Comments from the Devs

[Deuce]

I love it when the MMO genre-revolutionaries come out to proclaim that new MMOs require sweeping changes to be successful.

[Churchill]

I actually just want XIV to be perma-Realm v. Realm and have no PVE at all

[Churchill]

mainly because if it was just SE MMOers I'd be top dog

[Elcura]

If something is slow and challenging, it's usually because you need the time to think it through and consider what might happen and because not doing so will screw you over in the long run (and sometimes immediately). You can't really have that with a battle because by nature there's only so much you can think about how to not get hit in the face. This is even more apparent when you only have direct control over a single character.

Not to mention that while slow and tactical is fine, generally the more people you add to the equation the slower it gets and there's only so much the average person can concentrate on. Usually it's battle or tactics.

Though there is a solution to what you're asking, something like having to micro manage AI to get the best out of their actions to help you win. But that already sounds complicated and far more suited to single player experiences than multiplayer. Or at least offline to online.

[Takiwaki]

Another thing to look at is that most games tend to always set up challenges as how we react or not react to what a mob does. I would kill for a game where enemies reacts to what we do, in real time. even if its predefined, depending on party make up, builds, gear etc. A dynamic AI would make for some fun, doesn't have to be groundbreakingly complex either.

Imagine fighting a boss that does different moves depending on the party set up, so that it doesn't become a fight where we all bring certain jobs only, as its the easiest way. I know its a simple example but just to get the gist.

[Lucavi]

Another thing to look at is that most games tend to always set up challenges as how we react or not react to what a mob does. I would kill for a game where enemies reacts to what we do, in real time. even if its predefined, depending on party make up, builds, gear etc. A dynamic AI would make for some fun, doesn't have to be groundbreakingly complex either.

Wouldn't that absolutely murder servers, with AI having to calculate for the potentially dozens of people attempting to beat on it at the same time?

It -does- sound interesting, but I have no idea how they - or anyone, for that matter - would execute it.

[Achitophel]

Modern, in the terms of Square Enix (which is what we're discussing), means any MMO that came out post XI.

No, it doesn't. That's kind of your problem: you make some nonsensical/irrational point and then go on for paragraphs.

Stop that.

[Takiwaki]

Wouldn't that absolutely murder servers, with AI having to calculate for the potentially dozens of people attempting to beat on it at the same time?

It -does- sound interesting, but I have no idea how they - or anyone, for that matter - would execute it.

They can just have it at least for instances, not impossible. simple checks before entering, and only need to check a party of people, during.

[Lucavi]

No, it doesn't. That's kind of your problem: you make some nonsensical/irrational point and then go on for paragraphs.

Stop that.

Okay. I'm totally going to listen to you, who apparently can't stop getting infractions and time outs.

Must be your excellent arguments and tactful wit.

[Churchill]

I get them all the time to and I'm always right.

MIND FUCKED

[Lucavi]

You're the exception. Look at that avatar. That's a face I can trust.

[arus2001]

Imagine fighting a boss that does different moves depending on the party set up, so that it doesn't become a fight where we all bring certain jobs only, as its the easiest way. I know its a simple example but just to get the gist.

To some degree, I wouldn't call it as complex as some feel it might be. Rather, it'd only be as complex as the company was willing to make it. Things like damage received in the past 5 seconds, healing your enemies has done, and so on could also serve as variable that're likely considered in enmity tables to some degree anyway. Of course, whenever we're looking at some badass mob that needs 20+ people down over a 3+ minute span, my logical brain thinking from the perspective of the monster wants to say, "KILL THEIR HEALERS, IGNORE THE GUY WITH A SHIELD, THE REST WILL FOLLOW!" So, tactically speaking, this is a bit of a knock at the established mechanic of enmity within various MMOs or other games in general. It's unrealistic in the sense that everything should indeed react to situations differently, instead of always falling for the same, "Hey, look at me!" tactics of tanks and rotations.

To that end, I can see why people cling to the trinity. It requires a bit less thinking, but at the same time, also helps to solidify a role or sense of purpose when playing. I don't think GW2 ditching it worked to their favor, as sometimes it feels like trying to play more tanky is a detriment. Or being a healer is a lot harder because there isn't a tree of cures to cast. And in playing that and Tera, I can say I have a taste for what the more action-y side of MMOs could be like. There's a part of me that dislikes the "fire and forget" style of MMOs where all you have to do is be facing target and your skill lands no matter what, presuming accuracy rolls succeed. This has a habit of trivializing positioning. On the other hand, more action-y could lead to some creative uses of abilities outside of their typical function. Like in GW2, one of the warrior's sword abilities is a dashing charge attack. A lot of people would probably think of that as a gap closer. Yet, you could also use it to dash away from a foe or their attack. Yet in other games, the attack would only work if you were facing your probably automatically navigate you toward them. That aspect CAN be beneficial if something is moving a lot, but I can see some people hating it because it takes some "thinking" or "control" out of the situation.

My earlier rant on WASD+Mouse in mind, my usual concern with games veering toward too action-y or twitchy is that the control scheme just doesn't support it. Or at least in a way that's ergonomically pleasing for longer play sessions. In comparison, I'm of the mind the PS2 controller is probably one of the best designed gaming interface devices produced to date. It's not flawless, but there isn't an over-abundance of buttons, nor are any painfully out of reach. Its biggest weakness is obvious typing out text, though. I guess what I want to say is a more action-y game would be better served by a controller, while a slower-paced best befits keyboard only. WASD+Mouse tries to serve as an in-between that only emphasizes differences in dexterity between people, with a dash of handicap if you consider vanilla keyboard/mouse against someone with specialized gaming accessories that make it easier for them to play in contrast. For e-sport, something like that may be a requirement, but for more general gaming? I'm not so sure we should be demanding people dump $150+ in hardware on top just to level the playing field. Some people have a hard enough time accepting paying for a sub on top of a box purchase.

