Dikenzu said:I'm not sure what folks mean by outdated systems and graphics. What spcific system, that we know about, will be outdated if Pantheon releases in 2 years or more? Moreover, the final graphics have not been shown publicly and will be done closer to Alpha/Launch. If the Alpha Pantheon release looks comparable to Quinfall(An MMO using the Unity Engine), can folks honestly say it will look 'dated'? Folks thinking that it will look closer to what it is now and not take into account we are still seeing very old assests and animations are not being realistic or fair, imo. Even now there are 'some' screenshots that show promise and give a glimpse into what the game will look like when VR makes graphics and polish a priority.
Yes, it may not look like the latest Unreal release at the time, but it will still be a beautiful looking game.
Maybe I'm missing something...
Graphics can be improved over time, that's not what concerns me. The problem I see is combat. It looks similar to Lotro, which I played years ago. It's not about killing mobs slow or fast, it's about being fun and dynamic. This static combat where you only push buttons is what makes Pantheon look outdated. I came back recently to follow closer after some years and even pledged higher tier, but what concerns me I see not much improvement in this department and it's not even topic of dev videos. They talk about skills and what they do, but that's not important, because that's always subject to change. What is important is the feeling of core mechanics like combat. Then is the worldbuilding and then is the rest.
jura said:Dikenzu said:I'm not sure what folks mean by outdated systems and graphics. What spcific system, that we know about, will be outdated if Pantheon releases in 2 years or more? Moreover, the final graphics have not been shown publicly and will be done closer to Alpha/Launch. If the Alpha Pantheon release looks comparable to Quinfall(An MMO using the Unity Engine), can folks honestly say it will look 'dated'? Folks thinking that it will look closer to what it is now and not take into account we are still seeing very old assests and animations are not being realistic or fair, imo. Even now there are 'some' screenshots that show promise and give a glimpse into what the game will look like when VR makes graphics and polish a priority.
Yes, it may not look like the latest Unreal release at the time, but it will still be a beautiful looking game.
Maybe I'm missing something...
Graphics can be improved over time, that's not what concerns me. The problem I see is combat. It looks similar to Lotro, which I played years ago. It's not about killing mobs slow or fast, it's about being fun and dynamic. This static combat where you only push buttons is what makes Pantheon look outdated. I came back recently to follow closer after some years and even pledged higher tier, but what concerns me I see not much improvement in this department and it's not even topic of dev videos. They talk about skills and what they do, but that's not important, because that's always subject to change. What is important is the feeling of core mechanics like combat. Then is the worldbuilding and then is the rest.
Before I can respond in detail, are you referring to tab target VS action combat? If not, then what exactly?
"Graphics can be improved over time, that's not what concerns me. The problem I see is combat. It looks similar to Lotro, which I played years ago. It's not about killing mobs slow or fast, it's about being fun and dynamic. This static combat where you only push buttons is what makes Pantheon look outdated. I came back recently to follow closer after some years and even pledged higher tier, but what concerns me I see not much improvement in this department and it's not even topic of dev videos. They talk about skills and what they do, but that's not important, because that's always subject to change. What is important is the feeling of core mechanics like combat. Then is the worldbuilding and then is the rest."
Firstly, and within reason, I consider world building more important than the details of combat mechanics. Though if the mechanics are too weak I won't bother with a game even if the world is very well built. That is what I mean by "within reason".
More importantly - I have no idea what you object to the current system. You object to combat where you only push buttons. How do you want us to fight - using telepathy to control our characters?
Perhaps you mean you want constant action. As you fight constantly move the character to the right, to the left, dodge, jump, block, evade, all at the same time as we try to swing our weaons or use our skills. There is a term for this in the MMO world - action combat.
It is diametrically different from the "old school" games that most of us experienced - such as EQ. It emphasizes *player* reflexes, vision, hearing, and internet connection. It deemphasizes *character* development, skills, and gear.
If I had to name one single thing that would drive me away faster than any other development choice it would be taking an action combat approach. If comments on the forums over the years are representative - it would drive the great majority of supporters away.
Maybe you aren't advocating for action combat - that is just the best guess I can come up with. In which case there is no way I could possibly disagree more.
Old School MMORPGs were highly inspired by pen and paper RPGs where combat is tactical and not rushed. In pen and paper you have the time everyone else is describing their turns to determine what you want to do. Every move, spell, and ability you use is impactful. A miss or a fizzle is devastating. The tension is real and when your gambit pays off you are elated. I understand that for an MMORPG turn based combat isn't going to appeal to a broad range of people, but by having slower paced combat that gives you time to look at the battlefield and pick your next move is a compromise that comes closer to capturing that feel. If you haven't played Pen and Paper RPGs, I encourage you to give it a try. It will give you a new perspective on these "Old School" MMOs and the feeling they are trying to create.
Additionally, this slower combat is accessible to a different group of people than action combat is. There is a reason I don't play first person shooters, or PVP. I'm not fast enough or spatially aware enough to be any use on a team, making the entire game unfun. I'm looking forward to a game where I can apply my intellect without being handicapped by my lack of spatial senses and quick reaction time. It's a completely different experience. Both should exist, but for THIS game, I want it slow and tactical.
dorotea said:"Graphics can be improved over time, that's not what concerns me. The problem I see is combat. It looks similar to Lotro, which I played years ago. It's not about killing mobs slow or fast, it's about being fun and dynamic. This static combat where you only push buttons is what makes Pantheon look outdated. I came back recently to follow closer after some years and even pledged higher tier, but what concerns me I see not much improvement in this department and it's not even topic of dev videos. They talk about skills and what they do, but that's not important, because that's always subject to change. What is important is the feeling of core mechanics like combat. Then is the worldbuilding and then is the rest."
