Originally posted by whatamidoing

Originally posted by Sarr

Originally posted by whatamidoing

The thread basically says most of it all. First of all what's wrong with them?...every MMO that I've played that's tried to implement free aiming/FPS style aiming has felt slow, unresponsive, clunky and awkward to boot (basically they tend to feel like so pop-up games where you shoot the targets). So, until they implement the technology to maintain the flowing feel of FPS aiming style with thousands of players playing at once, it's not gonna happen. All these hopes for a "twitch based" MMO to show off your skillz will continue to be crushed due to design limitations. Maybe I'm wrong...maybe one does exist. But I doubt it, because if it existed, a whole lot more people would be playing it.

Just for clarities sake. In an ideal world you would get a game like Oblivion and be able to implement that type of combat system into an MMO, until then, it'll all be second rate.

 

D&D Online has much better and faster combat system than Oblivion. Remember that "moonwalk" in Oblivion? In DDO gravtity works like it should ; ).

If you played D&D Online and still say this, I'd be really surprised. No faster and more realistic combat in any other MMO, with excpeption maybe for Darkfall (sandbox game), but I didn't play it myself.

If you didn't - check it out. Especially after Module 9 hits live servers:

compendium.ddo.com/wiki/Release_Notes_Lamannia_Update_9.0_Official

Cheers.

I trialed DDO when it first came out and I didn't like it at all. I honestly don't even recall what the combat system was like I was just so turned off by it. But perhaps ill look into it again. Thanks for the info!
 

But its a mass of instances, of course it can afford to have more responsive serverside mechanics. It doesn't count as an mmo anymore than GW

You're welcome. But I'd encourage you to try it AFTER Module 9 hits live - it will be anounced on MMORPG.COM for sure : ). There's so many changes in that mod, very good for newcomers, that you could spoil everything by playing now, hehe ; ).

This game changed since those 3 years so much, that people coming back were amazed. There's something "big" going on behind the scenes too, but Turbine still keeps secrecy. They bring major investment in DDO and want to expand it's growth drastically. How? We still wait for Mod 9 and info... Mod 9 was already on test servers, now it seems Turbine's already working on Module 10 - probably some legal issues, like changing publisher may be keeping them from realeasing Mod 9 already.

Here are my videos of DDO combat . Xfire was causing some glitches, but generally it's playing fine:

www.xfire.com/video/b7a7c/

www.xfire.com/video/b7a51/

www.xfire.com/video/b7a43/

www.xfire.com/video/b8182/

And game intro + new character screen:

www.xfire.com/video/bbc6e/

Check those out. I'll try to port them later on youtube : ).

PS: I DOES count as MMO much more than GW : ). WoW isn't a definition of an MMO. Fully open world isn't a definition too, it's just an old way of thinking about it : ).
And DDO is much more MMORPG than WoW in my opinion - I played them all and many others. DDO is 100% real MMO, GW is... I wouldn't say it's 100% MMOish. It's more like a big multi PvP game, while DDO is about socializing, exploring, questing, finding traps, hidden passages, ways to overcame obastacles and roleplaying. GW lacks in those areas, it's like a vast PvP game with a fantasy background.

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by Axehilt

Planetside worked exactly like any other FPS.  Client-side hit verification:

 

Ouch. That's a bad thing.

No it's not.  It's far better than server side hit detection.  If you want to see a game that uses server side hit detection versus client side play Gunz (or any of the ijji shooters for that matter).  You'll see several of your shots land, but the enemy will take no damage.

Client side hit detection is superior to server side hit detection because it's based solely on your skill and it's impossible to blame player lag.  If you hit someone on your screen then they take damage.  None of this bull where a player could be on one side of the screen on your client and another on his, and your are firing full clips of bullets on the side the player isn't actually on according to the server.  It's also probably less of a stress on the server to handle collision detection.  I don't know why any game would use server side hit detection over client side (Gunz has loads of poor design choices like this).

Someone was saying how Counter Strike did hit detection, but they actually used server side hit detection in their example.  I'm pretty sure Counter Strike uses client side like pretty much every major triple A release title does.

There are two disadvantages to client side hit detection over server side, but I think they far outweigh the numerous disadvantages of using server side:  Some unfair hits will be registered (such as occassionally being shot while you are behind a wall because their client showed you as not being behind it due to lag) and aimbot hacking.

Originally posted by Magnum2103

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by Axehilt

Planetside worked exactly like any other FPS.  Client-side hit verification:

 

Ouch. That's a bad thing.

 

No it's not.  It's far better than server side hit detection.  If you want to see a game that uses server side hit detection versus client side play Gunz (or any of the ijji shooters for that matter).  You'll see several of your shots land, but the enemy will take no damage.

