you totally miss the point showed by the poll, and miss what i try to say (but ... not surprising from you)
You totally miss one thing : people want a good gameplay, not a specific design
preference is a thing and i never denied it. i said myself that the polls was 50 to 60% in favor of action... so where is the lie ?
but on the poll you point, only one out of 5 action enjoyers said "i WANT action" and this is the major thing : preference is not always what is mandatory.
i prefer an excellent game, without the gameplay i favor if the gameplay is well designed, well thought, and well developed.
Because, in the end, this is the only matter.
You speak about people playing old game, while i spoke about people playing modern games with old design choice, and this is where again, you try to change what i said... Because again, this is against your "action is future, and all mmorpg will be action" ... no, some mmorpg will be action, some other will be tab, other again will be hybrid.
And inside those 3 kind of gameplay, there will be even more subdivision, because this is what the whole history of video game is... always new design, while old design can at any time continue to have new game...
Even the "dead" point&click manage to still live and is enjoyed... While people spoke about more and more realism in FPS, DOOM came, and like old one, no need to press R, totally arcade gameplay.
You just try to push your taste as "global taste" while it is yours, and the taste of other people.
And all your narrativ is focused on your own view of what the perfect game is...
But if we go with your "this is the way of future in MMORPG" ... Why remove healing from this progress ? healers are stupid dumb guy unable to improve their aim ? is it impossible to do a healing action gameplay that reward the people with the best aim ? ... You defend that action = better to show skill, but healers are forbidden of it so ?
in the end, you just defend your own hope for what the gameplay should be...
The game will be hybrid, both tab and action. and only few people, being those "only want action" that are a minority tries to change that...
If the skill needs to active when you are facing towards them that is a lot better then not needing to face or the game fully auto directing you to face the target. It becomes more of a horizontal facing thing than what soft lock would be in horizontal and vertical but balance would be a lot closer and fair.
Abilities can curve i honestly have no issue with that since its a mmorpg if they are within your aim and you hit them. This includes both tab, action / soft lock in how i view it. Though I've made a suggestion that based on distance the curve arc could be less magnetized allowing people to dodge if its a really far shot if they do it at the right time, or to ensure they are constantly moving to not be hit as much.
Reading it it sounds god though and of course would require "physical skill". The point of which isn't to make anything like a FPS but have more of an action flow to it.
If the skill needs to active when you are facing towards them that is a lot better then not needing to face or the game fully auto directing you to face the target. It becomes more of a horizontal facing thing than what soft lock would be in horizontal and vertical but balance would be a lot closer and fair.
I should've stated it more explicitly but the system would rotate you automatically, but it would do so in a way that any target that's moving at a high speed or is just way closer to you and moves around you would just outpace that autorotation.
This would apply to fast moving mobs too, so it would even influence the pve difficulty.
And as I see it, your camera could still be facing away from your target and your character could be moving backwards away from your target, but if the target is just running after you in a straight line - you'll be able to shoot out tab abilities at them. But if the target is moving in a zig zag pattern or is just doing a half-circle arc instead of a direct line towards you - you won't do shit.
If the skill needs to active when you are facing towards them that is a lot better then not needing to face or the game fully auto directing you to face the target. It becomes more of a horizontal facing thing than what soft lock would be in horizontal and vertical but balance would be a lot closer and fair.
I should've stated it more explicitly but the system would rotate you automatically, but it would do so in a way that any target that's moving at a high speed or is just way closer to you and moves around you would just outpace that autorotation.
This would apply to fast moving mobs too, so it would even influence the pve difficulty.
And as I see it, your camera could still be facing away from your target and your character could be moving backwards away from your target, but if the target is just running after you in a straight line - you'll be able to shoot out tab abilities at them. But if the target is moving in a zig zag pattern or is just doing a half-circle arc instead of a direct line towards you - you won't do shit.
Well either way its better than having a sphere of influence around you and if you have line of sight your character turns and attacks automatically. Though i expect most tab target games to work like that and honestly its fine if its in AoC. But if you are doing something that takes more effort you should be rewarded for it.
The balance just needs to be there so if it is like the foremost point their kite speeds are not insane. The higher their speeds, the strongest the traits of other classes need to be to catch them. Though I'm sure they will balance they game out well once it is in A2 phase and testing more things out.
All i can really do is guess or raise red flags until it is being played with atleast part of their kit.
@8:40 of the video, the BDO and New World mob kiting is a good example of what's wrong with Action Combat games.
Like I commented on the game using bad examples of pve does not really get a point across, he came up pretty short on that video.
1. BDO doesn't really have pve content so you can't compare it
2. In new world he should have did that in a dungeon atleast. New world is not that complex another bad example to use.
*edit Kiting issues is pretty easy to solve, if they wanted to make the game more difficult....
@Mag7spy would you consider it more skillful if tab abilities didn't curve and instead required 1-2° precision of where your character was facing, but the character would also very slowly turn towards the target if it was laterally moving? And projectile itself could hit anywhere within a 5° angle of its direction, but not outside of that.
So smth like this.
In order to even activate a tab skill your character gotta be facing your target directly. Then at the moment of use of the ability, there's a 5° angle within which the target could move and still get hit. But if the target moves outside of those 5° - they avoid the attack.
The speed of turning would have to depend on basic speed of movement across all archetypes and races. If a character moves at the speed of, say, 60° a second (at the longest possible range of ranged attacks and abilities), I'd say that character turn speed should be ~20° a second. In other words, 1/3 of the lateral movement speed.
This way the tab targeting still helps people aim at their targets, but the attacks themselves work way closer to action abilities than the usual tab ones (no hardcore 90° turns of flying projectiles). If the target is barely moving to the side, ranged abilities will still be tracking them fairly well, but if the target is at top speeds or is way closer to the attacker - the attacker would have to manually adjust their character's direction in order to even be able to use a tab ability.
This would also boost melee fighting, cause you can just dance around your stationary target and they'd have hard time hitting you, which would make them move more and with more thought. Obviously melee tab abilities (if there even are any) would have a bit wider activation angle, though that could be tested.
@Azherae@Noaani I'd be interested in hearing your opinions on a system like this too. I'm obviously super biased cause I'm used to this, so hearing opinions of less-action-combat-inclined people would be good.
I'm not a good person to ask if you're looking for 'less action combat inclined'.
I'm in Aerlana's camp, I don't care about any of this, I don't even 'believe in it'. It doesn't matter to me, which was the point I was making to Mag to begin with. I enjoy both combat styles if they are done correctly and push my limits or allow for proper expression.
Therefore I don't usually think about 'fixing' something that most games already do quite well, to 'improve' things for a few diehards. Particularly since in my personal experience the diehards are not great at games, they just 'choose games that are hard to be good at or introduce more randomness' so they can feel superior to others.
There's entire threads in Elite Dangerous from someone 'top in PvP' crying about how their opponents 'use weapons that don't take real skill' because they use one of the other options for targeting. That person, however, just doesn't want to 'waste' defensive equipment slots on things that counter those options. I mention this because 'gimballing' weapons is SIMILAR to what you mention.
tl;dr if the game suited it, it'd be fine. To me, everything about these games has to be designed on a very granular level. But I am a firm believer that a SINGLE average-strength ability out of HUNDREDS being ONE frame too fast can ruin a game.
[
In everquest you do not need to face your target, the game auto faces your target for you so that is incorrect. There is a big different between facing your target and the game doing it for you.
Tab is not like 4d chess tab is pretty simply and extend to just your understanding of the game. Action mmorpgs are having a understanding of the game and having the skill.