Firstly, and within reason, I consider world building more important than the details of combat mechanics. Though if the mechanics are too weak I won't bother with a game even if the world is very well built. That is what I mean by "within reason".
More importantly - I have no idea what you object to the current system. You object to combat where you only push buttons. How do you want us to fight - using telepathy to control our characters?
Perhaps you mean you want constant action. As you fight constantly move the character to the right, to the left, dodge, jump, block, evade, all at the same time as we try to swing our weaons or use our skills. There is a term for this in the MMO world - action combat.
It is diametrically different from the "old school" games that most of us experienced - such as EQ. It emphasizes *player* reflexes, vision, hearing, and internet connection. It deemphasizes *character* development, skills, and gear.
If I had to name one single thing that would drive me away faster than any other development choice it would be taking an action combat approach. If comments on the forums over the years are representative - it would drive the great majority of supporters away.
Maybe you aren't advocating for action combat - that is just the best guess I can come up with. In which case there is no way I could possibly disagree more.
I think you know well what he means by the statement: "I don't want to just press buttons."
Take Black Desert: Online as an excellent example of making a great action combat system.
You have your basic abilities which you can activate with a button, but you can also change these attacks to do _different_ things by changing how you move in the world and what other buttons you press while doing an attack. Say you:
Do Attack 1 while Moving Forward which morphs Attack 1 into Attack 1a and chaining Attack 1a with Attack2 creates a new effect for Attack2 which may cause it to change from Single Target - High Damage to AoE Spread Damage. You can then start doing fun things like Activating Attack3 while dodging causes Attack3 to explode around you, rather than at a fixed point you chose.
It's not particularly difficult to make honestly. You have State Machines for this sort of stuff and they make it _extremely_ easy to do this sort of thing (in fact many game use them already, you just don't notice).
In fact, not employing a State Machine is one of the biggest no-no's in video games. Your code gets unnecessarily bloated and extremely hard to maintain and chase down bugs.
Of course you choose the delays and how tactical you want it to be.. It does not have to be fast paced. It is a mistake to think that action combat needs to be fast paced.
Ashreon said:dorotea said:"Graphics can be improved over time, that's not what concerns me. The problem I see is combat. It looks similar to Lotro, which I played years ago. It's not about killing mobs slow or fast, it's about being fun and dynamic. This static combat where you only push buttons is what makes Pantheon look outdated. I came back recently to follow closer after some years and even pledged higher tier, but what concerns me I see not much improvement in this department and it's not even topic of dev videos. They talk about skills and what they do, but that's not important, because that's always subject to change. What is important is the feeling of core mechanics like combat. Then is the worldbuilding and then is the rest."
Firstly, and within reason, I consider world building more important than the details of combat mechanics. Though if the mechanics are too weak I won't bother with a game even if the world is very well built. That is what I mean by "within reason".
More importantly - I have no idea what you object to the current system. You object to combat where you only push buttons. How do you want us to fight - using telepathy to control our characters?
Perhaps you mean you want constant action. As you fight constantly move the character to the right, to the left, dodge, jump, block, evade, all at the same time as we try to swing our weaons or use our skills. There is a term for this in the MMO world - action combat.
It is diametrically different from the "old school" games that most of us experienced - such as EQ. It emphasizes *player* reflexes, vision, hearing, and internet connection. It deemphasizes *character* development, skills, and gear.
If I had to name one single thing that would drive me away faster than any other development choice it would be taking an action combat approach. If comments on the forums over the years are representative - it would drive the great majority of supporters away.
Maybe you aren't advocating for action combat - that is just the best guess I can come up with. In which case there is no way I could possibly disagree more.
I think you know well what he means by the statement: "I don't want to just press buttons."
Take Black Desert: Online as an excellent example of making a great action combat system.
You have your basic abilities which you can activate with a button, but you can also change these attacks to do _different_ things by changing how you move in the world and what other buttons you press while doing an attack. Say you:
Do Attack 1 while Moving Forward which morphs Attack 1 into Attack 1a and chaining Attack 1a with Attack2 creates a new effect for Attack2 which may cause it to change from Single Target - High Damage to AoE Spread Damage. You can then start doing fun things like Activating Attack3 while dodging causes Attack3 to explode around you, rather than at a fixed point you chose.
It's not particularly difficult to make honestly. You have State Machines for this sort of stuff and they make it _extremely_ easy to do this sort of thing (in fact many game use them already, you just don't notice).
In fact, not employing a State Machine is one of the biggest no-no's in video games. Your code gets unnecessarily bloated and extremely hard to maintain and chase down bugs.
Of course you choose the delays and how tactical you want it to be.. It does not have to be fast paced. It is a mistake to think that action combat needs to be fast paced.
Black Desert maybe an excellent example of how to make an action combat game, but I'm not interested in action combat in my MMO. Non MMO games, yes, but not MMOS.
None of what you describe sounds like something I want to engage in even though you use words like 'fun'. It wasn't a 'fun' experience for me, my combat choices felt limited and the classes felt like they all played the same, except with different aesthetics especially with everyone dodging all the time. The very specific way you described combat can be applied to all the classes which seems homogenized.
Black Desert is a beautiful game and I was looking forward to trying it out when I first heard about it. I played it for a couple of months and deleted it because I did not like the action combat. Moreover, I play healers and none of the action combat MMOS I played(BDO, New World) did healing well, IMO.
Basically, all the positives that folks praise about action combat are negatives for me when it comes to MMOS.
Slowing down the pace maybe an option, but I'm not interested in Pantheon being the guinea pig to balance and try that out. I can already see the posts being made by folks criticizing slowing the pace. "Why slow down the pace when you already committed to action combat. That's stupid..." and a host of other complaints. I just don't see how that would play out.
