@Sapiverenus
Thats fine if its just not your preference- but when you are explaining that you don't like it by providing reasons that I have countered and broke down in-depth for you, then there is no reason to continue to hold that opinion, unless its more of an abstract subjective reason.
Your main gripe was that it reduced the weapon variation, and I have beat that dead horse many times now as to how that wouldn't be the case, and how any lack of fun game states resulting from that would be far outweighed by the many more fun game states that would be creating through having a great overall combat design- without having to limit your game design by trying to achieve an arbitrary amount something like "weapon jobs" within your game.
I also addressed the ability to maintain rpg elements and have them coexist alongside this kind of combat system, through giving examples of strategic benefit to class choice, other rpg elements that could coexist, and an example of a game community that shows that there is value to this type of gameplay.
@Sapiverenus I think the idea is great, but actually making it work would be hard. Having a stamina bar for sprinting would be easy enough. But once you start adding in calculations for character stamina/str/weight/class ect you add in more things the server needs to process. Even if you assume that wouldn't be an issue you'll have problems with balancing all the character classes with this system, fighters, mages, rogues, priests, ect... Then problems with people manipulating it for EXP gain. With how much Intrepid is already biting off I don't think a system like this would add much value to the game, I'd rather see the effort put else where.
But I do agree a system that took in character weight, carry weight, str/stam, ect. Applied that to how fast that character could swing a sword, and how much energy it took from them would be extremely fun and lead to so many different types of physical combat builds. Imagine if you applied the character weight/weight/str/stam to there swimming or climbing abilities. Anyone ever see anyone swim in full plate? or even chain mail? New World accidentally got that right lol.
It's something I've thought about for a while. I think it just requires an open-mind to balance well. I'm not sure why it's taken 6 years for the current iteration of the game though.
I would loathe a game where my character is less capable than my real life capabilities. My Valheim character can't run for 30 seconds, it is annoying, tedious, not fun, it has never been fun, but the rest of the game was fun.
Having a character more limited than a person would not be great I agree, but @Volgaris is right that sprinting with 150 kg is beyond what anyone here can do lol.
Adding real mechanics but making the character more capable is not contradictory. You're complaining about the stamina bar but I am betting it improved your immersion and engagement whether you know it or not.
Stop telling me about your dream for a 3D fighter.
Yet here you are telling us yours?
Do you think keeping the RPG part of MMORPG shallow and rehearsed makes it a better RPG?
I'm not asking for a different game I'm asking for more of what the genre is.
Combat is the single most disruptive part of an RPG and not having the RPG define the combat is just backwards.
@Sapiverenus
Thats fine if its just not your preference- but when you are explaining that you don't like it by providing reasons that I have countered and broke down in-depth for you, then there is no reason to continue to hold that opinion, unless its more of an abstract subjective reason.
Your main gripe was that it reduced the weapon variation, and I have beat that dead horse many times now as to how that wouldn't be the case, and how any lack of fun game states resulting from that would be far outweighed by the many more fun game states that would be creating through having a great overall combat design- without having to limit your game design by trying to achieve an arbitrary amount something like "weapon jobs" within your game.
I also addressed the ability to maintain rpg elements and have them coexist alongside this kind of combat system, through giving examples of strategic benefit to class choice, other rpg elements that could coexist, and an example of a game community that shows that there is value to this type of gameplay.
There is no argument. You are just trying to convince others to give you what you want. Fuck off.
You "beat the dead horse" about how abstractly subjectively fun your version of the game would be? Stop fucking characterizing this as some logical argument then saying you made it clear 'with facts and logic' how much more fun your game fantasy would be.
You are obnoxious.
If you think RPGs are arbitrary and not fun, type your manifesto in a game forum that more closely resembles your game fantasy.
"Do you think keeping the RPG part of MMORPG shallow and rehearsed makes it a better RPG?
I'm not asking for a different game I'm asking for more of what the genre is.
Combat is the single most disruptive part of an RPG and not having the RPG define the combat is just backwards.
So yeah I'm saying my ideas are better."
At this point you are just delusional or are too prideful to accept that you were wrong. I adressed these points, and you have 0 ability to out argue me on this topic, because I am right and you are not. Again, if its a matter of preference, that is one thing, but when we are looking objectively at the reasoning provided, then it has been explained to you how there is no "watering down" of the rpg elements, they are still relevant and impactful to every aspect of gameplay including the combat, under my framework. You either don't have the mental capacity to grasp that, or are too prideful to admit that you don't like the idea simply because you are "in your feelings" too much- which again, there is nothing wrong with, but when you try to come from the stance that it objectively would not work, then its time to sit down and face reality that you learned something new.