1. You can take all tab skills and make them action oriented
2. That means the entire depth will always be higher than tab for the additional layers that are added
3. More gameplay elements and challenges available
Decision making is not more important than tab nor more in depth than a action game, action games have infinite for difficulty and decision making that can be added. Which is easily done by having more challenges on screen and further increasing the mobility and reaction abilities and physical effect abilities. in a way tab just doesn't do.
If you played BDO on a higher level you would have realized there are action mmorpgs games where you need to make plenty of decisions and need to pick the best one. Regardless if you realize or accept other games it doesn't really matter because tab games can be made into action ones and that layer of depth is added.
The way you incorrectly look at action elements is kind of naïve years + quantity of mmorpgs has given tab plenty of time and grow from the click to move era. The same thing is going to be applied to action combat in mmorpgs as it is still young, but every new game is pushing it further immensely (minus new world). There is a reason why people prefer action combat and its only a matter of time before that becomes the standard. More than likely will be when riots mmorpg comes out 4-7 years down the line.
EQ *sometimes* auto faces you. Not every time. Needing to know when this will and will not happen is a part of that knowledge I've been talking about, and it happens less and less as you get more in to the game.
However, some action games also have aim assist. You taking one concept from one tab target game that you have a poor understanding of and using it as an argument against tab target games in general is like me saying aiming in Action MMO's isnt all that hard because Tera.
It's a similar thing to the above where you were trying to argue a possibility of action games without also arguing the possibility of tab games. Here though, you are arguing one aspect of one tab game, without arguing similar aspects of one action game.
I played BDO at a fairly high end. The game had more decision making than any other action MMO I have played - but it is still only a fraction of top end tab target combat.
Something you are probably not aware of - and I have no intention of telling you the mechanic that makes it the case - but specific position is more important in tab target PvP than in action combat. The equivalent of a step in one direction can make a massive difference in tab - far, far more than in any action game I have ever played.
To your comment of tab simply being an understanding of the game but action being an understanding of the game and having the skill to play it, I totally agree. This is what I have been saying.
The difference between what you and I are now saying is that I am aware that a tab target game is like an F1 car, where the player only needs to understand how it works. Action, on the other hand, is like a soap box racer - the user needs to understand how it works, and have the skill to drive it, but understanding how a soap box racer works isnt really all that hard.
I've yet to see an action MMORPG that has had elements in its combat that I needed to analyze after more than a few days play, specifically where something disnt behave as I expected it to. There are aspects of tab target MMO's where I have not fully understood what was going on after a decade of using a combat tracker.
This is - again- by design. Action combat games want players to focus on the action, and so design a combat system where that is what players need to do. Tab target games dont need players to focus on the action, and so instead opt to make a deep and complex combat system (again, other than WoW).
This is literally the point of each combat system.
@Mag7spy would you consider it more skillful if tab abilities didn't curve and instead required 1-2° precision of where your character was facing, but the character would also very slowly turn towards the target if it was laterally moving? And projectile itself could hit anywhere within a 5° angle of its direction, but not outside of that.
So smth like this.
In order to even activate a tab skill your character gotta be facing your target directly. Then at the moment of use of the ability, there's a 5° angle within which the target could move and still get hit. But if the target moves outside of those 5° - they avoid the attack.
The speed of turning would have to depend on basic speed of movement across all archetypes and races. If a character moves at the speed of, say, 60° a second (at the longest possible range of ranged attacks and abilities), I'd say that character turn speed should be ~20° a second. In other words, 1/3 of the lateral movement speed.
This way the tab targeting still helps people aim at their targets, but the attacks themselves work way closer to action abilities than the usual tab ones (no hardcore 90° turns of flying projectiles). If the target is barely moving to the side, ranged abilities will still be tracking them fairly well, but if the target is at top speeds or is way closer to the attacker - the attacker would have to manually adjust their character's direction in order to even be able to use a tab ability.
This would also boost melee fighting, cause you can just dance around your stationary target and they'd have hard time hitting you, which would make them move more and with more thought. Obviously melee tab abilities (if there even are any) would have a bit wider activation angle, though that could be tested.
@Azherae@Noaani I'd be interested in hearing your opinions on a system like this too. I'm obviously super biased cause I'm used to this, so hearing opinions of less-action-combat-inclined people would be good.
This seems like a reasonable game design. The only part I would personally consider changing is the need to be facing your target directly - give me the ability to assume where my target will be when my attack reaches them (or at least the ability to force the attack to happen even if not directly facing my target).
One of the things it opens up is a desire for players using tab target projectile skills to want a boost in speed to those projectiles. If it reaches the target sooner, players have less opportunity to get out of that arc. Having an option to increase the tracking angle could also exist, but I like the idea of simply increasing the projectile speed more.
As many will know, I'm all for options for players having options to make a skill either more user friendly, or more powerful. It let's players tailor their build to their own personal strengths. If you dont feel you need faster projectiles, you can always just make them do more damage.
This seems like a reasonable game design. The only part I would personally consider changing is the need to be facing your target directly - give me the ability to assume where my target will be when my attack reaches them (or at least the ability to force the attack to happen even if not directly facing my target).
One of the things it opens up is a desire for players using tab target projectile skills to want a boost in speed to those projectiles. If it reaches the target sooner, players have less opportunity to get out of that arc. Having an option to increase the tracking angle could also exist, but I like the idea of simply increasing the projectile speed more.
As many will know, I'm all for options for players having options to make a skill either more user friendly, or more powerful. It let's players tailor their build to their own personal strengths. If you dont feel you need faster projectiles, you can always just make them do more damage.
Yeah, I forgot to mention that projectiles would probably have to be on the speedier side in this kind of system.
And as for forcing the attack, I feel like that side would just be covered by the action side of combat. I tried to add mechanical skill to the tab combat, while still keeping it purely tab, all while trying to keep the dodge mechanics intact. Projectile's angle could be widened a bit to let it hit moving targets a bit more often, though that's obviously a testable thing.
This seems like a reasonable game design. The only part I would personally consider changing is the need to be facing your target directly - give me the ability to assume where my target will be when my attack reaches them (or at least the ability to force the attack to happen even if not directly facing my target).
One of the things it opens up is a desire for players using tab target projectile skills to want a boost in speed to those projectiles. If it reaches the target sooner, players have less opportunity to get out of that arc. Having an option to increase the tracking angle could also exist, but I like the idea of simply increasing the projectile speed more.
As many will know, I'm all for options for players having options to make a skill either more user friendly, or more powerful. It let's players tailor their build to their own personal strengths. If you dont feel you need faster projectiles, you can always just make them do more damage.
Yeah, I forgot to mention that projectiles would probably have to be on the speedier side in this kind of system.
And as for forcing the attack, I feel like that side would just be covered by the action side of combat. I tried to add mechanical skill to the tab combat, while still keeping it purely tab, all while trying to keep the dodge mechanics intact. Projectile's angle could be widened a bit to let it hit moving targets a bit more often, though that's obviously a testable thing.
If you watch this briefly, look for the SMALLER circle target reticles.
Then, notice that sometimes the player does not fire despite those reticles being on target. Not often, but it happens. The reason for this is that the projectile speed of the bullets combined with THEIR ship's trajectory means that many of the bullets would still miss, even though their weapon is 'gimballed'.
"Turret" weapons work the same relative to smaller enemy movements, particularly on faster ships, but can autofire in all directions, which matches the concept of 'you don't have to be facing the target at all, but their dodging still works'.