I know it's the future of MMOS, but I won't be playing MMOS when action combat MMOS become the only option. There will be more than enough action combat MMOS coming out for those who prefer it. I'm only interested in MMOS similiar to Pantheon. I'm enjoying Ember's Adrift in the meantime.
"None of what you describe sounds like something I want to engage in even though you use words like 'fun'. It wasn't a 'fun' experience for me, my combat choices felt limited and the classes felt like they all played the same, except with different aesthetics especially with everyone dodging all the time. The very specific way you described combat can be applied to all the classes which seems homogenized.
Black Desert is a beautiful game and I was looking forward to trying it out when I first heard about it. I played it for a couple of months and deleted it because I did not like the action combat. Moreover, I play healers and none of the action combat MMOS I played(BDO, New World) did healing well, IMO.
Basically, all the positives that folks praise about action combat are negatives for me when it comes to MMOS."
This is all true for me as well except it took me a lot less than a couple of months to uninstall BDO. If I want action combat - and I do not - I can't possibly think of a worse place to put it than an old school MMO. Not that it goes well in a new school MMO. Why have all the character development and gearing and grinding to improve characters if 90% of your combat results are based on how well the *player* reacts and how fast her fingers are and all that work with the character is almost meaningless?
Dikenzu - separate post so as not to derail the discussion - Embers Adrift looks like an interesting place to play for a while while waiting for Pantheon - though not even remotely as good as what we hope for from Pantheon. A quick search tells me that grouping is not mandatory - it opens up many possibilities (as it should) but someone can go on and do reasonably well on their own even as a pure soloer. Is that more or less accurate? If I hated grouping I wouldn't be here as a Pantheon supporter but more than many of us I value the option of being able to hop on and just play by myself at my own speed and relax and not worry about finding a group each time I feel like spending an hour playing.
dorotea said:Firstly, and within reason, I consider world building more important than the details of combat mechanics. Though if the mechanics are too weak I won't bother with a game even if the world is very well built. That is what I mean by "within reason".
More importantly - I have no idea what you object to the current system. You object to combat where you only push buttons. How do you want us to fight - using telepathy to control our characters?
Perhaps you mean you want constant action. As you fight constantly move the character to the right, to the left, dodge, jump, block, evade, all at the same time as we try to swing our weaons or use our skills. There is a term for this in the MMO world - action combat.
It is diametrically different from the "old school" games that most of us experienced - such as EQ. It emphasizes *player* reflexes, vision, hearing, and internet connection. It deemphasizes *character* development, skills, and gear.
If I had to name one single thing that would drive me away faster than any other development choice it would be taking an action combat approach. If comments on the forums over the years are representative - it would drive the great majority of supporters away.
Maybe you aren't advocating for action combat - that is just the best guess I can come up with. In which case there is no way I could possibly disagree more.
Movement is one part. Personally I dislike when combat success relies on movement to the point that lag can easily ruin your fight. On the other hand character barely moving at all during combat is also bad. Another important thing is impact your strikes have. If both side are only waving thei weapon and number floating above their head with no impact, that's also bad. That's not how combat should be made in 2023.
jura said:dorotea said:Firstly, and within reason, I consider world building more important than the details of combat mechanics. Though if the mechanics are too weak I won't bother with a game even if the world is very well built. That is what I mean by "within reason".
More importantly - I have no idea what you object to the current system. You object to combat where you only push buttons. How do you want us to fight - using telepathy to control our characters?
Perhaps you mean you want constant action. As you fight constantly move the character to the right, to the left, dodge, jump, block, evade, all at the same time as we try to swing our weaons or use our skills. There is a term for this in the MMO world - action combat.
It is diametrically different from the "old school" games that most of us experienced - such as EQ. It emphasizes *player* reflexes, vision, hearing, and internet connection. It deemphasizes *character* development, skills, and gear.
If I had to name one single thing that would drive me away faster than any other development choice it would be taking an action combat approach. If comments on the forums over the years are representative - it would drive the great majority of supporters away.
Maybe you aren't advocating for action combat - that is just the best guess I can come up with. In which case there is no way I could possibly disagree more.
Movement is one part. Personally I dislike when combat success relies on movement to the point that lag can easily ruin your fight. On the other hand character barely moving at all during combat is also bad. Another important thing is impact your strikes have. If both side are only waving thei weapon and number floating above their head with no impact, that's also bad. That's not how combat should be made in 2023.
This is why I asked instead of assuming. All I can say is this. WoW is a tab target MMO and has THE BEST combat in any MMO I've played, old or new. It is impactful and extremely fun to play, IMO. The lead programmer for Pantheon is/was a high level WoW player and has talked about how he/VR want combat/animations to feel when playing. What we see now is not the final form of how the game will be played. Animations is not even a priority right now, so expect things to improve. I can't say it will meet your expectations, but it will be an improvement over what you see now.
dorotea said:Dikenzu - separate post so as not to derail the discussion - Embers Adrift looks like an interesting place to play for a while while waiting for Pantheon - though not even remotely as good as what we hope for from Pantheon. A quick search tells me that grouping is not mandatory - it opens up many possibilities (as it should) but someone can go on and do reasonably well on their own even as a pure soloer. Is that more or less accurate? If I hated grouping I wouldn't be here as a Pantheon supporter but more than many of us I value the option of being able to hop on and just play by myself at my own speed and relax and not worry about finding a group each time I feel like spending an hour playing.
This will be long becasue it's a topic near and dear to me. My. personal, honest thoughts on Embers Adrift:
It is a fun game if you want to play a 'modern' tab target MMO until Pantheon releases.