"Do you think keeping the RPG part of MMORPG shallow and rehearsed makes it a better RPG?
I'm not asking for a different game I'm asking for more of what the genre is.
Combat is the single most disruptive part of an RPG and not having the RPG define the combat is just backwards.
So yeah I'm saying my ideas are better."
At this point you are just delusional or are too prideful to accept that you were wrong. I adressed these points, and you have 0 ability to out argue me on this topic, because I am right and you are not. Again, if its a matter of preference, that is one thing, but when we are looking objectively at the reasoning provided, then it has been explained to you how there is no "watering down" of the rpg elements, they are still relevant and impactful to every aspect of gameplay including the combat, under my framework. You either don't have the mental capacity to grasp that, or are too prideful to admit that you don't like the idea simply because you are "in your feelings" too much- which again, there is nothing wrong with, but when you try to come from the stance that it objectively would not work, then its time to sit down and face reality that you learned something new.
It is my preference- but that has no bearing on its legitimacy.
1. You came arrogantly acting like it wouldn't work- that is not a matter of "preference"- as I showed you how it would work and you eventually conceded
2. You came in telling me why my preference is "bad" only supported by your "preference"
3. You then do the very thing you accuse me of doing as you post threads based on your very own "preference"- projecting much?
4. Regardless of all of those more "personal" issues that are less relevant to the topic- the very criteria you used to support your own "preferences" (varying and consequential game states) is the benchmark I used to an objective comparison between our subjective ideas of fun. So even through the lens of subjectivity I proved to you how my subjective idea of fun is better than yours, by using your own standard of what makes your ideas fun.
Again, its time to lay down your pride on this one, its a losing battle for you.
It is my preference- but that has no bearing on its legitimacy.
1. You came arrogantly acting like it wouldn't work- that is not a matter of "preference"- as I showed you how it would work and you eventually conceded
2. You came in telling me why my preference is "bad" only supported by your "preference"
3. You then do the very thing you accuse me of doing as you post threads based on your very own "preference"- projecting much?
4. Regardless of all of those more "personal" issues that are less relevant to the topic- the very criteria you used to support your own "preferences" (varying and consequential game states) is the benchmark I used to an objective comparison between our subjective ideas of fun. So even through the lens of subjectivity I proved to you how my subjective idea of fun is better than your by using your own standard of what makes your ideas fun.
Again, its time to lay down your pride on this one, its a losing battle for you.
it doesn't work as an rpg. my preference is an rpg. you are the one that brought up game states. this game is not a 3d fighter it is an rpg
@Sapiverenus
I turned your own idea of fun around on you after you brought up game states as a way of comparing your idea of exhaustion to my 3d combat system. Don't try to give me busy work of going back and finding your statement and just accept it.
@Volgaris yeah but the game isn't exactly realistic, i can carry what is essentially 20-30 chopped trees on my back, so are we going for realism or practicality here?
@Voxtrium well yeah that's my point too. It just needs to be fun, its a game. It can relate to RL, it doesn't need to simulate it. I just don't see a stamina bar something too hindering. You say it's not fun, that's fair point of view. I think it can be fun, IF done right. I think linking too many things to a 'stamina' style bar, will make the game too survival genre. I'm not convinced adding survival aspects to this game will make it a better MMORPG, which is what I want.
"it doesn't work as an rpg. my preference is an rpg."
Oh how the "mighty" have fallen. As I provide you reason after reason of how it can still be an rpg, you resort to repeating "no it can't" like an child throwing a tantrum waiting for suck.
This is how I know you have nothing left to go on. Its quite satisfying, considering how mad you got at others earlier when they had the same dismissive approach to the points you were trying to make. It proves you have no ammo left on the matter- it shows weakness in your argument.
@Sapiverenus
I turned your own idea of fun around on you after you brought up game states as a way of comparing your idea of exhaustion to my 3d combat system. Don't try to give me busy work of going back and finding your statement and just accept it.
I looked back and yes I brought up the term game states 1 page back; to encapsulate what you were saying which was about strategic depth and optionality for unique outcomes.
You seemed to think what you were saying would increase the 'number of unique game states' and brought up language you would want to use.
You never turned anything around and accused me of going in circles because you kept trying to explain to me what I understood you to be saying.
You think your logic is sound and I don't really care. I didn't start the conversation thinking it was an exercise in logic.