The 'Long Range' mod would improve projectile speed, making it more likely that the guns will hit the target, but the 'arc of the gimballing' or 'speed of turret target resolution' might still not be enough, depending on the weapon (bigger single shot cannons sometimes have this issue, similar to a 'more powerful skill').
Then, notice that sometimes the player does not fire despite those reticles being on target. Not often, but it happens. The reason for this is that the projectile speed of the bullets combined with THEIR ship's trajectory means that many of the bullets would still miss, even though their weapon is 'gimballed'.
Do they not shoot because the ammo is limited? Or is there some other effect that makes not shooting in those situations more beneficial in the long run?
Cause I'm trying to apply this info in the context of leading shots in smth like Ashes and I find it hard to see how it applies.
Then, notice that sometimes the player does not fire despite those reticles being on target. Not often, but it happens. The reason for this is that the projectile speed of the bullets combined with THEIR ship's trajectory means that many of the bullets would still miss, even though their weapon is 'gimballed'.
Do they not shoot because the ammo is limited? Or is there some other effect that makes not shooting in those situations more beneficial in the long run?
Cause I'm trying to apply this info in the context of leading shots in smth like Ashes and I find it hard to see how it applies.
Limited ammo.
For a skill, in a Fantasy game, the Skill would still fire off with all the associated costs, but miss, or go on cooldown, yes.
Or in Ashes, even just 'Bow Durability depletion' might matter.
[
In everquest you do not need to face your target, the game auto faces your target for you so that is incorrect. There is a big different between facing your target and the game doing it for you.
Tab is not like 4d chess tab is pretty simply and extend to just your understanding of the game. Action mmorpgs are having a understanding of the game and having the skill.
1. You can take all tab skills and make them action oriented
2. That means the entire depth will always be higher than tab for the additional layers that are added
3. More gameplay elements and challenges available
Decision making is not more important than tab nor more in depth than a action game, action games have infinite for difficulty and decision making that can be added. Which is easily done by having more challenges on screen and further increasing the mobility and reaction abilities and physical effect abilities. in a way tab just doesn't do.
If you played BDO on a higher level you would have realized there are action mmorpgs games where you need to make plenty of decisions and need to pick the best one. Regardless if you realize or accept other games it doesn't really matter because tab games can be made into action ones and that layer of depth is added.
The way you incorrectly look at action elements is kind of naïve years + quantity of mmorpgs has given tab plenty of time and grow from the click to move era. The same thing is going to be applied to action combat in mmorpgs as it is still young, but every new game is pushing it further immensely (minus new world). There is a reason why people prefer action combat and its only a matter of time before that becomes the standard. More than likely will be when riots mmorpg comes out 4-7 years down the line.
EQ *sometimes* auto faces you. Not every time. Needing to know when this will and will not happen is a part of that knowledge I've been talking about, and it happens less and less as you get more in to the game.
However, some action games also have aim assist. You taking one concept from one tab target game that you have a poor understanding of and using it as an argument against tab target games in general is like me saying aiming in Action MMO's isnt all that hard because Tera.
It's a similar thing to the above where you were trying to argue a possibility of action games without also arguing the possibility of tab games. Here though, you are arguing one aspect of one tab game, without arguing similar aspects of one action game.
I played BDO at a fairly high end. The game had more decision making than any other action MMO I have played - but it is still only a fraction of top end tab target combat.
Something you are probably not aware of - and I have no intention of telling you the mechanic that makes it the case - but specific position is more important in tab target PvP than in action combat. The equivalent of a step in one direction can make a massive difference in tab - far, far more than in any action game I have ever played.
To your comment of tab simply being an understanding of the game but action being an understanding of the game and having the skill to play it, I totally agree. This is what I have been saying.
The difference between what you and I are now saying is that I am aware that a tab target game is like an F1 car, where the player only needs to understand how it works. Action, on the other hand, is like a soap box racer - the user needs to understand how it works, and have the skill to drive it, but understanding how a soap box racer works isnt really all that hard.
I've yet to see an action MMORPG that has had elements in its combat that I needed to analyze after more than a few days play, specifically where something disnt behave as I expected it to. There are aspects of tab target MMO's where I have not fully understood what was going on after a decade of using a combat tracker.
This is - again- by design. Action combat games want players to focus on the action, and so design a combat system where that is what players need to do. Tab target games dont need players to focus on the action, and so instead opt to make a deep and complex combat system (again, other than WoW).
This is literally the point of each combat system.
As i said action in mmorpg is young with plenty of room to grow as it has been doing quickly. Not seeing something doesn't change the fact of my point, if you turn like 75% of the elements in a tab game to action you have more depth and a much higher skill ceiling. Not really about if you have seen it or not, mechanically that is just how it would work.
When I see tab combat I don't view it as combat complexity, the combat is simple but the systems around that are more complex.
When I've been playing a tab game and I use my skill it works, there isn't much I have to think about in those terms with tracking, aiming, them dodging, my own movement, predicting their movement.
It is more so you use your skill it works, and you trying to predict and/or be ready for what they might do on their class. It has a missing element where there isn't as much as push and pull from an action feeling. You can't push yourself in battle and improve on the spot through your own actual actions, ON TOP of your class and skill mechanics and rotations, etc and why it will always be lacking imo from games that are tab target, especially pure tab target.
For a skill, in a Fantasy game, the Skill would still fire off with all the associated costs, but miss, or go on cooldown, yes.
Or in Ashes, even just 'Bow Durability depletion' might matter.
Would you then prefer Ashes to have the ability to make leading shots even in hard lock tab mode? And what kind of range could it lead?
Cause I just doublechecked how hard lock attacks worked in the archer demo and that shit turned you 180 on a dime. I didn't notice that before, but imo that's bad design and I hope it's just placeholder. But even if it is, that seems to be an indicator of design direction. In other words, the system might already be what I'm suggesting, that is "your character turns to look directly at their target to shoot". Except while I suggest that autoturning is slow, currently it's instant.
As i said action in mmorpg is young with plenty of room to grow as it has been doing quickly. Not seeing something doesn't change the fact of my point, if you turn like 75% of the elements in a tab game to action you have more depth and a much higher skill ceiling. Not really about if you have seen it or not, mechanically that is just how it would work.
Weve been over this in the past as well. I dont disagree with you, you are just missing the actual point.
As I have said to you before - there are already tab target games (or, specifically, encounters) where there is as much going on as any player is able to handle. You can not add more to that.
So, if developers do add action combat elements to a tab game, sure, it could add a higher skill ceiling to the combat system of the game.
However, they would then need to remove depth from the content on which that content is used on.
And game genre can just add and add more and more stuff and overload what players need to do.
That isnt good game design though.
Good game design gives players a specific amount they need to do or to focus on, and no more. So if you take a game that is already doing that (top end tab target encounters, in this case), and you then add action combat elements, you have suddenly gone over what you can ask players to do, and have slipped in to bad game design.
Now, I'm not saying a game cant add action elements to tab target games. In fact, that is exactly what Archeage did. However, Archage also had dead boring encounters - even the instanced ones.
Something I ak wondering if you are grasping is that with an action game, you are playing the combat system and the encounter or enemy player is simply a tool to use your combat system on. With a tab target game you are playing the encounter or enemy player, and the combat system is simply a tool to do that with.
[
Unsure where this is coming from, I've never mention head shots.
Your ego is showing. I never mentioned you or anything you said specifically in my post.