As soon as Pantheon releases I probably won't be playing Embers much, or at all. I love MMOS becasue of the class fantasy. I'm not a min/max optimal player. I play mostly solo in every MMO I've ever played and love to take my time exploring the world without absiolutely any care for fast leveling or reaching max level. I fully support Pantheon(and Embers...for the sake of this discussion) as a group focused game because, even though I play mostly solo, I despise what catering to solo players in MMOS has turned MMOS into. My favorite MMO of all time, WoW, has been desecrated becasue of this. That mindset has even solied Wow Classic(which I thoroughly enjoyed when first released) and I stopped playing that after awhile.
With that being said, I play Embers mostly solo and do so for hours on end most times. When I know I will have a couple of hours to spare, I find groups and they are enjoyable when I do group. Embers has a great community that is helpful and relatively mature. You can quickly figure out what mobs are soloable and can play solo as long as you want and enjoy...I do. Of course you level a LOT slower, but I don't mind that at all. The world is dangerous, but if you play smart and strategically you can manage solo. Taking on a high level mob or mobs and smartly winning the battle is fun. It is also fun when you are close to beating them and you get arggo another mob and it attacks you from behind and you either run away or die trying...lol
You will die...lol. You can ask for help and the community will help you, but I only do so when I can't figure things out for myself.
As a solo player you will figure out the tricks that solo players have figured out in all the MMOS we play. I spend a lot of time gathering to raise my skill levels. I'm constantly exploring the world trying to get comfortable with learning the area and terrain. Their map is like a book map and does not show your location unless you are at certain POIs. You use a planet for true North and have to figure your way around which is an adventure itself as a solo player. You have reagents that you need for your main skills and I spend a great deal of time time farming those as well. Only certain animals drop certain reagents and it's listed in the tooltip what class can use what reagents. Some of the quests can be done solo or with a small group of like 2-3 players depending on your meta skill level. Some require a full group. As you get more comfortable and knowlegdable about the game you will figure out what you can and can't do as a solo player.
I'm enjoying myself, for now.
As for why I KNOW this is a temporary enjoyment until Pantheon releases:
As I said previously, I love MMOS becasue of the class fantasy. Pantheon has that on lockdown which is why it will be my MMO Home. Embers does not. There is no magic, even though they will introduce their version of magic called Alchemy in the 3rd quarter of this year. I play support roles that heal through a 'first aid' type skill that uses the reagents I mentioned earlier. After awhile, you get used to it as a 'healer', but the lack of class fantasy makes it hard to 'accept' it as your Home. No types of priests or paladins exist in game, so that alone keeps me from being fully invested even though I like the game.
Put it another way...I LIKE what Embers is...I LOVE what Pantheon is.
Since I'm not fully invested, I have only paid superficial attention to the lore. From the little I paid attention to, it is good and has some promise if lore is your thing. Others who actually invest in the lore enjoy it. When I say 'others', I'm referring to folks I respect that play it and trust their review.
If your more of a non magic and non holy class player, then you will get a decent dose of class fantasy out of the classes.
For the record, I will be making a sincere attempt to group more in Pantheon. Since there are a lot of like-minded folks in this community, one of the ways I will do this is by forming 'Adventuring groups' for those like myslef who want to just enjoy the world without the stress of grouping with those who want to rush to level or demand optimal play.
I hope you(and anyone else interested) found this useful in making your decision.
Thank you for the reply on Embers Adrift. It sounds as if our styles are very similar and your approach is very similar to mine in terms of grouping, soloing and what we look for. I even mostly agree about WoW. I couldn't stick with it at release because the community was far too juvenile and toxic in many ways but the game itslef was very well done.
jura said:Movement is one part. Personally I dislike when combat success relies on movement to the point that lag can easily ruin your fight. On the other hand character barely moving at all during combat is also bad. Another important thing is impact your strikes have. If both side are only waving thei weapon and number floating above their head with no impact, that's also bad. That's not how combat should be made in 2023.
I have the same preferences. Stationary combat can become boring if most fights are this way. There should be some movement around the battlefield, though it should be for tactical reasons and not because of action combat GUI elements on screen.
Characters standing still and taking turns with attack animations lacks verisimilitude--real combat would have dodging, moving, parrying, etc. These should be automated animations (and not action combat micromanagement).
The lack of weapons actually making visual contact also disrupts suspension of disbelief.
These concerns are mostly related to animations, which aren't done yet, so its hard to know how much better they will end up. Because this isn't a deep pockets AAA studio, I'm not expecting any of the above to be fully addressed to my satisfaction. And I'm okay with this.
Of course, my personal standard for what would constitute believable combat animations probably differs from most since I've been fencing for decades. Noone stands still when being attacked by a sword so this lack of reaction really stands out.
Dikenzu said:Ashreon said:dorotea said:"Graphics can be improved over time, that's not what concerns me. The problem I see is combat. It looks similar to Lotro, which I played years ago. It's not about killing mobs slow or fast, it's about being fun and dynamic. This static combat where you only push buttons is what makes Pantheon look outdated. I came back recently to follow closer after some years and even pledged higher tier, but what concerns me I see not much improvement in this department and it's not even topic of dev videos. They talk about skills and what they do, but that's not important, because that's always subject to change. What is important is the feeling of core mechanics like combat. Then is the worldbuilding and then is the rest."
Firstly, and within reason, I consider world building more important than the details of combat mechanics. Though if the mechanics are too weak I won't bother with a game even if the world is very well built. That is what I mean by "within reason".
More importantly - I have no idea what you object to the current system. You object to combat where you only push buttons. How do you want us to fight - using telepathy to control our characters?
Perhaps you mean you want constant action. As you fight constantly move the character to the right, to the left, dodge, jump, block, evade, all at the same time as we try to swing our weaons or use our skills. There is a term for this in the MMO world - action combat.