Anyway, demanding more movement out of a combat system simply for the sake of more movement doesn't strike me as a wise move. The more complex you make expected repetition within the games, the harder they'll be to sit down and do for longer periods. There's also the elephant of immersion to consider on whether or not running around in full plate for extended periods being active and such should eventually take its toll to the point we couldn't run anymore. A lot of games seem to the forgo that consideration because it's a "not fun" mechanic, but the quirky belief that battles should always be fluid isn't quite true. Dodge, dodge, dodge, like some choreography of scattering insects shouldn't be the only way. Standing your ground and defending should also be a consideration at times, but too often this is just delegated to shield-bearers if it is even an option. Most weapons can parry/deflect to some degree. Mages could erect magical barriers. Maybe this is more of a cautionary tale that if monsters have a higher degree of reaction potential, then players need it, as well. This would also include environment use, and not cheesy shit like, "Stand here so the AoE doesn't hit you" because some Z-axis calculations aren't right on the attack dodged. And this is also why some likely latch onto PvP so, for the mix of challenge and variety. However there's no mistaking a lot of games get it wrong in allowing for things like ganking, griefing, and basically anything and everything possible to create everything but a fair fight due to gear discrepencies or the usual Ranged superiority over Melee with first strike potential, escape methods, and crowd control options.

I also realize this post got a bit fragmented in stream of conscious thinking. Think I'll shut up and go get some lunch now. x.x

[Gulkeeva]

Okay. I'm totally going to listen to you, who apparently can't stop getting infractions and time outs.

Must be your excellent arguments and tactful wit.

I was going to do a 24 hour timeout, but apparently someone thought took him out a little longer

They can just have it at least for instances, not impossible. simple checks before entering, and only need to check a party of people, during.

I've played a game like this... where a boss usually "adapts" to the group makeup.
For instance if you have say a fast casting small heals healer, the boss would do many aoe attacks. If you target the boss with a stun, if its cooldown is up it will throw out some aoe DoT, if you charge a big attack it may randomly get away from that person and throw out ranged attacks for a bit, or use some damage reducing buff etc.

Although the mechanics are interesting and makes you think the monster has some intelligence reacting to what people do and what classes are in, in the end it could be pretty annoying to fight something that is potentially "hard as hell" to kill because its reacting to defend against attacks/kill everyone. It would be a whole new level of hardcore thats for sure haha
I wouldn't mind it since I've played a game like it before, although it makes instancing... scary especially the endgame ones, where its warcraft Heroic mode with an unpredictable pattern. Felt like an achievement though to somehow pull a win out the ass!

[Takiwaki]

What game was that? lol, Also thanks for posting that, it totally backs up what I was saying, that you do not need fast paced twitch based combat in order for a game to be challenging. What you described sounds potentially daunting, Im sure many will love that kind of challenge

[Whaleporn]

Anyway, demanding more movement out of a combat system simply for the sake of more movement doesn't strike me as a wise move. The more complex you make expected repetition within the games, the harder they'll be to sit down and do for longer periods.

Movement is an easy way to give a boss something that every job/role/gear level can respond to in some fashion.

[Cutriss]

So, is there a BG consensus about whether instant travel is good or bad?

I keep walking up to the ferry docks and forgetting to talk to the NPC because I'm waiting on the ferry to arrive. I kinda miss waiting on airships. Saves me money traveling the "old fashioned way". All this instant travel is ruining my immersion.

[Gulkeeva]

What game was that? lol, Also thanks for posting that, it totally backs up what I was saying, that you do not need fast paced twitch based combat in order for a game to be challenging. What you described sounds potentially daunting, Im sure many will love that kind of challenge

Its been a long time, it was some korean game, it was a scripted boss fight (that took near 30min to kill on average).

[Lucavi]

So, is there a BG consensus about whether instant travel is good or bad?

I keep walking up to the ferry docks and forgetting to talk to the NPC because I'm waiting on the ferry to arrive. I kinda miss waiting on airships. Saves me money traveling the "old fashioned way". All this instant travel is ruining my immersion.

Never thought much about it until I played GW2 and realized how useful it was in a game based somewhat around public quests and getting to them. Its very useful in that sense, so I think its a good thing if they're pushing the FATE system hard.

[Stromgarde]

So, is there a BG consensus about whether instant travel is good or bad?

I keep walking up to the ferry docks and forgetting to talk to the NPC because I'm waiting on the ferry to arrive. I kinda miss waiting on airships. Saves me money traveling the "old fashioned way". All this instant travel is ruining my immersion.

Didn't FFXII have an option for 'skip to destination' or 'scenic route' for airship travel?

[Cutriss]

Didn't FFXII have an option for 'skip to destination' or 'scenic route' for airship travel?

The only airship travel not involving the Strahl was basically for a specific quest, IIRC, so no, there were no airship scenes in XII.

Never thought much about it until I played GW2 and realized how useful it was in a game based somewhat around public quests and getting to them. Its very useful in that sense, so I think its a good thing if they're pushing the FATE system hard.

My impression isn't that you're supposed to get to FATEs quickly and catch 'em all. It's supposed to be a boon for people already working in that area. Otherwise you just get WOTG Campaign all over again, where people hide in town until La Vaule [S] gets attacked and everyone ports in.