Last I checked this is a public forum. You are also free to respond or ignore post of people option is completely your choice. Better than snide remarks.
I've paid more attention to the video and realized that I was completely off base on all my assumptions L2 bias shows itself once again. The whole hard lock tab system is literally what I described. The character is looking directly at the target as long as the target is at the front. So any ability use will just go towards it.
I'm used to character's direction mattering because L2's combat was fully rooted and turn rate of the character was quite low. But I then remembered my dancing around a target in WoW and realized that L2's system was an outlier in that regard. Full tab usually just has your character's vision centered on the target, while you move laterally around them, instead of running determining your direction.
And now I understand why WoW's combat felt so damn floaty to me. Yall can disregard my suggestion completely, cause it got nothing to do with how most tab games work I'm too much of a boomer in that regard.
As i said action in mmorpg is young with plenty of room to grow as it has been doing quickly. Not seeing something doesn't change the fact of my point, if you turn like 75% of the elements in a tab game to action you have more depth and a much higher skill ceiling. Not really about if you have seen it or not, mechanically that is just how it would work.
Weve been over this in the past as well. I dont disagree with you, you are just missing the actual point.
As I have said to you before - there are already tab target games (or, specifically, encounters) where there is as much going on as any player is able to handle. You can not add more to that.
So, if developers do add action combat elements to a tab game, sure, it could add a higher skill ceiling to the combat system of the game.
However, they would then need to remove depth from the content on which that content is used on.
And game genre can just add and add more and more stuff and overload what players need to do.
That isnt good game design though.
Good game design gives players a specific amount they need to do or to focus on, and no more. So if you take a game that is already doing that (top end tab target encounters, in this case), and you then add action combat elements, you have suddenly gone over what you can ask players to do, and have slipped in to bad game design.
Now, I'm not saying a game cant add action elements to tab target games. In fact, that is exactly what Archeage did. However, Archage also had dead boring encounters - even the instanced ones.
Something I ak wondering if you are grasping is that with an action game, you are playing the combat system and the encounter or enemy player is simply a tool to use your combat system on. With a tab target game you are playing the encounter or enemy player, and the combat system is simply a tool to do that with.
Don't agree player has too much to worry about, unless you are going to provide an example this won't get anywhere.
If content is hard let it be hard, and let people working together and communicating as well as skill help overcome it.
People using a tracker to assist them means on a technical level there is too much for them to understand to begin with. Meaning action elements are not going to take away from that level of depth, as their skill and execution is going it be its own thing to begin with.
Lets say for some reason action elements did take away (which i don't believe int he slightest) and the developers made the game easier by reducing as much need for a tracker. But instead putting those skill elements in the actual combat of the raid. The difficulty in the end would be the same and players would have plenty to worry about in the raid with multiple levels of different kinds of gameplay from the mmorpg skills (this is not exclusive to tab) and the action elements of how those skills work and all the effects and min maxing.
As i said action in mmorpg is young with plenty of room to grow as it has been doing quickly. Not seeing something doesn't change the fact of my point, if you turn like 75% of the elements in a tab game to action you have more depth and a much higher skill ceiling. Not really about if you have seen it or not, mechanically that is just how it would work.
Weve been over this in the past as well. I dont disagree with you, you are just missing the actual point.
As I have said to you before - there are already tab target games (or, specifically, encounters) where there is as much going on as any player is able to handle. You can not add more to that.
So, if developers do add action combat elements to a tab game, sure, it could add a higher skill ceiling to the combat system of the game.
However, they would then need to remove depth from the content on which that content is used on.
And game genre can just add and add more and more stuff and overload what players need to do.
That isnt good game design though.
Good game design gives players a specific amount they need to do or to focus on, and no more. So if you take a game that is already doing that (top end tab target encounters, in this case), and you then add action combat elements, you have suddenly gone over what you can ask players to do, and have slipped in to bad game design.
Now, I'm not saying a game cant add action elements to tab target games. In fact, that is exactly what Archeage did. However, Archage also had dead boring encounters - even the instanced ones.
Something I ak wondering if you are grasping is that with an action game, you are playing the combat system and the encounter or enemy player is simply a tool to use your combat system on. With a tab target game you are playing the encounter or enemy player, and the combat system is simply a tool to do that with.
Don't agree player has too much to worry about, unless you are going to provide an example this won't get anywhere.
If content is hard let it be hard, and let people working together and communicating as well as skill help overcome it.
People using a tracker to assist them means on a technical level there is too much for them to understand to begin with. Meaning action elements are not going to take away from that level of depth, as their skill and execution is going it be its own thing to begin with.
Lets say for some reason action elements did take away (which i don't believe int he slightest) and the developers made the game easier by reducing as much need for a tracker. But instead putting those skill elements in the actual combat of the raid. The difficulty in the end would be the same and players would have plenty to worry about in the raid with multiple levels of different kinds of gameplay from the mmorpg skills (this is not exclusive to tab) and the action elements of how those skills work and all the effects and min maxing.
Physical skills are muscle-memory based and can be autopiloted, though, that's why this comes up.
I've zoned out playing footsies in SFV with other PLAYERS. Not 'weak' players, either, it's just a thing the mind learns how to do. I've had other top players 'fight me effectively while chatting with friends and occasionally looking away from the screen'.
These things are not hard enough for someone like Noaani, so from THAT side it is 'you're taking complexity and difficulty out of the game and replacing it with something I don't need to consciously think about, to do'.
As i said action in mmorpg is young with plenty of room to grow as it has been doing quickly. Not seeing something doesn't change the fact of my point, if you turn like 75% of the elements in a tab game to action you have more depth and a much higher skill ceiling. Not really about if you have seen it or not, mechanically that is just how it would work.
Weve been over this in the past as well. I dont disagree with you, you are just missing the actual point.
As I have said to you before - there are already tab target games (or, specifically, encounters) where there is as much going on as any player is able to handle. You can not add more to that.
So, if developers do add action combat elements to a tab game, sure, it could add a higher skill ceiling to the combat system of the game.
However, they would then need to remove depth from the content on which that content is used on.
And game genre can just add and add more and more stuff and overload what players need to do.
That isnt good game design though.
Good game design gives players a specific amount they need to do or to focus on, and no more. So if you take a game that is already doing that (top end tab target encounters, in this case), and you then add action combat elements, you have suddenly gone over what you can ask players to do, and have slipped in to bad game design.
Now, I'm not saying a game cant add action elements to tab target games. In fact, that is exactly what Archeage did. However, Archage also had dead boring encounters - even the instanced ones.
Something I ak wondering if you are grasping is that with an action game, you are playing the combat system and the encounter or enemy player is simply a tool to use your combat system on. With a tab target game you are playing the encounter or enemy player, and the combat system is simply a tool to do that with.
Don't agree player has too much to worry about, unless you are going to provide an example this won't get anywhere.
If content is hard let it be hard, and let people working together and communicating as well as skill help overcome it.
People using a tracker to assist them means on a technical level there is too much for them to understand to begin with. Meaning action elements are not going to take away from that level of depth, as their skill and execution is going it be its own thing to begin with.
Lets say for some reason action elements did take away (which i don't believe int he slightest) and the developers made the game easier by reducing as much need for a tracker. But instead putting those skill elements in the actual combat of the raid. The difficulty in the end would be the same and players would have plenty to worry about in the raid with multiple levels of different kinds of gameplay from the mmorpg skills (this is not exclusive to tab) and the action elements of how those skills work and all the effects and min maxing.
Physical skills are muscle-memory based and can be autopiloted, though, that's why this comes up.