It is diametrically different from the "old school" games that most of us experienced - such as EQ. It emphasizes *player* reflexes, vision, hearing, and internet connection. It deemphasizes *character* development, skills, and gear.
If I had to name one single thing that would drive me away faster than any other development choice it would be taking an action combat approach. If comments on the forums over the years are representative - it would drive the great majority of supporters away.
Maybe you aren't advocating for action combat - that is just the best guess I can come up with. In which case there is no way I could possibly disagree more.
I think you know well what he means by the statement: "I don't want to just press buttons."
Take Black Desert: Online as an excellent example of making a great action combat system.
You have your basic abilities which you can activate with a button, but you can also change these attacks to do _different_ things by changing how you move in the world and what other buttons you press while doing an attack. Say you:
Do Attack 1 while Moving Forward which morphs Attack 1 into Attack 1a and chaining Attack 1a with Attack2 creates a new effect for Attack2 which may cause it to change from Single Target - High Damage to AoE Spread Damage. You can then start doing fun things like Activating Attack3 while dodging causes Attack3 to explode around you, rather than at a fixed point you chose.
It's not particularly difficult to make honestly. You have State Machines for this sort of stuff and they make it _extremely_ easy to do this sort of thing (in fact many game use them already, you just don't notice).
In fact, not employing a State Machine is one of the biggest no-no's in video games. Your code gets unnecessarily bloated and extremely hard to maintain and chase down bugs.
Of course you choose the delays and how tactical you want it to be.. It does not have to be fast paced. It is a mistake to think that action combat needs to be fast paced.
Black Desert maybe an excellent example of how to make an action combat game, but I'm not interested in action combat in my MMO. Non MMO games, yes, but not MMOS.
None of what you describe sounds like something I want to engage in even though you use words like 'fun'. It wasn't a 'fun' experience for me, my combat choices felt limited and the classes felt like they all played the same, except with different aesthetics especially with everyone dodging all the time. The very specific way you described combat can be applied to all the classes which seems homogenized.
Black Desert is a beautiful game and I was looking forward to trying it out when I first heard about it. I played it for a couple of months and deleted it because I did not like the action combat. Moreover, I play healers and none of the action combat MMOS I played(BDO, New World) did healing well, IMO.
Basically, all the positives that folks praise about action combat are negatives for me when it comes to MMOS.
Slowing down the pace maybe an option, but I'm not interested in Pantheon being the guinea pig to balance and try that out. I can already see the posts being made by folks criticizing slowing the pace. "Why slow down the pace when you already committed to action combat. That's stupid..." and a host of other complaints. I just don't see how that would play out.
I know it's the future of MMOS, but I won't be playing MMOS when action combat MMOS become the only option. There will be more than enough action combat MMOS coming out for those who prefer it. I'm only interested in MMOS similiar to Pantheon. I'm enjoying Ember's Adrift in the meantime.
It's not really your MMO though ;).
Secondly, making classes feel distinct has absolutely nothing to do with the combat system. I could say that all classes play the same with tab target spam buttons and I would be right. You tab target and you click a button. That is all you'll ever do. It is about as static and samey as you can get. If that is truely your problem, it is not the type of combat system that is your issue, it's the class designs.
There's many ways to make an action combat system. It does not have to be all about movement and memorizing different attack patterns nor does it have to be "fast" by any means. There's also the option of going for the Final Fantasy system which employs a bit of both tab targetting with a healthy amount of chains for the combat feel. I could see how people would complain about the combat system pantheon is going for as stale beyond compare.
I literally wouldn't know the difference between a healer and a caster/support other than the make different swirly animations, heck I can't see the difference between a rogue and a monk.
Balance is a moot point. List a single MMO or RPG that has not had to balance something.
Pantheon needs to be successful, I'm sorry to say, but you don't particularly matter in that equation - nor do I for that matter. If it is not successful, the game won't survive for an extended period of time. You can try and claim "but niche!", yes, but "niche!" also needs to make money to pay for future expenses and preferably make some profit. So whether you like it or not. The current combat system is simply not good enough. Adding more... appropriate animations so that stuff actually connect. Is not going to make the combat system any better. It's still just going to be standing/sitting and clicking a button every so often.
I'm not saying make this into an action combat system. Far from it. I am saying that what they want to implement is going to be exceptionally boring. There needs to be more to it than I press button: Hot1. I press Hot2x3. I press InstantAllHots and renew. Give us some options.
ie. take a page out of action combat's book. I press Hot1 and now I can press Hot1a to make it apply to everyone or I can press Hot1b and make it a stronger effect. Set it up as a chain system and all of a sudden you have a strategic system. Do my party need AoE hot healing which is going to be expensive or would I rather use a more potent single target Hot still expensive, but not as much as an AoE, do I even need to use any of them and can I thus save mana.
Ashreon said:Dikenzu said:Ashreon said:dorotea said:"Graphics can be improved over time, that's not what concerns me. The problem I see is combat. It looks similar to Lotro, which I played years ago. It's not about killing mobs slow or fast, it's about being fun and dynamic. This static combat where you only push buttons is what makes Pantheon look outdated. I came back recently to follow closer after some years and even pledged higher tier, but what concerns me I see not much improvement in this department and it's not even topic of dev videos. They talk about skills and what they do, but that's not important, because that's always subject to change. What is important is the feeling of core mechanics like combat. Then is the worldbuilding and then is the rest."
Firstly, and within reason, I consider world building more important than the details of combat mechanics. Though if the mechanics are too weak I won't bother with a game even if the world is very well built. That is what I mean by "within reason".
More importantly - I have no idea what you object to the current system. You object to combat where you only push buttons. How do you want us to fight - using telepathy to control our characters?
