Azathoth wrote: » I would argue that BRs are more popular with youth, over the older audiences, because of attention span. But, I could be as wrong as others making assumptions.
Azathoth wrote: » I don't want every game I play to be reduced and streamlined for just the players that want "ease of entry and convenience." Is it too much to ask for games that require a couple hours at a time? Games that have deep meaningful systems and stories that shouldn't be accomplished in 15-20 minutes? Maybe, by making MMORPGs great again IS, and the 'mature crowd', don't want super simple ease of access and quick stories. Maybe there are games for that. Maybe people can play multiple games at the same time to fulfill multiple gaming needs?
ferryman wrote: » Azathoth wrote: » I would argue that BRs are more popular with youth, over the older audiences, because of attention span. But, I could be as wrong as others making assumptions. You are right. MMORPGs are for men and women made from iron, and BRs are more for drooling kids.
Caeryl wrote: » We were commenting about why BRs are so popular, zero to do with the MMO genre or Ashes
Caeryl wrote: » Not attention span so much as ease of entry and convenience. It’s much simpler to fit a 15-20minute match in every now and then than devoting hours to a single player game, even, and maybe especially, in the case of adults with limited playtime.
Azathoth wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » We were commenting about why BRs are so popular, zero to do with the MMO genre or Ashes A lot of this thread has used the comparison of 'older audiences' and 'younger audiences' to justify why Tab-Target games have not 'exploded' like BR's. My goal was to indicate that, although BR's are popular due to a very specific statement, Caeryl wrote: » Not attention span so much as ease of entry and convenience. It’s much simpler to fit a 15-20minute match in every now and then than devoting hours to a single player game, even, and maybe especially, in the case of adults with limited playtime. I would like that not to be the case with Ashes, an MMO. Also, if we are not comparing the two genres, can we stop comparing the popularity of BR's versus MMO's to justify Action Combat being better than Tab-Target?
Caeryl wrote: » Action combat is better (in my opinion) because it lets skill make up for a gap in stats.
Ghoosty wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Action combat is better (in my opinion) because it lets skill make up for a gap in stats. Different type of games need different type of skill to overcome situation when you are in worse position. In action games it is the eye-hand coordination skill. In chess it is the skill how many relevant forward steps you can calculate. In a TBS games you can chose the position where you want to fight. You can bring units what counter better the enemy's units. In an MMORPG, you have tons of skill and you can have utility potions/scrolls/items/etc. The standardized PvP games are team-games so you have mates. So you need to combine your skill, you need to communicate with your teammates. Even without aiming, you can use the LOS and the environment element to overcome your weakness. I played in arena in WoW, we had similar gear, but in some fight I had better skills, but in some fight I did not have any chance to win, because the enemy was much better. I played Starcraft. It was accused that it is a clicking championship, no strategic thinking is needed. But I was very bad at clicking my APM was about 60-70 (pros are about 150-200), and I was in the 2nd best league, because I played strategically. I know that you do not want to remove anything what an MMORPG already has, but my experience is that in an action based MMORPG, you have much less character-skill to use once. As you have to aim, your mouse is not free to click on a rarely used skill what would be great in your current situation. You need to grow some more fingers or buy special equipment be able to map and use the same amount of skills. That is why I fear from the aiming in the MMOs. I like to have tons of skills even if I use them once a week. But I am open for action based combat, I just fear from it.
Blackhearted wrote: » You should never click on abilities no matter how many there were.
Blackhearted wrote: » Closer to ten sounds bad, where did you get that info? I could only find a citation in wiki for fewer than 30. I think its quite easy to manage 30ish abilities in tab but for action combat I think fewer will be fluid. You have 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, §, q, e, r, t f, g, caps, mmb, (z, x) keybinds unmodded w/ basic equipment + F1-F4 depending on keyboard. You should never click on abilities no matter how many there were.
Caeryl wrote: » Your ability choices have consequences, but you can also adapt on the fly with good reflexes and creative use of those abilities. We don’t need such niche abilities that you use them only a handful of times your whole time playing.
Damokles wrote: » I always use Q, E, R, F, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, SHIFT-Q, SHIFT-E, SHIFT-R, SHIFT-F, SHIFT-1, SHIFT-2, SCHIFT-3, SCHIFT-4, SCHIFT-5, F1, F2, F3, F4 which makes for 22 skills and that was always more then enough for me xD
xlangatangx wrote: » Damokles wrote: » I always use Q, E, R, F, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, SHIFT-Q, SHIFT-E, SHIFT-R, SHIFT-F, SHIFT-1, SHIFT-2, SCHIFT-3, SCHIFT-4, SCHIFT-5, F1, F2, F3, F4 which makes for 22 skills and that was always more then enough for me xD GET SHIFT-Ehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ctK1aoWuqY
Selo wrote: » Ghoosty wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » Action combat is better (in my opinion) because it lets skill make up for a gap in stats. Different type of games need different type of skill to overcome situation when you are in worse position. In action games it is the eye-hand coordination skill. In chess it is the skill how many relevant forward steps you can calculate. In a TBS games you can chose the position where you want to fight. You can bring units what counter better the enemy's units. In an MMORPG, you have tons of skill and you can have utility potions/scrolls/items/etc. The standardized PvP games are team-games so you have mates. So you need to combine your skill, you need to communicate with your teammates. Even without aiming, you can use the LOS and the environment element to overcome your weakness. I played in arena in WoW, we had similar gear, but in some fight I had better skills, but in some fight I did not have any chance to win, because the enemy was much better. I played Starcraft. It was accused that it is a clicking championship, no strategic thinking is needed. But I was very bad at clicking my APM was about 60-70 (pros are about 150-200), and I was in the 2nd best league, because I played strategically. I know that you do not want to remove anything what an MMORPG already has, but my experience is that in an action based MMORPG, you have much less character-skill to use once. As you have to aim, your mouse is not free to click on a rarely used skill what would be great in your current situation. You need to grow some more fingers or buy special equipment be able to map and use the same amount of skills. That is why I fear from the aiming in the MMOs. I like to have tons of skills even if I use them once a week. But I am open for action based combat, I just fear from it. Good post. I rather use a various amount of skills (15~25) in combat and using positioning and teamcoordination rather then the fight only beeing about "who can circlestrafe the most to confuse the other player and headshot the most" The younger generation are 99% FPS players and they bring in very bad influences to the mmorpg genre that has made the genre much worse and is a main reason why no game survives longer than a couple of months. Really the only games since EQ/DaoC/WoW that has survived for a longer time has all been using the core mechanics, and the ones that have failed has gone the FPS route.
UndeadCanadianGamer wrote: » No. It has been said many times by Steven that it will be a hybrid system. You will be able to go to 75% (I think) to one way, but not completely action or tab. I hear ya. I am not a huge fan of action, but if that is what it takes to play this game, I am up for it.