I've zoned out playing footsies in SFV with other PLAYERS. Not 'weak' players, either, it's just a thing the mind learns how to do. I've had other top players 'fight me effectively while chatting with friends and occasionally looking away from the screen'.
These things are not hard enough for someone like Noaani, so from THAT side it is 'you're taking complexity and difficulty out of the game and replacing it with something I don't need to consciously think about, to do'.
Sounds like a skill thing, nor does it mean you need to try hard all the time. You being zoned out and fighting someone who is far below your level will be crushed. Same way someone that isn't the best zoning out and fighting someone below their level will lose as well do to a skill difference
If you are zoning out in a fight it is pretty clear that person isn't really trying. Also i think its a bit early to jump the gun on saying Noaani can reach a level in a fighting game and zone out against good players. Not everyone reaches high skill levels.
Same thing can be said of a tab game where it is much easier to zone out since you know exactly what rotations to do and movements to do as you are use to the content.
Either way zoning out isn't a good comparison of difficulty of content, that can be a case for almost anything when you know exactly what to do and what to read. That isn't going to happen if you are in a competitive fight.
As i said action in mmorpg is young with plenty of room to grow as it has been doing quickly. Not seeing something doesn't change the fact of my point, if you turn like 75% of the elements in a tab game to action you have more depth and a much higher skill ceiling. Not really about if you have seen it or not, mechanically that is just how it would work.
Weve been over this in the past as well. I dont disagree with you, you are just missing the actual point.
As I have said to you before - there are already tab target games (or, specifically, encounters) where there is as much going on as any player is able to handle. You can not add more to that.
So, if developers do add action combat elements to a tab game, sure, it could add a higher skill ceiling to the combat system of the game.
However, they would then need to remove depth from the content on which that content is used on.
And game genre can just add and add more and more stuff and overload what players need to do.
That isnt good game design though.
Good game design gives players a specific amount they need to do or to focus on, and no more. So if you take a game that is already doing that (top end tab target encounters, in this case), and you then add action combat elements, you have suddenly gone over what you can ask players to do, and have slipped in to bad game design.
Now, I'm not saying a game cant add action elements to tab target games. In fact, that is exactly what Archeage did. However, Archage also had dead boring encounters - even the instanced ones.
Something I ak wondering if you are grasping is that with an action game, you are playing the combat system and the encounter or enemy player is simply a tool to use your combat system on. With a tab target game you are playing the encounter or enemy player, and the combat system is simply a tool to do that with.
Don't agree player has too much to worry about, unless you are going to provide an example this won't get anywhere.
If content is hard let it be hard, and let people working together and communicating as well as skill help overcome it.
People using a tracker to assist them means on a technical level there is too much for them to understand to begin with. Meaning action elements are not going to take away from that level of depth, as their skill and execution is going it be its own thing to begin with.
Lets say for some reason action elements did take away (which i don't believe int he slightest) and the developers made the game easier by reducing as much need for a tracker. But instead putting those skill elements in the actual combat of the raid. The difficulty in the end would be the same and players would have plenty to worry about in the raid with multiple levels of different kinds of gameplay from the mmorpg skills (this is not exclusive to tab) and the action elements of how those skills work and all the effects and min maxing.
Physical skills are muscle-memory based and can be autopiloted, though, that's why this comes up.
I've zoned out playing footsies in SFV with other PLAYERS. Not 'weak' players, either, it's just a thing the mind learns how to do. I've had other top players 'fight me effectively while chatting with friends and occasionally looking away from the screen'.
These things are not hard enough for someone like Noaani, so from THAT side it is 'you're taking complexity and difficulty out of the game and replacing it with something I don't need to consciously think about, to do'.
Sounds like a skill thing, nor does it mean you need to try hard all the time. You being zoned out and fighting someone who is far below your level will be crushed. Same way someone that isn't the best zoning out and fighting someone below their level will lose as well do to a skill difference
If you are zoning out in a fight it is pretty clear that person isn't really trying. Also i think its a bit early to jump the gun on saying Noaani can reach a level in a fighting game and zone out against good players. Not everyone reaches high skill levels.
Same thing can be said of a tab game where it is much easier to zone out since you know exactly what rotations to do and movements to do as you are use to the content.
Either way zoning out isn't a good comparison of difficulty of content, that can be a case for almost anything when you know exactly what to do and what to read. That isn't going to happen if you are in a competitive fight.
I am not talking about people far below.
I keep meaning to ask you if the only game you played at this level is Soul Calibur, but I wonder if you'll answer.
The reason I'm asking is that I normally assume fighting game players play multiple games, so I talk to you as if you've played certain others at similar levels to what I've seen from your Soul Calibur play, when you might not have done that and therefore have different expectations.
I am ENTIRELY confident that Noaani would body BOTH of us in most fighting games if so chosen to, and would find it easy to do.
(you don't need to counter that point to defend your honor because no one other than me cares, and I've watched your matches so I am pretty confident in it).
At some point I've seen some indication that Noaani was a top PvP player in ArcheAge, as mentioned. Noaani's high skill is not in question here, if we are not challenging that claim. It can be treated as a fact.
As i said action in mmorpg is young with plenty of room to grow as it has been doing quickly. Not seeing something doesn't change the fact of my point, if you turn like 75% of the elements in a tab game to action you have more depth and a much higher skill ceiling. Not really about if you have seen it or not, mechanically that is just how it would work.
Weve been over this in the past as well. I dont disagree with you, you are just missing the actual point.
As I have said to you before - there are already tab target games (or, specifically, encounters) where there is as much going on as any player is able to handle. You can not add more to that.
So, if developers do add action combat elements to a tab game, sure, it could add a higher skill ceiling to the combat system of the game.
However, they would then need to remove depth from the content on which that content is used on.
And game genre can just add and add more and more stuff and overload what players need to do.
That isnt good game design though.
Good game design gives players a specific amount they need to do or to focus on, and no more. So if you take a game that is already doing that (top end tab target encounters, in this case), and you then add action combat elements, you have suddenly gone over what you can ask players to do, and have slipped in to bad game design.
Now, I'm not saying a game cant add action elements to tab target games. In fact, that is exactly what Archeage did. However, Archage also had dead boring encounters - even the instanced ones.
Something I ak wondering if you are grasping is that with an action game, you are playing the combat system and the encounter or enemy player is simply a tool to use your combat system on. With a tab target game you are playing the encounter or enemy player, and the combat system is simply a tool to do that with.
Don't agree player has too much to worry about, unless you are going to provide an example this won't get anywhere.
If content is hard let it be hard, and let people working together and communicating as well as skill help overcome it.
People using a tracker to assist them means on a technical level there is too much for them to understand to begin with. Meaning action elements are not going to take away from that level of depth, as their skill and execution is going it be its own thing to begin with.
Lets say for some reason action elements did take away (which i don't believe int he slightest) and the developers made the game easier by reducing as much need for a tracker. But instead putting those skill elements in the actual combat of the raid. The difficulty in the end would be the same and players would have plenty to worry about in the raid with multiple levels of different kinds of gameplay from the mmorpg skills (this is not exclusive to tab) and the action elements of how those skills work and all the effects and min maxing.
Physical skills are muscle-memory based and can be autopiloted, though, that's why this comes up.
I've zoned out playing footsies in SFV with other PLAYERS. Not 'weak' players, either, it's just a thing the mind learns how to do. I've had other top players 'fight me effectively while chatting with friends and occasionally looking away from the screen'.