Perhaps you mean you want constant action. As you fight constantly move the character to the right, to the left, dodge, jump, block, evade, all at the same time as we try to swing our weaons or use our skills. There is a term for this in the MMO world - action combat.
It is diametrically different from the "old school" games that most of us experienced - such as EQ. It emphasizes *player* reflexes, vision, hearing, and internet connection. It deemphasizes *character* development, skills, and gear.
If I had to name one single thing that would drive me away faster than any other development choice it would be taking an action combat approach. If comments on the forums over the years are representative - it would drive the great majority of supporters away.
Maybe you aren't advocating for action combat - that is just the best guess I can come up with. In which case there is no way I could possibly disagree more.
I think you know well what he means by the statement: "I don't want to just press buttons."
Take Black Desert: Online as an excellent example of making a great action combat system.
You have your basic abilities which you can activate with a button, but you can also change these attacks to do _different_ things by changing how you move in the world and what other buttons you press while doing an attack. Say you:
Do Attack 1 while Moving Forward which morphs Attack 1 into Attack 1a and chaining Attack 1a with Attack2 creates a new effect for Attack2 which may cause it to change from Single Target - High Damage to AoE Spread Damage. You can then start doing fun things like Activating Attack3 while dodging causes Attack3 to explode around you, rather than at a fixed point you chose.
It's not particularly difficult to make honestly. You have State Machines for this sort of stuff and they make it _extremely_ easy to do this sort of thing (in fact many game use them already, you just don't notice).
In fact, not employing a State Machine is one of the biggest no-no's in video games. Your code gets unnecessarily bloated and extremely hard to maintain and chase down bugs.
Of course you choose the delays and how tactical you want it to be.. It does not have to be fast paced. It is a mistake to think that action combat needs to be fast paced.
Black Desert maybe an excellent example of how to make an action combat game, but I'm not interested in action combat in my MMO. Non MMO games, yes, but not MMOS.
None of what you describe sounds like something I want to engage in even though you use words like 'fun'. It wasn't a 'fun' experience for me, my combat choices felt limited and the classes felt like they all played the same, except with different aesthetics especially with everyone dodging all the time. The very specific way you described combat can be applied to all the classes which seems homogenized.
Black Desert is a beautiful game and I was looking forward to trying it out when I first heard about it. I played it for a couple of months and deleted it because I did not like the action combat. Moreover, I play healers and none of the action combat MMOS I played(BDO, New World) did healing well, IMO.
Basically, all the positives that folks praise about action combat are negatives for me when it comes to MMOS.
Slowing down the pace maybe an option, but I'm not interested in Pantheon being the guinea pig to balance and try that out. I can already see the posts being made by folks criticizing slowing the pace. "Why slow down the pace when you already committed to action combat. That's stupid..." and a host of other complaints. I just don't see how that would play out.
I know it's the future of MMOS, but I won't be playing MMOS when action combat MMOS become the only option. There will be more than enough action combat MMOS coming out for those who prefer it. I'm only interested in MMOS similiar to Pantheon. I'm enjoying Ember's Adrift in the meantime.
It's not really your MMO though ;).
Secondly, making classes feel distinct has absolutely nothing to do with the combat system. I could say that all classes play the same with tab target spam buttons and I would be right. You tab target and you click a button. That is all you'll ever do. It is about as static and samey as you can get. If that is truely your problem, it is not the type of combat system that is your issue, it's the class designs.
There's many ways to make an action combat system. It does not have to be all about movement and memorizing different attack patterns nor does it have to be "fast" by any means. There's also the option of going for the Final Fantasy system which employs a bit of both tab targetting with a healthy amount of chains for the combat feel. I could see how people would complain about the combat system pantheon is going for as stale beyond compare.
I literally wouldn't know the difference between a healer and a caster/support other than the make different swirly animations, heck I can't see the difference between a rogue and a monk.
Balance is a moot point. List a single MMO or RPG that has not had to balance something.
Pantheon needs to be successful, I'm sorry to say, but you don't particularly matter in that equation - nor do I for that matter. If it is not successful, the game won't survive for an extended period of time. You can try and claim "but niche!", yes, but "niche!" also needs to make money to pay for future expenses and preferably make some profit. So whether you like it or not. The current combat system is simply not good enough. Adding more... appropriate animations so that stuff actually connect. Is not going to make the combat system any better. It's still just going to be standing/sitting and clicking a button every so often.
I'm not saying make this into an action combat system. Far from it. I am saying that what they want to implement is going to be exceptionally boring. There needs to be more to it than I press button: Hot1. I press Hot2x3. I press InstantAllHots and renew. Give us some options.ie. take a page out of action combat's book. I press Hot1 and now I can press Hot1a to make it apply to everyone or I can press Hot1b and make it a stronger effect. Set it up as a chain system and all of a sudden you have a strategic system. Do my party need AoE hot healing which is going to be expensive or would I rather use a more potent single target Hot still expensive, but not as much as an AoE, do I even need to use any of them and can I thus save mana.
I believe Pantheon will be successful if they release the game they want to release...simple. You keep bringing up action combat scenarios like it guarantees something and it doesn't...sorry. Nothing about what I percieive Pantheon to be is boring...nothing, so I very strongly disagree with your point on that. I've already told you that everything you LOVE about action combat(or some facsimile thereof) I DISLIKE in MMOS. You keep trying to want VR to experiment with some new 'hybrid like' system when they have already stated what their design goals are for combat. The system they have shown and will implement has loads of strategy involved(and is much more 'strategic' than what you keep talking about, IMO), which the community has already shown strong favor to. ALL the action combat MMOS(and their hybrid variations) have not been as satisfying to me as what I experienced in WoW and the other MMOS. I leave those MMOS to the folks who enjoy them(instead of speaking negatively about them on their forums or videos) and play the MMOS that I actually like. Like I have been saying, I have played tons of action games and love them as they are. But, I'm not interested in having action combat(or some hybrid iteration) in my MMO
So, there is nothing else for me or you to debate about as far as that is concerned.