If everyone fits the role of 3D fighter then the uniqueness of the game decreases.
You are a politician and grand standing to shine your ego as much as possible.
When I tried connecting what you were saying to the melee demonstration, and what my input was and why it existed, you called it a logical error of mine .
No one cares about your rhetorical exercise.
"Kindness goes a long way.... °mutters* We`re all entitled to our opinion, no need for being rude.
OP should buy a bar of soap and wash his/her/their mouth " @Anagrov You think everyone has good intentions lol
@Ace1234
Again this is not a political exercise. Pokemon and DPS/Tank/Healer is not deep RPG and is the most shallow token shit -- just like a political fucking nod and smile.
I know you honestly don't give a shit about an RPG being made. I'd say half of people know you don't give a shit about an RPG being made in fact. But you try to waste my time and energy anyway.
MMOs as they're made are not good RPGs.
To be clear:
You are unwilling to compromise on your vision of a 3D fighter and don't want to think of how an MMO can lean harder into the RPG side of things.
If you had to work with others it would be those that submit to your or have the same goal and preferences because you are unwilling to compromise on what you want.
Except that you are going in circles. Round and round about how your argument is about how the weapons arent varied enough which is why you prefer a different system- so when I address that, you say its just "preference" and then you use supporting points that you preference is based on the ability for the weapons to be more varied in a different system. In circles you chasing your tail around as I re-address your points for the 1000th time.
If its just preference then just say that you like the "feel" better in a subjective way- stop using the same supporting reasons that I already addressed as being false claims of my system needing more "variety"
"If everyone fits the role of 3D fighter then the uniqueness of the game decreases."
Why must you keep bringing up the dead horse? I explained several times, as you admitted yourself how 3d combat offers a larger degree of unique game states, that in and of itself is the most amount of "uniqueness" you can have in the combat system. In addition to unique outcomes you have player individuaility based on how you categorize and break down the components within that system to create your "weapon jobs" that I explained could be all but infinitely varied and unique. You are just being too stubborn and prideful to accept that.
"Again this is not a political exercise. Pokemon and DPS/Tank/Healer is not deep RPG and is the most shallow token shit -- just like a political fucking nod and smile."
False- you don't know enough on the topic, which is why your assumptions are leading you down the slippery slope of thinking I am trying to dampen the rpg elements in order to "get what I want" instead of an mmorpg.
Pokemon in fact has an enormous amount of competitive depth too it and leans into the traditional trinity rpg roles with the ability to blurr the lines between roles, just like Ashes. Again with makimg me beat a dead horse.
The problem here is not my lack of explanation of me forcing my will. It is you not being willing to undderstand and accept that you were wrong in saying my ideas wouldn't work or be as fun as what you offered. Which is why I brought up using your own point of fun being unique game state outcomes, to explain how my idea would perform that in a better way.
So you have no grounds or any argument or perspective to stand on at this point, that would lead to a justifiable disagreement with my claims, other than the fact that you just refuse to see things another way or that the only thing you have is your subjective feelings against my ideas.
"I know you honestly don't give a shit about an RPG being made. I'd say half of people know you don't give a shit about an RPG being made in fact. But you try to waste my time and energy anyway."
This viewpoint is a result of your slippery slope thinking from above, that RPG elements can't exist using my ideas, which is false.
You could always try and get this as a question to be asked on their official stream and see what Steven has to say about it. That should sort this out.
You mean, you wouldn't want to find out for certain whether the person who has the final say over whether they want this in the game likes your idea or not?
This thread is just another typical argument of people calling each other wrong, why not just ask someone on the team what they think? It would close the argument, that is my angle. Who knows, even though I don't like it Steven may love it and it gets put in and I'd regret suggesting you tell him about it.
Exactly. That's your angle; shut it down. I've mostly argued with one person who brought something from another thread over here.
We both know having more of a thought out and fleshed out idea is better received and that constructive discussion would start fleshing it out. This would increase the likelihood you don't get your way.
I can't force people to contribute thoughtful and open-minded replies that add to the topic lol. With time there might be some though.
Exhaustion is only an elaboration on Stamina. If there were more elaborations on other stats it would be a more fleshed out idea.
If anyone has any suggestions, shoot.
We both know having more of a thought out and fleshed out idea is better received and that constructive discussion would start fleshing it out.