These things are not hard enough for someone like Noaani, so from THAT side it is 'you're taking complexity and difficulty out of the game and replacing it with something I don't need to consciously think about, to do'.
Sounds like a skill thing, nor does it mean you need to try hard all the time. You being zoned out and fighting someone who is far below your level will be crushed. Same way someone that isn't the best zoning out and fighting someone below their level will lose as well do to a skill difference
If you are zoning out in a fight it is pretty clear that person isn't really trying. Also i think its a bit early to jump the gun on saying Noaani can reach a level in a fighting game and zone out against good players. Not everyone reaches high skill levels.
Same thing can be said of a tab game where it is much easier to zone out since you know exactly what rotations to do and movements to do as you are use to the content.
Either way zoning out isn't a good comparison of difficulty of content, that can be a case for almost anything when you know exactly what to do and what to read. That isn't going to happen if you are in a competitive fight.
I am not talking about people far below.
I keep meaning to ask you if the only game you played at this level is Soul Calibur, but I wonder if you'll answer.
The reason I'm asking is that I normally assume fighting game players play multiple games, so I talk to you as if you've played certain others at similar levels to what I've seen from your Soul Calibur play, when you might not have done that and therefore have different expectations.
I am ENTIRELY confident that Noaani would body BOTH of us in most fighting games if so chosen to, and would find it easy to do.
(you don't need to counter that point to defend your honor because no one other than me cares, and I've watched your matches so I am pretty confident in it).
At some point I've seen some indication that Noaani was a top PvP player in ArcheAge, as mentioned. Noaani's high skill is not in question here, if we are not challenging that claim. It can be treated as a fact.
Only one i play seriously was soul calibur, and no I wouldn't get bodied. As I said before you don't get to top 10 in the world from just playing the game. I've played against ltos of average people on soulcalibur and I could beat them with one hand on my controller.
Based on my time and wanting to be the best I only have time for one and I don't enjoy 2d fighters. Since I don't play the game actively anymore I'd be in my most rusty stage possible though but still wouldn't have a issue beating anyone unless they are a higher level and actively playing.
Id say that is debateable if he is a high lvl pvper since he has always said he is more into PvE. I'd need to see proof on how he was a high level pvper than just assuming all these things. Though not impossible on a mmorpg, if you were on a high level people should be talking about you and guild wise it should be known the top guilds that were around and being in one.
Akin to BDO with the top guilds in that game that pretty much have been on top for years at a time holding the best territories.
@Azherae Curious though, what content of his have you seen to be making claims on what he can do?
I don't need to see people's content to trust their words, I feel no need to do this.
If Noaani is lying about this, I assume someone will make it clear eventually. And even if so, it doesn't matter because a 'hypothetical Noaani' must exist.
I also don't assume that high level PvE players are bad at PvP, I automatically assume the OPPOSITE.
I will remind you that making that top 10 claim for Soul Calibur around me is not meaningful, I know all of the timing and information surrounding that. But now that I know that the only game you play seriously is SC, I can stop making certain appeals to experiences I thought you would have had.
I now understand that Noaani probably shouldn't make certain comparisons when talking with you either. This is my fault for making assumptions about your experiences and trying to reframe things Noaani says when you quote them, to 'Fighting Game Experience'.
I will stop making references to such games when addressing you on these matters. I'd prefer not to take this any further as I think it might be too difficult to avoid somehow offending you or making you feel defensive.
But I stand by my claim. I know your skill level in SC. I know what thought processes SC does not teach. I know that your 'top 10 player' status lasted for like ... six days I think, if that? I can go ask.
Let's not make this about you trying to prove your ability, I am the only one who cares and I am unlikely to ever change my mind. There's no reason for me to expect that a person who is most likely telling the truth about being top tier will not win against someone who I have explicitly seen play, given basic effort.
You can continue to believe that sort of thing if you want, I'm just saying it won't ever convince ME, and that's okay.
@Azherae Curious though, what content of his have you seen to be making claims on what he can do?
I don't need to see people's content to trust their words, I feel no need to do this.
If Noaani is lying about this, I assume someone will make it clear eventually. And even if so, it doesn't matter because a 'hypothetical Noaani' must exist.
I also don't assume that high level PvE players are bad at PvP, I automatically assume the OPPOSITE.
I will remind you that making that top 10 claim for Soul Calibur around me is not meaningful, I know all of the timing and information surrounding that. But now that I know that the only game you play seriously is SC, I can stop making certain appeals to experiences I thought you would have had.
I now understand that Noaani probably shouldn't make certain comparisons when talking with you either. This is my fault for making assumptions about your experiences and trying to reframe things Noaani says when you quote them, to 'Fighting Game Experience'.
I will stop making references to such games when addressing you on these matters. I'd prefer not to take this any further as I think it might be too difficult to avoid somehow offending you or making you feel defensive.
But I stand by my claim. I know your skill level in SC. I know what thought processes SC does not teach. I know that your 'top 10 player' status lasted for like ... six days I think, if that? I can go ask.
Let's not make this about you trying to prove your ability, I am the only one who cares and I am unlikely to ever change my mind. There's no reason for me to expect that a person who is most likely telling the truth about being top tier will not win against someone who I have explicitly seen play, given basic effort.
You can continue to believe that sort of thing if you want, I'm just saying it won't ever convince ME, and that's okay.
You are making a lot of assumptions I was on top for only 6 days? You haven't seen Noaani fight competitive in any games but you are assuming he can be a top 10 in the world?
Giving someone the benefit of being good is one thing, but giving the benefit of being one of the best without seeing or fighting them doesn't really sound bound by logic.
honestly going by the logic me saying and showing it and saying he wouldn't be me, you should be assuming that there would be a big difference between him fighting a random on soulcalibur and me?
I literarily don't understand your logic behind this.... Like I guess anyone can believe anything they want at the end of the day but at some point there has to be some realism.
Comments
You totally miss one thing : people want a good gameplay, not a specific design
preference is a thing and i never denied it. i said myself that the polls was 50 to 60% in favor of action... so where is the lie ?
but on the poll you point, only one out of 5 action enjoyers said "i WANT action" and this is the major thing : preference is not always what is mandatory.
i prefer an excellent game, without the gameplay i favor if the gameplay is well designed, well thought, and well developed.
Because, in the end, this is the only matter.
You speak about people playing old game, while i spoke about people playing modern games with old design choice, and this is where again, you try to change what i said... Because again, this is against your "action is future, and all mmorpg will be action" ... no, some mmorpg will be action, some other will be tab, other again will be hybrid.
And inside those 3 kind of gameplay, there will be even more subdivision, because this is what the whole history of video game is... always new design, while old design can at any time continue to have new game...
Even the "dead" point&click manage to still live and is enjoyed... While people spoke about more and more realism in FPS, DOOM came, and like old one, no need to press R, totally arcade gameplay.
You just try to push your taste as "global taste" while it is yours, and the taste of other people.
And all your narrativ is focused on your own view of what the perfect game is...
But if we go with your "this is the way of future in MMORPG" ... Why remove healing from this progress ? healers are stupid dumb guy unable to improve their aim ? is it impossible to do a healing action gameplay that reward the people with the best aim ? ... You defend that action = better to show skill, but healers are forbidden of it so ?
in the end, you just defend your own hope for what the gameplay should be...
The game will be hybrid, both tab and action. and only few people, being those "only want action" that are a minority tries to change that...