There is a community of folks supporting this game that is very much looking forward to playing Pantheon as VR has advertised it to be. I never said anything about niche. I was one of the ones supporting VR's stance that they don't want to promote Pantheon as a niche game. Folks keep acting like we were the age we are now when Everquest and WoW was released. We were young/younger. There are plenty of younger folks(and folks of all ages) who will try Pantheon and like it enough to play for years. There will be lots of folks of all ages who will try Pantheon and not like it at all. NOONE can predict what that number will be. Pantheon will be marketed to EVERYONE who has some interest in MMOS....the chips will fall where they may after that.
I'm well aware of what hundreds of millions of folks are playing today. The most popular games have mostly been action combat games. But, there is a segment of folks who will appreciate what VR has to offer. VR can be successful with 500,000 subs...250,000 subs...maybe even 100,000 or 50,000 subs.
That includes younger folks. Some have even started making content for Pantheon and more will try it out when it officially releases. Most of the folks who will try out Pantheon don't even have it on their radar yet. While a great community, this community does not represent the totality of the number of folks interested in a game like Pantheon or the amount that will try it when VR makes a big PR push and has an actual release date. There is a market out there for well made and meaningful games and Pantheon will have it's market if they release the game they want to release. There are tons of MMOS being made for folks who prefer something else. We BOTH can have an MMO we want to play.
It seems certain that a significant change in how combat works is more likely to doom the game than to help it. Whether it winds up "niche" or not the driving force among both supporters and developers is to wind up with an "old school" style of game albeit with modern graphics and whatever modern quality of life features VR feels do not undercut the "old school" feel.
Even if one feels, contrary to my opinion and that of the great majority of us, that a far more active style of combat is better, Pantheon with its *other* old school features is unlikely to attract the first-person shooter crowd that action combat most appeals to. Driving away the fans of slow and strategic combat while replacing them by attracting ....nobody .... does not sound like a really good approach.
Dikenzu said:There is a community of folks supporting this game that is very much looking forward to playing Pantheon as VR has advertised it to be.
This 'advertised it to be' has changed significantly since this whole thing started. So what VR said it would be in 2014 was different than what it was in 2016 when PA testing started, then there were refactors, rebuilds, reworks, etc between then and now. The game now is not what it was.
Vandraad said:Dikenzu said:There is a community of folks supporting this game that is very much looking forward to playing Pantheon as VR has advertised it to be.
This 'advertised it to be' has changed significantly since this whole thing started. So what VR said it would be in 2014 was different than what it was in 2016 when PA testing started, then there were refactors, rebuilds, reworks, etc between then and now. The game now is not what it was.
Unfortunatly I have to agree with Vandraad here, maybe not for the same reason. the "advertised to be" IMHO is not what it was when I signed up, is not what I heard Brad say it was going to be. Brad was going to build a world first and foremos the game was inside that. what they have here so far (and it keeps getting worse) is just another please everybody game. Players running/climbing through other players (no collision) every healing class rezing, fast travel (summoning stones outside dungeons) little to no death penalty (a slap on the wrist not requiring help to recover from) and the list goes on.
what I'm seeing these days is not the Pantheon I signed on for. I signed on for something different, what they are showing us now is very little different from most any other mmo out there (RPG purposely left off of that) so I personally am not anxious for it to release, or even time to get in and "play" I fully expect at launch to use up the free time allowed with my pledge then move the icon off my into the (OTHER mmo) folder on my desktop with wow and several others.
"Players running/climbing through other players (no collision) every healing class rezing, fast travel (summoning stones outside dungeons) little to no death penalty (a slap on the wrist not requiring help to recover from) and the list goes on."
I am tempted to simply agree with Zorkon, with the usual caveat that it is still pre-alpha (unfortunately) and much may change. Since the general direction of change has been more in the direction of "quality of life" and less in the direction of "old school" that caveat gives little comfort to anyone who wants the game to stay at the "old school" end of the spectrum.
As to whether the game looks sufficiently "old school" now depends in large part on two things. One of them is what features one considers "old school" and what features one considers "annoying pains in the arse and thank all Gods they are gone". My own view is a bit different than Zorkon's as one would expect - few of us have identical opinions on every feature. I agree emphatically about fast travel and death penalty. I am not convinced that limiting rezzing to one or two healing classes is structural to "old school" - heck having a paladin rez wouldn't raise my eyebrows and that wasn't a healing class at all. As to "no collision" I have seen that used to grief other players far too often to miss it. In 1999 players were a lot nicer on average than they are today and it wasn't abused as much as it came to be. No, people haven't changed, but there were a lot fewer of us playing MMOs then, we often viewed each other as colleagues in a small group rather than opponents or even enemies, and there weren't as many immature children with routine access to computers, internet access and subscriptions as there are today.
I said there are two things to consider before deciding "not old school enough I am out of here". The second thing, rather than being what features the game lacks, is what features the game does *not* lack that "modern" games have abandoned.
Thus, suppose Pantheon launches without the things Zorkon mentions. Some of which I will regret just as much as Zorkon does. Is it still "old school" if it does have few or no quest hubs. Few or no breadcrumb trails. No magical map showing everything near you. No icons over NPC heads. No worldwide mail or auction house/broker. Very slow leveling. Very good support for player guilds. Strong incentive for people to group rather than solo. Limited use of fast travel (maybe just portals to dungeons and class teleportation abilities but no routine fast travel between areas and no mounts or slow mounts). No store. No pay-to-win.