I thought this had been fleshed out by now and had descended into the typical argumentative stage for the past couple of pages. Is there anything else you want to add to your idea? I did mention before I didn't like it and there's still a chance with more information (fleshing out some more) me and others could be convinced but instead you just said this:
I am under no obligation to try and make the game better lol
Their loss. That's the truth.
Multiple low effort flat responses are rude and unproductive @Scarbeus
Yeah and how the hell haven't I tried to change minds lol what kind of scripted response is this? Same low effort shit.
I don't have anything to suggest, maybe others will. But that isn't that the kind of response you should be giving anyone to get them on your side, or to anyone on the forum for that matter. Do you understand why getting a dev to hear your opinion was something I put forward? That's a suggestion right there, from a dev!
We both know having more of a thought out and fleshed out idea is better received and that constructive discussion would start fleshing it out.
I thought this had been fleshed out by now and had descended into the typical argumentative stage for the past couple of pages. Is there anything else you want to add to your idea? I did mention before I didn't like it and there's still a chance with more information (fleshing out some more) me and others could be convinced but instead you just said this:
I am under no obligation to try and make the game better lol
Their loss. That's the truth.
Multiple low effort flat responses are rude and unproductive @Scarbeus
Yeah and how the hell haven't I tried to change minds lol what kind of scripted response is this? Same low effort shit.
I don't have anything to suggest, maybe others will. But that isn't that the kind of response you should be giving anyone to get them on your side, or to anyone on the forum for that matter. Do you understand why getting a dev to hear your opinion was something I put forward? That's a suggestion right there, from a dev!
Yes it can be fleshed out: By anyone. I'm not under any obligation to make the game better and anyone can contribute their input for constructive discourse.
It didn't seem like anyone was willing to put in the minimum effort and expected me to provide some finished product for them; which you may be confirming.
It's unfortunate very few people have added to the thread but with rude responses you just turn people away. There have been threads that I didn't agree to but as they were maintained as discussions rather than turning into arguments as people weren't being rude I felt I could contribute something that made their idea more interesting to me. But something you should learn is to be civil and they will be more likely to put in the 'minimum effort' you are hoping for. Next time you make a thread if you keep it polite then I'll make some suggestions. But due to your attitude it's no surprise people have just gone elsewhere.
I'll take a stab at why people are reacting so negatively to this post. I'm going to try to break down some key points about the suggestion and why they might not be received so well.
Firstly: This post seems to combine two systems together when talking about "exhaustion".
A resource to be used during combat
A character progression system
Before we untangle these, lets learn of an old story from WoW. In summary, Blizzard added an xp penalty to players grinding for a long time, which people hated because they felt they were being throttled. Afterwards, Blizzard flipped the concept around and instead gave players rested xp bonus that wore off as you grinded. Now everyone was happy, even though the effect was exactly the same!
So what's the lesson here? People don't like being given something, and then have it taken away.
1) Exhaustion as a combat resource
Combat resources to limit action have existed in many forms. The most common forms are mana and cooldowns, but rapidly refilling stamina bar is also popular among action games. All of these exist to limit the player, and need to have a good reason to exist; Running out of mana/stamina/buttons to press is just not fun. These limiting systems need to be carefully designed so that the players can't infinitely spam their strongest move to win, but also not so limiting that players feel like the system is holding them back from having fun.
Games without system enforced resource costs can exist, such as fighting games, but so far nobody has pulled this off in an MMO.
So a limiting system needs to exist, but why not exhaustion?
Simply because as you've described it, exhaustion doesn't offer anything positive you can't design using the traditional cooldown/mana system, while also being more throttling.
Having weightless, infinity swinging melee combat is not more fun.
Give the player meaningful cooldowns that can be used to make plays and counterplays. The player now gets to choose how to spend their precious skills and mana, instead of being punished by being weaker for exhausting themselves because they used their abilities.
Every level needs to think about how quickly they can kill a target before engaging unless it's an easy encounter. Level 1 quickly learns the mechanic and starts getting in a rhythm and pace.
The player already has to do this: If they can't kill the mob quickly enough, the mob kills them! There is no reason for exhaustion to be at play here when the mob difficulty could instead be adjusted.
Running and 'effort' could require spamming a button press to mirror physical effort and focus. Simply holding the button could be moderate power/ effect, and just tapping the button could be a little spurt of an attack that amounts to a jab.
This could be tied to every spell, running, dodging, and physical attack. A game-wide power boost.
I don't believe you've thought of this long enough. Having to mash your keyboard to perform actions is extremely inaccurate and physically exhausting. I would be surprised if you yourself would enjoy playing a game that requires constant mashing after the first hour of play.