Client side hit detection is superior to server side hit detection because it's based solely on your skill and it's impossible to blame player lag.  If you hit someone on your screen then they take damage.  None of this bull where a player could be on one side of the screen on your client and another on his, and your are firing full clips of bullets on the side the player isn't actually on according to the server.  It's also probably less of a stress on the server to handle collision detection.  I don't know why any game would use server side hit detection over client side (Gunz has loads of poor design choices like this).

Someone was saying how Counter Strike did hit detection, but they actually used server side hit detection in their example.  I'm pretty sure Counter Strike uses client side like pretty much every major triple A release title does.

There are two disadvantages to client side hit detection over server side, but I think they far outweigh the numerous disadvantages of using server side:  Some unfair hits will be registered (such as occassionally being shot while you are behind a wall because their client showed you as not being behind it due to lag) and aimbot hacking.

Are you high? I'm listening to a cracking album atm so I'm in a spanking mood atm so I'm going to try to agree with you at all costs. For a single player game, yes client side is king. That's the best I can do I'm afraid.

Are you high? I'm listening to a cracking album atm so I'm in a spanking mood atm so I'm going to try to agree with you at all costs. For a single player game, yes client side is king. That's the best I can do I'm afraid.

Uh, of course a single player game is going to use client side hit detection.  THERE IS NO SERVER.  Please point out a single triple A title FPS that uses server side hit detection.  I sure don't know of any.  At least not any that have been made in the past 6-7 years or so.

Have you actually played a F2P game that uses it like Gunz?  A single lagger can ruin a game.  Your only option is to boot the person if you can or find a new game.  When you compare this to the downside of client side hit detection (aimbots) you'll find that laggers are much more rampant.  It's much easier to force lag than program or find an aimbot.  It's also easier to deal with players who aimbot over laggers, since much of the time it's not the laggers fault they are lagging and they should be allowed to have as much of an enjoyable game experience as someone with a better connection than them (and certainly shouldn't ruin the person with a better connection's game experience).

I think you'd be hard pressed to find any game programmer or designer who thinks server side hit detection is superior to client side.  I'd like to know your reasoning (you haven't stated one in any of your posts) as to why server side is superior.

Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

 

---

Originally posted by Josher

 

Planetside LOOKED like an FPS but that was it.  Aiming was just a replacement for a target lock.  It was just a target check, which is VERY different than a real FPS.   Stats still decided hit/miss and damage.   You could miss over and over again, even if it looks like you're aiming perfectly. 

 

---

You dont know what you are talking about.

 

 

---

Originally posted by Karbonoid

 

Planetside didn't work like a real shooter, I am fairly certain it didn't trace the paths of individual bullets serverside for example. The client just checked if the player was aiming more or less in the right direction, a bit like it worked in tabula rasa, although not as obvious.

 

---

You too. Stop talking.

 

And yes, Planetside was the next evolution of Tribes, made by the same people (Different game play however). The engine is a custom one, that is now available to buy if you want to. But its KIN, is the Torque game engine, also, made by the people who made the Tribes series.

 

Also, keep your eye on M.A.G

 

http://www.massivefps.com/

 

So the server/client sucked bad enough, that I would still miss over and over again, even though my target is right on the button.  Maybe it did work like a real FPS in theory.  It still played like molasis, so who cares in the end?   Maybe it got better overt the years.  It still didn't compare to a real FPS.   At the time, I could jump into a 40 vs 40 UT2k3 match and get pretty accurate performance in a much cooler looking playing field, with FAR better models, guns, ect.  So why play Planetside?    Nobody did.

Originally posted by TheHavok

I remember planetside having pretty tight controls but its been so long and I never really played more then a week or two.

Planetside beat Oblivion in terms of controls. Hell Oblivion felt clunky and slow, you can imagine my irritation at various other games no?

What I honestly want to see is a game that is as good as Jedi Knights: Jedi Academy. It was pretty much perfect.

Problem is what made Planetside work for it's controls was the CSHD system they used. That CSHD system was also the root of many many (worthless) b**** fits on the forums and in the game. So yeah, I don't think other game companies are going to resort to that in an MMO. And the alternative is either clunkyness or SSHD which means even if you see yourself hit the target, you might not have actually hit the target.

Magnum2103 summed it up well.

Much better than I could.

Every recent FPS uses client-side hit detection.

Gunz is probably the only FPS I've played in the last ten years that didn't use client-side hit detection.  The result?  It's terrible.  A game which could've been amazing (dual wielding?  Item progression in a FPS!?  RUNNING UP WALLS!?!?) is absolutely terrible because your shots just don't land on people.  You could be the greatest player in the world, but unless you're leading your targets by the laggiest player's latency (Quake 2-style), you won't actually hit anything.

I loved me some Quake 2 (especially the CTF mods with the offhand grapples: fun!) but I'd like to think we're 10-12 years beyond that era of technology now.

