the combat system. It's all memorized twitch responses and switching between characters is so hard for someone like me who only has a few hours to play a week it's not even worth it. The learning curve is way too steep. Yeah, it's more interesting than click a button - cast a spell. But more interesting and better are two different things.
In an MMO, the things that have made combat fun for me are
I remember older games where I dealt with, looking back, pretty shady and crappy combat mechanics. I can't imagine IS putting out anything equal or worse to that, so I will be fine (again, as long as it works).
I've read through everything you guys have written so far. At first I didn't really feel like taking the time to 'defend' my points. I'm not here to debate, especially about something that largely comes down to preference. I'm just here to state my preferences, and objective as possible statements about why I think a deep high skill system is necessary for a world to be truly alive.
My personal preference, is that if a game cannot get me into a deep flow state, then I simply cannot become deeply immersed into this game. And as I stated above and have given links to research that backs this up, not to mention from my own personal experience. A flow state is only achieved when a system is challenging, and you have achieved a minimum level of skill in this challenging system. It's a bit difficult to comprehend a flow state if you have never been in a deep flow state before. Most people have not, because most people do not attempt to achieve mastery within complex systems.
I play a lot of high skill ceiling games, and i get very-very good at them. To give some perspective, I think Dark souls and bloodborne are easy. I'm quite surprised someone here actually thought the game was too difficult. The thing is, the more skilled you become at games, the more it takes to get into that oh so lovely state of deep flow. Right now the only games that really interest me are Super Hexagon, Touhou, Blade Symphony, and Chess. There are a few more, but they haven't really been released yet, such as Exanima (Sui Generis) and this other game called Hatashiai.
Counter to what someone here said about players like me going from game to game, I absolutely disagree. I think we are the type of players that dedicate the most time and effort into a single game. Hence why we have thousands of hours into these games. Hence why Chess has literally been around for hundreds of years, and why people spend literally their entire lives studying the system. Go has been around even longer and is truly an even greater game than Chess, it's probably the deepest game humans have ever made. These games also don't require you to spend so much time just to get competent at the systems. Super Hexagon for example only requires around 20-30 hours to actually beat. Yet only around 3% of the millions of people who get the game actually beat it. It's not because most people don't have the time, it's because most people lack the perseverance, grit. Which is also probably why most people don't accomplish their dreams in this world. Because they lack the will power, perseverance, and grit to do so.
Anyway, sorry for the ramble, I'm not trying to debate the topic, just trying to clarify some things about myself and where i'm coming from.
The real reason why I thought it would be appropriate to respond. Was that I noticed there was some confusion regarding the term 'skill' and 'depth'. And I felt, seeing as I brought up the topic, that it was only fair that I at least clarify these terms if I wish for people to actually consider these ideas.
The first thing is that 'skill ceiling' and 'depth' are essentially the same thing. The deeper system, the more skill one can attain within said system. A game doesn't have to be complex, in order for it to have a high skill ceiling. In fact most of the great games, are actually very-very simple, such as Chess. And Go which is even simpler, and yet far more deeper than Chess.
Easy to learn, and yet extremely hard to master, if not impossible to master. Is the core of any great game.
There also seems to be some confusion in regards to 'twitch skill' and 'strategic skill'.
Most twitch skill games, actually don't have a high skill ceiling. Hence why it's easy to build a simple AI that can beat humans in those types of games, such as an aimbot. Making an AI that can beat a human in Chess, or Go, is far more difficult. Because those systems literally are more difficult to understand. Skill, is the equivalent of understanding, and the 'skill ceiling' or the 'depth' of a system. Is effectively a measurement of how difficult it is to understand those systems. Complex systems can be generated from very-very simple rules.. that's the beauty of complex systems. To be clear as well, understanding, doesn't have to be conscious understanding. In fact, many systems are so complex, you can't really consciously understand how you're doing everything that you're doing. An example that many of you may be familiar with, is riding a bike. In Go, top players, when asked why they made a certain move, can't tell you why. The only response they can really give you, is that it 'felt' right. It's beautiful, truly..
If you ever fought a person in a high skill ceiling game, it can feel like a dance.. I love it so very much.
Anyway I hope that clears up somethings..
Here's a really good video that goes into detail about this topic as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VxRxh8Ka5H8
Here's another good video about over complexity, which is a problem that many MMO's experience. Hence the cluttered UI and many different abilities. Yet their systems still remain shallow.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVL4st0blGU