A counter example!
So let me design the inverse of exhaustion system, just like Blizzard did with rested system. Behold, the super bar:
As combat starts, and when players deal or take damage, or dodge moves, they gain super bar.
Players can spend this bar to empower any of their moves. An empowered basic swing can have bonus effects like an absorbing shield effect, additional damage, or debuff / cc their enemy.
Players also have access to big special moves they can't use without super bar. The biggest ones break your super bar and prevent you from using further super moves for some time.
Now all the power is (seemingly) in the players own hands. The player has an expected "normal" powerlevel where they don't have super bar built up. When the player has super bar, they feel EXTRA powerful, and even if they blow it all, they are back to their normal perceived powerlevel. The player is happy.
In an exhaustion system, the player has a normal power level, but if they use their moves too much, now they are suddenly knocked to a "weakened" state. This makes the player feel like he was gimped for playing the game. Not good.
2) Exhaustion as a progression system
The exhaustion system as something that contributes to XP has similar throttling effects. A player goes fighting mobs, which is fun! They get exhausted, and now they have to stop doing the fun activity and instead sit around until they are no longer exhausted.
Why? What is the benefit gained here? If a game has to block the player from the fun activity it has to be for a good reason. For example, Ashes doesn't have fast travel (in most cases). This means that players are prevented from instantly getting from fun activity to the next one because now they have to spend time riding around. The reason Ashes doesn't have fast travel even though it throttles the player is because fast travel also breaks many important systems such as the economy, open world pvp and node social systems. The throttle exists because the alternative would be worse.
I can't think of a similar reason for exhaustion.
Classes like Fighters at level 1 should fight unarmed or with brass knuckles for a longer amount of time just fine. A dagger/ knuckle duster combo could be the ideal start.
Not every class should start as effective at combat; not everyone wants to play for pure Combat like someone picking up Fighter. I am referring to all Mana classes. They can do a profession for some XP, shoot their spell at some training dummies, and assist zerging Fighters in a difficult encounter with a 1-off spell that maxes their Exhaustion instantly [because they're novice and magic is tough].
What is the reason for all these limits? Realism? That alone isn't any justification outside a simulator.
Professions can create a certain ratio of Exhaustion; hence Mages tend to be great at pure Mental professions but Fighters can Lumberjack, Mine, etc and carry resources much easier.
CARRY BURDEN. People with high Stamina and Strength can simply carry more for longer. Thus physical classes are better at Gathering.
Again, these are limits on the player with no discernible benefits.
A thought exercise
Here's an old game I played when I was a kid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sjq9mB64Kjk
Car goes fast. If you keep going fast without making mistakes, you go EVEN FASTER!
When you're zooming at turbo speeds, you also have a harder time not flying off the road. The player is in constant struggle trying to go as fast as possible, but also has to control their speed to make tight turns.
Now, an alternative: The player can easily accelerate to max speed. But if they keep going at max speed for too long, their engine overheats and they have to stop for a while to regain max speed.
For anyone that doesn't like the idea or don't know what to think about it;
if you played a 10 hour Breath of the Wild/Monster Hunter hybrid type game with the Exhaustion mechanics I suggest;
30 seconds - 5 minutes of action depending on weapon type with degrading power when mid to high exhaustion, and some lower defense and certain moves being locked out as your exhaustion goes up. . .
switching from a heavy hitting weapon to a lighter one to manage exhaustion and stay mobile because the enemy is lethal or there's multiple. . .
then say 1 - 5 minutes of downtime where you eat and read a Skill Tome because you're training up one of your moves (currently half trained and 80% understood); where understanding determines how much you can learn it and how much progress you make on it while resting and the next time you use it.
Would you think it's tedious and bad? Would a small addition or drawback make it more interesting? A certain dynamic?
Comments
Thats fine if its just not your preference- but when you are explaining that you don't like it by providing reasons that I have countered and broke down in-depth for you, then there is no reason to continue to hold that opinion, unless its more of an abstract subjective reason.
Your main gripe was that it reduced the weapon variation, and I have beat that dead horse many times now as to how that wouldn't be the case, and how any lack of fun game states resulting from that would be far outweighed by the many more fun game states that would be creating through having a great overall combat design- without having to limit your game design by trying to achieve an arbitrary amount something like "weapon jobs" within your game.
I also addressed the ability to maintain rpg elements and have them coexist alongside this kind of combat system, through giving examples of strategic benefit to class choice, other rpg elements that could coexist, and an example of a game community that shows that there is value to this type of gameplay.