Abilities can curve i honestly have no issue with that since its a mmorpg if they are within your aim and you hit them. This includes both tab, action / soft lock in how i view it. Though I've made a suggestion that based on distance the curve arc could be less magnetized allowing people to dodge if its a really far shot if they do it at the right time, or to ensure they are constantly moving to not be hit as much.
Reading it it sounds god though and of course would require "physical skill". The point of which isn't to make anything like a FPS but have more of an action flow to it.
This would apply to fast moving mobs too, so it would even influence the pve difficulty.
And as I see it, your camera could still be facing away from your target and your character could be moving backwards away from your target, but if the target is just running after you in a straight line - you'll be able to shoot out tab abilities at them. But if the target is moving in a zig zag pattern or is just doing a half-circle arc instead of a direct line towards you - you won't do shit.
Well either way its better than having a sphere of influence around you and if you have line of sight your character turns and attacks automatically. Though i expect most tab target games to work like that and honestly its fine if its in AoC. But if you are doing something that takes more effort you should be rewarded for it.
The balance just needs to be there so if it is like the foremost point their kite speeds are not insane. The higher their speeds, the strongest the traits of other classes need to be to catch them. Though I'm sure they will balance they game out well once it is in A2 phase and testing more things out.
All i can really do is guess or raise red flags until it is being played with atleast part of their kit.
@8:40 of the video, the BDO and New World mob kiting is a good example of what's wrong with Action Combat games.
Like I commented on the game using bad examples of pve does not really get a point across, he came up pretty short on that video.
1. BDO doesn't really have pve content so you can't compare it
2. In new world he should have did that in a dungeon atleast. New world is not that complex another bad example to use.
*edit Kiting issues is pretty easy to solve, if they wanted to make the game more difficult....
I'm not a good person to ask if you're looking for 'less action combat inclined'.
I'm in Aerlana's camp, I don't care about any of this, I don't even 'believe in it'. It doesn't matter to me, which was the point I was making to Mag to begin with. I enjoy both combat styles if they are done correctly and push my limits or allow for proper expression.
Therefore I don't usually think about 'fixing' something that most games already do quite well, to 'improve' things for a few diehards. Particularly since in my personal experience the diehards are not great at games, they just 'choose games that are hard to be good at or introduce more randomness' so they can feel superior to others.
There's entire threads in Elite Dangerous from someone 'top in PvP' crying about how their opponents 'use weapons that don't take real skill' because they use one of the other options for targeting. That person, however, just doesn't want to 'waste' defensive equipment slots on things that counter those options. I mention this because 'gimballing' weapons is SIMILAR to what you mention.
tl;dr if the game suited it, it'd be fine. To me, everything about these games has to be designed on a very granular level. But I am a firm believer that a SINGLE average-strength ability out of HUNDREDS being ONE frame too fast can ruin a game.
EQ *sometimes* auto faces you. Not every time. Needing to know when this will and will not happen is a part of that knowledge I've been talking about, and it happens less and less as you get more in to the game.
However, some action games also have aim assist. You taking one concept from one tab target game that you have a poor understanding of and using it as an argument against tab target games in general is like me saying aiming in Action MMO's isnt all that hard because Tera.
It's a similar thing to the above where you were trying to argue a possibility of action games without also arguing the possibility of tab games. Here though, you are arguing one aspect of one tab game, without arguing similar aspects of one action game.
I played BDO at a fairly high end. The game had more decision making than any other action MMO I have played - but it is still only a fraction of top end tab target combat.
Something you are probably not aware of - and I have no intention of telling you the mechanic that makes it the case - but specific position is more important in tab target PvP than in action combat. The equivalent of a step in one direction can make a massive difference in tab - far, far more than in any action game I have ever played.
To your comment of tab simply being an understanding of the game but action being an understanding of the game and having the skill to play it, I totally agree. This is what I have been saying.
The difference between what you and I are now saying is that I am aware that a tab target game is like an F1 car, where the player only needs to understand how it works. Action, on the other hand, is like a soap box racer - the user needs to understand how it works, and have the skill to drive it, but understanding how a soap box racer works isnt really all that hard.
I've yet to see an action MMORPG that has had elements in its combat that I needed to analyze after more than a few days play, specifically where something disnt behave as I expected it to. There are aspects of tab target MMO's where I have not fully understood what was going on after a decade of using a combat tracker.
This is - again- by design. Action combat games want players to focus on the action, and so design a combat system where that is what players need to do. Tab target games dont need players to focus on the action, and so instead opt to make a deep and complex combat system (again, other than WoW).
This is literally the point of each combat system.
This seems like a reasonable game design. The only part I would personally consider changing is the need to be facing your target directly - give me the ability to assume where my target will be when my attack reaches them (or at least the ability to force the attack to happen even if not directly facing my target).
One of the things it opens up is a desire for players using tab target projectile skills to want a boost in speed to those projectiles. If it reaches the target sooner, players have less opportunity to get out of that arc. Having an option to increase the tracking angle could also exist, but I like the idea of simply increasing the projectile speed more.
As many will know, I'm all for options for players having options to make a skill either more user friendly, or more powerful. It let's players tailor their build to their own personal strengths. If you dont feel you need faster projectiles, you can always just make them do more damage.
And as for forcing the attack, I feel like that side would just be covered by the action side of combat. I tried to add mechanical skill to the tab combat, while still keeping it purely tab, all while trying to keep the dodge mechanics intact. Projectile's angle could be widened a bit to let it hit moving targets a bit more often, though that's obviously a testable thing.
If you watch this briefly, look for the SMALLER circle target reticles.
Then, notice that sometimes the player does not fire despite those reticles being on target. Not often, but it happens. The reason for this is that the projectile speed of the bullets combined with THEIR ship's trajectory means that many of the bullets would still miss, even though their weapon is 'gimballed'.
"Turret" weapons work the same relative to smaller enemy movements, particularly on faster ships, but can autofire in all directions, which matches the concept of 'you don't have to be facing the target at all, but their dodging still works'.
The 'Long Range' mod would improve projectile speed, making it more likely that the guns will hit the target, but the 'arc of the gimballing' or 'speed of turret target resolution' might still not be enough, depending on the weapon (bigger single shot cannons sometimes have this issue, similar to a 'more powerful skill').
Your ego is showing. I never mentioned you or anything you said specifically in my post.
too bad he doesnt explain whats wrong with tab targetting games
Cause I'm trying to apply this info in the context of leading shots in smth like Ashes and I find it hard to see how it applies.
Limited ammo.
For a skill, in a Fantasy game, the Skill would still fire off with all the associated costs, but miss, or go on cooldown, yes.
Or in Ashes, even just 'Bow Durability depletion' might matter.
As i said action in mmorpg is young with plenty of room to grow as it has been doing quickly. Not seeing something doesn't change the fact of my point, if you turn like 75% of the elements in a tab game to action you have more depth and a much higher skill ceiling. Not really about if you have seen it or not, mechanically that is just how it would work.
When I see tab combat I don't view it as combat complexity, the combat is simple but the systems around that are more complex.
When I've been playing a tab game and I use my skill it works, there isn't much I have to think about in those terms with tracking, aiming, them dodging, my own movement, predicting their movement.
It is more so you use your skill it works, and you trying to predict and/or be ready for what they might do on their class. It has a missing element where there isn't as much as push and pull from an action feeling. You can't push yourself in battle and improve on the spot through your own actual actions, ON TOP of your class and skill mechanics and rotations, etc and why it will always be lacking imo from games that are tab target, especially pure tab target.
I'm going with narcissism over ego.
Just seems to assume everything is about them.