I do not choose to give an answer to this question. But my long-held and often expessed view is that a game that is perfect in all respects to me is useless if it fails because it cannot support a large enough population. A game that is indistinguishable from WoW in all respects but lore is useless - we don't need another "modern" MMO. So what I will welcome and play eagerly is a game that gives me half of what I want because that is far better than "modern" MMOs even though it sacrifices the *other* half of old school features I want in order to expand the player base.
Vandraad said:Dikenzu said:There is a community of folks supporting this game that is very much looking forward to playing Pantheon as VR has advertised it to be.
This 'advertised it to be' has changed significantly since this whole thing started. So what VR said it would be in 2014 was different than what it was in 2016 when PA testing started, then there were refactors, rebuilds, reworks, etc between then and now. The game now is not what it was.
I'm referring to the ongoing design of the game as they build and iterate and share with us, NOT some static thing that folks cling to. Correct me if I'm wrong(which I KNOW folks will), but some of the design and goals changed after the failed Kickstarter. Changes were made and were still being made while the creator was still alive, which means that he was well aware that theese things were going on and participated in them. It just seems odd to me folks want to continue this argument like the things they discussed with the creator trumps the MUCH more detailed and profound discussions the creator of Pantheon had with the person who HE choose to lead the design. Those conversations were MUCH more significant in the making of the game.
That argument continues to be the weirdest thing to me.
I read about a LOT of things that were changed in all the MMOS I researched like WoW, GuildWars 2, etc. NO game is 100% as it was initially presented. Due to player feedback and things not working out or being as 'fun' or 'enjoyable' as the initial design promised. It is the nature of game design. Lots of things about Pantheon I am not in full agreement with, but the overall game design, tenets and continuing progress is something I support. No other MMO out there comes close to having my interest and I pay attention to a LOT of MMOs being made now.
Zorkon said:Vandraad said:Dikenzu said:There is a community of folks supporting this game that is very much looking forward to playing Pantheon as VR has advertised it to be.
This 'advertised it to be' has changed significantly since this whole thing started. So what VR said it would be in 2014 was different than what it was in 2016 when PA testing started, then there were refactors, rebuilds, reworks, etc between then and now. The game now is not what it was.
Unfortunatly I have to agree with Vandraad here, maybe not for the same reason. the "advertised to be" IMHO is not what it was when I signed up, is not what I heard Brad say it was going to be. Brad was going to build a world first and foremos the game was inside that. what they have here so far (and it keeps getting worse) is just another please everybody game. Players running/climbing through other players (no collision) every healing class rezing, fast travel (summoning stones outside dungeons) little to no death penalty (a slap on the wrist not requiring help to recover from) and the list goes on.
what I'm seeing these days is not the Pantheon I signed on for. I signed on for something different, what they are showing us now is very little different from most any other mmo out there (RPG purposely left off of that) so I personally am not anxious for it to release, or even time to get in and "play" I fully expect at launch to use up the free time allowed with my pledge then move the icon off my into the (OTHER mmo) folder on my desktop with wow and several others.
I strongly disagree with your opinion of Pantheon being a 'please everybody game' and don't see that at all. In fact, I see the complete opposite. Players trolling others incessantly is one of the reasons that collisions is not a thing. If folks can't see that or present a real and viable solution, then I can't have any empathy for folks using that against VR. Every healing class rezzing is an odd complaint. Making every healing class viable so folks can play the healing style they want and not be the victims of the EQ meta of ONLY wanting Clerics is a good thing for the health of the game that does not take away from what the game promised. Why have 3 healers and then only one is actually wanted as a healer? How is that hard stance beneficial to Pantheon? What you may see as 'pleasing everyone', I see as thoughtful game design that address a fundamental flaw in how healers were designed in EQ.
Also, folks are putting far too much emphasis on and comparing Pantheon or wanting Pantheon to be almost exactly like EQ, which would, ironically, make the game the very 'unimaginative' game you are accusing it of being. I want to play the game myself before I can go along with folks trying to minimize the death penalty. The challenges of Pantheon are NOT the challenges of EQ, so the death penalty needs to be designed with THAT in mind. NOT just to duplicate what EQ or some other MMO had. Since you don't agree that Pantheon is different then it would be hard to convince you that the death penalty should be different as well.
I see a sincere balance between VR trying to make the game they want and being open to player feedback that does not take away from the 'spirit' of what they want Pantheon to be. LOTS of things players want for quality of life that VR has said no to. Some were addressed in the recent PtV, but folks keep being dismissive of them to make points that are weird to me.
I see objective and evolutionary differences between what VR describes Pantheon to be and ALL other MMOS out there. I'm not going to debate back and forth with folks who don't because it's exhausting and I don't know when folks are being sincere when they discuss Pantheon anymore...far too many folks being negative for the sake of being so and nothing VR does will ever satisfy them.
YES, there is room for criticism, but I'm not hearing any sincere criticism most times and, while I condition myslef to have patience for Pantheon, I have very little for the problematic and questionable stuff folks keep bringing up that has been fairly and exhasutively addressed before.
Please see my response to Vandraad for more of my thoughts...if you are interested. If not, then take care.
“ what they have here so far (and it keeps getting worse) is just another please everybody game.“
Did we just see the Forums go from sub to Free to play?
Add that my long list of concerns.
Ashes of creation and pax dei look really good and who knows what the riot MMO will be like.
I will always try this MMO even if it takes 5-10 years, but i feel like a majority will realise that old school MMOs are only appealing because new ones are so bad currently, but if some new ones were good, the interest in pantheon would go down.
I personally hate EQ and anything older than wow.