It's something I've thought about for a while. I think it just requires an open-mind to balance well. I'm not sure why it's taken 6 years for the current iteration of the game though.
Having a character more limited than a person would not be great I agree, but @Volgaris is right that sprinting with 150 kg is beyond what anyone here can do lol.
Adding real mechanics but making the character more capable is not contradictory. You're complaining about the stamina bar but I am betting it improved your immersion and engagement whether you know it or not.
Do you think keeping the RPG part of MMORPG shallow and rehearsed makes it a better RPG?
I'm not asking for a different game I'm asking for more of what the genre is.
Combat is the single most disruptive part of an RPG and not having the RPG define the combat is just backwards.
So yeah I'm saying my ideas are better.
There is no argument. You are just trying to convince others to give you what you want. Fuck off.
You "beat the dead horse" about how abstractly subjectively fun your version of the game would be? Stop fucking characterizing this as some logical argument then saying you made it clear 'with facts and logic' how much more fun your game fantasy would be.
You are obnoxious.
If you think RPGs are arbitrary and not fun, type your manifesto in a game forum that more closely resembles your game fantasy.
"Do you think keeping the RPG part of MMORPG shallow and rehearsed makes it a better RPG?
I'm not asking for a different game I'm asking for more of what the genre is.
Combat is the single most disruptive part of an RPG and not having the RPG define the combat is just backwards.
So yeah I'm saying my ideas are better."
At this point you are just delusional or are too prideful to accept that you were wrong. I adressed these points, and you have 0 ability to out argue me on this topic, because I am right and you are not. Again, if its a matter of preference, that is one thing, but when we are looking objectively at the reasoning provided, then it has been explained to you how there is no "watering down" of the rpg elements, they are still relevant and impactful to every aspect of gameplay including the combat, under my framework. You either don't have the mental capacity to grasp that, or are too prideful to admit that you don't like the idea simply because you are "in your feelings" too much- which again, there is nothing wrong with, but when you try to come from the stance that it objectively would not work, then its time to sit down and face reality that you learned something new.
troll. everything you say is your preference
1. You came arrogantly acting like it wouldn't work- that is not a matter of "preference"- as I showed you how it would work and you eventually conceded
2. You came in telling me why my preference is "bad" only supported by your "preference"
3. You then do the very thing you accuse me of doing as you post threads based on your very own "preference"- projecting much?
4. Regardless of all of those more "personal" issues that are less relevant to the topic- the very criteria you used to support your own "preferences" (varying and consequential game states) is the benchmark I used to an objective comparison between our subjective ideas of fun. So even through the lens of subjectivity I proved to you how my subjective idea of fun is better than yours, by using your own standard of what makes your ideas fun.
Again, its time to lay down your pride on this one, its a losing battle for you.
it doesn't work as an rpg. my preference is an rpg. you are the one that brought up game states. this game is not a 3d fighter it is an rpg
I turned your own idea of fun around on you after you brought up game states as a way of comparing your idea of exhaustion to my 3d combat system. Don't try to give me busy work of going back and finding your statement and just accept it.
@Voxtrium well yeah that's my point too. It just needs to be fun, its a game. It can relate to RL, it doesn't need to simulate it. I just don't see a stamina bar something too hindering. You say it's not fun, that's fair point of view. I think it can be fun, IF done right. I think linking too many things to a 'stamina' style bar, will make the game too survival genre. I'm not convinced adding survival aspects to this game will make it a better MMORPG, which is what I want.
OP should buy a bar of soap and wash his/her/their mouth
"it doesn't work as an rpg. my preference is an rpg."
Oh how the "mighty" have fallen. As I provide you reason after reason of how it can still be an rpg, you resort to repeating "no it can't" like an child throwing a tantrum waiting for suck.
This is how I know you have nothing left to go on. Its quite satisfying, considering how mad you got at others earlier when they had the same dismissive approach to the points you were trying to make. It proves you have no ammo left on the matter- it shows weakness in your argument.
I looked back and yes I brought up the term game states 1 page back; to encapsulate what you were saying which was about strategic depth and optionality for unique outcomes.
You seemed to think what you were saying would increase the 'number of unique game states' and brought up language you would want to use.
You never turned anything around and accused me of going in circles because you kept trying to explain to me what I understood you to be saying.
You think your logic is sound and I don't really care. I didn't start the conversation thinking it was an exercise in logic.