Cause I just doublechecked how hard lock attacks worked in the archer demo and that shit turned you 180 on a dime. I didn't notice that before, but imo that's bad design and I hope it's just placeholder. But even if it is, that seems to be an indicator of design direction. In other words, the system might already be what I'm suggesting, that is "your character turns to look directly at their target to shoot". Except while I suggest that autoturning is slow, currently it's instant.
4:36 and onward you can see the character do a 180 as soon as Steven tries to use quickshot
In other words, this is already the L2 way, but worse
edit: he turned himself, it wasn't an autoturn, my mistake. But the turn being instant is still bad design imo.
As I have said to you before - there are already tab target games (or, specifically, encounters) where there is as much going on as any player is able to handle. You can not add more to that.
So, if developers do add action combat elements to a tab game, sure, it could add a higher skill ceiling to the combat system of the game.
However, they would then need to remove depth from the content on which that content is used on.
And game genre can just add and add more and more stuff and overload what players need to do.
That isnt good game design though.
Good game design gives players a specific amount they need to do or to focus on, and no more. So if you take a game that is already doing that (top end tab target encounters, in this case), and you then add action combat elements, you have suddenly gone over what you can ask players to do, and have slipped in to bad game design.
Now, I'm not saying a game cant add action elements to tab target games. In fact, that is exactly what Archeage did. However, Archage also had dead boring encounters - even the instanced ones.
Something I ak wondering if you are grasping is that with an action game, you are playing the combat system and the encounter or enemy player is simply a tool to use your combat system on. With a tab target game you are playing the encounter or enemy player, and the combat system is simply a tool to do that with.
Last I checked this is a public forum. You are also free to respond or ignore post of people option is completely your choice. Better than snide remarks.
I'm used to character's direction mattering because L2's combat was fully rooted and turn rate of the character was quite low. But I then remembered my dancing around a target in WoW and realized that L2's system was an outlier in that regard. Full tab usually just has your character's vision centered on the target, while you move laterally around them, instead of running determining your direction.
And now I understand why WoW's combat felt so damn floaty to me. Yall can disregard my suggestion completely, cause it got nothing to do with how most tab games work
Don't agree player has too much to worry about, unless you are going to provide an example this won't get anywhere.
If content is hard let it be hard, and let people working together and communicating as well as skill help overcome it.
People using a tracker to assist them means on a technical level there is too much for them to understand to begin with. Meaning action elements are not going to take away from that level of depth, as their skill and execution is going it be its own thing to begin with.
Lets say for some reason action elements did take away (which i don't believe int he slightest) and the developers made the game easier by reducing as much need for a tracker. But instead putting those skill elements in the actual combat of the raid. The difficulty in the end would be the same and players would have plenty to worry about in the raid with multiple levels of different kinds of gameplay from the mmorpg skills (this is not exclusive to tab) and the action elements of how those skills work and all the effects and min maxing.
Physical skills are muscle-memory based and can be autopiloted, though, that's why this comes up.
I've zoned out playing footsies in SFV with other PLAYERS. Not 'weak' players, either, it's just a thing the mind learns how to do. I've had other top players 'fight me effectively while chatting with friends and occasionally looking away from the screen'.
These things are not hard enough for someone like Noaani, so from THAT side it is 'you're taking complexity and difficulty out of the game and replacing it with something I don't need to consciously think about, to do'.
Sounds like a skill thing, nor does it mean you need to try hard all the time. You being zoned out and fighting someone who is far below your level will be crushed. Same way someone that isn't the best zoning out and fighting someone below their level will lose as well do to a skill difference
If you are zoning out in a fight it is pretty clear that person isn't really trying. Also i think its a bit early to jump the gun on saying Noaani can reach a level in a fighting game and zone out against good players. Not everyone reaches high skill levels.
Same thing can be said of a tab game where it is much easier to zone out since you know exactly what rotations to do and movements to do as you are use to the content.
Either way zoning out isn't a good comparison of difficulty of content, that can be a case for almost anything when you know exactly what to do and what to read. That isn't going to happen if you are in a competitive fight.
I am not talking about people far below.
I keep meaning to ask you if the only game you played at this level is Soul Calibur, but I wonder if you'll answer.
The reason I'm asking is that I normally assume fighting game players play multiple games, so I talk to you as if you've played certain others at similar levels to what I've seen from your Soul Calibur play, when you might not have done that and therefore have different expectations.
I am ENTIRELY confident that Noaani would body BOTH of us in most fighting games if so chosen to, and would find it easy to do.
(you don't need to counter that point to defend your honor because no one other than me cares, and I've watched your matches so I am pretty confident in it).
At some point I've seen some indication that Noaani was a top PvP player in ArcheAge, as mentioned. Noaani's high skill is not in question here, if we are not challenging that claim. It can be treated as a fact.
Only one i play seriously was soul calibur, and no I wouldn't get bodied. As I said before you don't get to top 10 in the world from just playing the game. I've played against ltos of average people on soulcalibur and I could beat them with one hand on my controller.
Based on my time and wanting to be the best I only have time for one and I don't enjoy 2d fighters. Since I don't play the game actively anymore I'd be in my most rusty stage possible though but still wouldn't have a issue beating anyone unless they are a higher level and actively playing.
Id say that is debateable if he is a high lvl pvper since he has always said he is more into PvE. I'd need to see proof on how he was a high level pvper than just assuming all these things. Though not impossible on a mmorpg, if you were on a high level people should be talking about you and guild wise it should be known the top guilds that were around and being in one.
Akin to BDO with the top guilds in that game that pretty much have been on top for years at a time holding the best territories.
I don't need to see people's content to trust their words, I feel no need to do this.
If Noaani is lying about this, I assume someone will make it clear eventually. And even if so, it doesn't matter because a 'hypothetical Noaani' must exist.
I also don't assume that high level PvE players are bad at PvP, I automatically assume the OPPOSITE.
I will remind you that making that top 10 claim for Soul Calibur around me is not meaningful, I know all of the timing and information surrounding that. But now that I know that the only game you play seriously is SC, I can stop making certain appeals to experiences I thought you would have had.
I now understand that Noaani probably shouldn't make certain comparisons when talking with you either. This is my fault for making assumptions about your experiences and trying to reframe things Noaani says when you quote them, to 'Fighting Game Experience'.
I will stop making references to such games when addressing you on these matters. I'd prefer not to take this any further as I think it might be too difficult to avoid somehow offending you or making you feel defensive.
But I stand by my claim. I know your skill level in SC. I know what thought processes SC does not teach. I know that your 'top 10 player' status lasted for like ... six days I think, if that? I can go ask.
Let's not make this about you trying to prove your ability, I am the only one who cares and I am unlikely to ever change my mind. There's no reason for me to expect that a person who is most likely telling the truth about being top tier will not win against someone who I have explicitly seen play, given basic effort.
You can continue to believe that sort of thing if you want, I'm just saying it won't ever convince ME, and that's okay.
You are making a lot of assumptions I was on top for only 6 days? You haven't seen Noaani fight competitive in any games but you are assuming he can be a top 10 in the world?
Giving someone the benefit of being good is one thing, but giving the benefit of being one of the best without seeing or fighting them doesn't really sound bound by logic.
honestly going by the logic me saying and showing it and saying he wouldn't be me, you should be assuming that there would be a big difference between him fighting a random on soulcalibur and me?
I literarily don't understand your logic behind this.... Like I guess anyone can believe anything they want at the end of the day but at some point there has to be some realism.