If everyone fits the role of 3D fighter then the uniqueness of the game decreases.
You are a politician and grand standing to shine your ego as much as possible.
When I tried connecting what you were saying to the melee demonstration, and what my input was and why it existed, you called it a logical error of mine .
No one cares about your rhetorical exercise.
"Kindness goes a long way.... °mutters* We`re all entitled to our opinion, no need for being rude.
OP should buy a bar of soap and wash his/her/their mouth "
@Anagrov You think everyone has good intentions lol
@Ace1234
Again this is not a political exercise. Pokemon and DPS/Tank/Healer is not deep RPG and is the most shallow token shit -- just like a political fucking nod and smile.
I know you honestly don't give a shit about an RPG being made. I'd say half of people know you don't give a shit about an RPG being made in fact. But you try to waste my time and energy anyway.
MMOs as they're made are not good RPGs.
To be clear:
You are unwilling to compromise on your vision of a 3D fighter and don't want to think of how an MMO can lean harder into the RPG side of things.
If you had to work with others it would be those that submit to your or have the same goal and preferences because you are unwilling to compromise on what you want.
Except that you are going in circles. Round and round about how your argument is about how the weapons arent varied enough which is why you prefer a different system- so when I address that, you say its just "preference" and then you use supporting points that you preference is based on the ability for the weapons to be more varied in a different system. In circles you chasing your tail around as I re-address your points for the 1000th time.
If its just preference then just say that you like the "feel" better in a subjective way- stop using the same supporting reasons that I already addressed as being false claims of my system needing more "variety"
"If everyone fits the role of 3D fighter then the uniqueness of the game decreases."
Why must you keep bringing up the dead horse? I explained several times, as you admitted yourself how 3d combat offers a larger degree of unique game states, that in and of itself is the most amount of "uniqueness" you can have in the combat system. In addition to unique outcomes you have player individuaility based on how you categorize and break down the components within that system to create your "weapon jobs" that I explained could be all but infinitely varied and unique. You are just being too stubborn and prideful to accept that.
"Again this is not a political exercise. Pokemon and DPS/Tank/Healer is not deep RPG and is the most shallow token shit -- just like a political fucking nod and smile."
False- you don't know enough on the topic, which is why your assumptions are leading you down the slippery slope of thinking I am trying to dampen the rpg elements in order to "get what I want" instead of an mmorpg.
Pokemon in fact has an enormous amount of competitive depth too it and leans into the traditional trinity rpg roles with the ability to blurr the lines between roles, just like Ashes. Again with makimg me beat a dead horse.
The problem here is not my lack of explanation of me forcing my will. It is you not being willing to undderstand and accept that you were wrong in saying my ideas wouldn't work or be as fun as what you offered. Which is why I brought up using your own point of fun being unique game state outcomes, to explain how my idea would perform that in a better way.
So you have no grounds or any argument or perspective to stand on at this point, that would lead to a justifiable disagreement with my claims, other than the fact that you just refuse to see things another way or that the only thing you have is your subjective feelings against my ideas.
"I know you honestly don't give a shit about an RPG being made. I'd say half of people know you don't give a shit about an RPG being made in fact. But you try to waste my time and energy anyway."
This viewpoint is a result of your slippery slope thinking from above, that RPG elements can't exist using my ideas, which is false.
You mean, you wouldn't want to find out for certain whether the person who has the final say over whether they want this in the game likes your idea or not?
We both know having more of a thought out and fleshed out idea is better received and that constructive discussion would start fleshing it out. This would increase the likelihood you don't get your way.
I can't force people to contribute thoughtful and open-minded replies that add to the topic lol. With time there might be some though.
Exhaustion is only an elaboration on Stamina. If there were more elaborations on other stats it would be a more fleshed out idea.
If anyone has any suggestions, shoot.
I don't have anything to suggest, maybe others will. But that isn't that the kind of response you should be giving anyone to get them on your side, or to anyone on the forum for that matter. Do you understand why getting a dev to hear your opinion was something I put forward? That's a suggestion right there, from a dev!
Yes it can be fleshed out: By anyone. I'm not under any obligation to make the game better and anyone can contribute their input for constructive discourse.
It didn't seem like anyone was willing to put in the minimum effort and expected me to provide some finished product for them; which you may be confirming.
strange stuff
Firstly: This post seems to combine two systems together when talking about "exhaustion".
Before we untangle these, lets learn of an old story from WoW. In summary, Blizzard added an xp penalty to players grinding for a long time, which people hated because they felt they were being throttled. Afterwards, Blizzard flipped the concept around and instead gave players rested xp bonus that wore off as you grinded. Now everyone was happy, even though the effect was exactly the same!
So what's the lesson here? People don't like being given something, and then have it taken away.
1) Exhaustion as a combat resource
Combat resources to limit action have existed in many forms. The most common forms are mana and cooldowns, but rapidly refilling stamina bar is also popular among action games. All of these exist to limit the player, and need to have a good reason to exist; Running out of mana/stamina/buttons to press is just not fun. These limiting systems need to be carefully designed so that the players can't infinitely spam their strongest move to win, but also not so limiting that players feel like the system is holding them back from having fun.
Games without system enforced resource costs can exist, such as fighting games, but so far nobody has pulled this off in an MMO.
So a limiting system needs to exist, but why not exhaustion?
Simply because as you've described it, exhaustion doesn't offer anything positive you can't design using the traditional cooldown/mana system, while also being more throttling.
Give the player meaningful cooldowns that can be used to make plays and counterplays. The player now gets to choose how to spend their precious skills and mana, instead of being punished by being weaker for exhausting themselves because they used their abilities.
The player already has to do this: If they can't kill the mob quickly enough, the mob kills them! There is no reason for exhaustion to be at play here when the mob difficulty could instead be adjusted.
I don't believe you've thought of this long enough. Having to mash your keyboard to perform actions is extremely inaccurate and physically exhausting. I would be surprised if you yourself would enjoy playing a game that requires constant mashing after the first hour of play.
A counter example!
So let me design the inverse of exhaustion system, just like Blizzard did with rested system. Behold, the super bar:
- As combat starts, and when players deal or take damage, or dodge moves, they gain super bar.
- Players can spend this bar to empower any of their moves. An empowered basic swing can have bonus effects like an absorbing shield effect, additional damage, or debuff / cc their enemy.
- Players also have access to big special moves they can't use without super bar. The biggest ones break your super bar and prevent you from using further super moves for some time.
Now all the power is (seemingly) in the players own hands. The player has an expected "normal" powerlevel where they don't have super bar built up. When the player has super bar, they feel EXTRA powerful, and even if they blow it all, they are back to their normal perceived powerlevel. The player is happy.In an exhaustion system, the player has a normal power level, but if they use their moves too much, now they are suddenly knocked to a "weakened" state. This makes the player feel like he was gimped for playing the game. Not good.
2) Exhaustion as a progression system
The exhaustion system as something that contributes to XP has similar throttling effects. A player goes fighting mobs, which is fun! They get exhausted, and now they have to stop doing the fun activity and instead sit around until they are no longer exhausted.
Why? What is the benefit gained here? If a game has to block the player from the fun activity it has to be for a good reason. For example, Ashes doesn't have fast travel (in most cases). This means that players are prevented from instantly getting from fun activity to the next one because now they have to spend time riding around. The reason Ashes doesn't have fast travel even though it throttles the player is because fast travel also breaks many important systems such as the economy, open world pvp and node social systems. The throttle exists because the alternative would be worse.
I can't think of a similar reason for exhaustion.
What is the reason for all these limits? Realism? That alone isn't any justification outside a simulator.
Again, these are limits on the player with no discernible benefits.
A thought exercise
Here's an old game I played when I was a kid:
Car goes fast. If you keep going fast without making mistakes, you go EVEN FASTER!
When you're zooming at turbo speeds, you also have a harder time not flying off the road. The player is in constant struggle trying to go as fast as possible, but also has to control their speed to make tight turns.
Now, an alternative: The player can easily accelerate to max speed. But if they keep going at max speed for too long, their engine overheats and they have to stop for a while to regain max speed.
Which game would be more fun in your opinion?
if you played a 10 hour Breath of the Wild/Monster Hunter hybrid type game with the Exhaustion mechanics I suggest;
30 seconds - 5 minutes of action depending on weapon type with degrading power when mid to high exhaustion, and some lower defense and certain moves being locked out as your exhaustion goes up. . .
switching from a heavy hitting weapon to a lighter one to manage exhaustion and stay mobile because the enemy is lethal or there's multiple. . .
then say 1 - 5 minutes of downtime where you eat and read a Skill Tome because you're training up one of your moves (currently half trained and 80% understood); where understanding determines how much you can learn it and how much progress you make on it while resting and the next time you use it.
Would you think it's tedious and bad? Would a small addition or drawback make it more interesting? A certain dynamic?