Originally posted by Josher

Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

 

---

Originally posted by Josher

 

Planetside LOOKED like an FPS but that was it.  Aiming was just a replacement for a target lock.  It was just a target check, which is VERY different than a real FPS.   Stats still decided hit/miss and damage.   You could miss over and over again, even if it looks like you're aiming perfectly. 

 

---

You dont know what you are talking about.

 

 

---

Originally posted by Karbonoid

 

Planetside didn't work like a real shooter, I am fairly certain it didn't trace the paths of individual bullets serverside for example. The client just checked if the player was aiming more or less in the right direction, a bit like it worked in tabula rasa, although not as obvious.

 

---

You too. Stop talking.

 

And yes, Planetside was the next evolution of Tribes, made by the same people (Different game play however). The engine is a custom one, that is now available to buy if you want to. But its KIN, is the Torque game engine, also, made by the people who made the Tribes series.

 

Also, keep your eye on M.A.G

 

http://www.massivefps.com/

 

 

So the server/client sucked bad enough, that I would still miss over and over again, even though my target is right on the button.  Maybe it did work like a real FPS in theory.  It still played like molasis, so who cares in the end?   Maybe it got better overt the years.  It still didn't compare to a real FPS.   At the time, I could jump into a 40 vs 40 UT2k3 match and get pretty accurate performance in a much cooler looking playing field, with FAR better models, guns, ect.  So why play Planetside?    Nobody did.

Wow. You must have sucked at aiming.

I played Planetside for years. It is an FPS system. No stats, no "hit checks". None of that crap. There wasn't even a single "hit scan" based weapon in the game (unlike various other "real shooters" like the CoD series). Most people who played Planetside and didn't like it just plain sucked because they suddenly had to compensate for bullet travel times.

Originally posted by blackwolf82

Originally posted by Josher

Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

 

---

Originally posted by Josher

 

Planetside LOOKED like an FPS but that was it.  Aiming was just a replacement for a target lock.  It was just a target check, which is VERY different than a real FPS.   Stats still decided hit/miss and damage.   You could miss over and over again, even if it looks like you're aiming perfectly. 

 

---

You dont know what you are talking about.

 

 

---

Originally posted by Karbonoid

 

Planetside didn't work like a real shooter, I am fairly certain it didn't trace the paths of individual bullets serverside for example. The client just checked if the player was aiming more or less in the right direction, a bit like it worked in tabula rasa, although not as obvious.

 

---

You too. Stop talking.

 

And yes, Planetside was the next evolution of Tribes, made by the same people (Different game play however). The engine is a custom one, that is now available to buy if you want to. But its KIN, is the Torque game engine, also, made by the people who made the Tribes series.

 

Also, keep your eye on M.A.G

 

http://www.massivefps.com/

 

 

So the server/client sucked bad enough, that I would still miss over and over again, even though my target is right on the button.  Maybe it did work like a real FPS in theory.  It still played like molasis, so who cares in the end?   Maybe it got better overt the years.  It still didn't compare to a real FPS.   At the time, I could jump into a 40 vs 40 UT2k3 match and get pretty accurate performance in a much cooler looking playing field, with FAR better models, guns, ect.  So why play Planetside?    Nobody did.

Wow. You must have sucked at aiming.

 

I played Planetside for years. It is an FPS system. No stats, no "hit checks". None of that crap. There wasn't even a single "hit scan" based weapon in the game (unlike various other "real shooters" like the CoD series). Most people who played Planetside and didn't like it just plain sucked because they suddenly had to compensate for bullet travel times.

Yup, YEARS of UT and CS and I just sucked at aiming.  Not to mention MOST people who tried PS thought it was bad...but its all me.  The critics sucked too.  Everyone sucked except the 10k who actually paid for it=)  Millions of people play CS, COD and other FPSs, but only hate PS because they sucked at it, hehe.  The game stunk.  You liked it.  Thats OK. 

Originally posted by Josher
....

Yup, YEARS of UT and CS and I just sucked at aiming.  Not to mention MOST people who tried PS thought it was bad...but its all me.  The critics sucked too.  Everyone sucked except the 10k who actually paid for it=)  Millions of people play CS, COD and other FPSs, but only hate PS because they sucked at it, hehe.  The game stunk.  You liked it.  Thats OK. 

I don't know how good or bad you are at aiming, but you clearly have a lot to learn about intelligent discourse. Planetside had at its peak about 60k concurrent subscribers (mmogchart.com). While this is not massive, it is still respectable and way more than was indicated by you. You speak with such authority about what 'everyone' likes and dislikes. Head over to the relevant forums and try again. The critics gave this game the thumbs up, btw. (Metacritic.com).

So, when all's said and done, you didn't like the game because it wasn't like one of the shooters you were already familiar with. The fact that you compare PS to UT and CS further reveals your lack of understanding. In a previous post you state:

After aiming perfectly like I would in any FPS only to see, miss, miss, miss...I uninstalled.

Has the Eurogamer review made into some form of urban slang term, I should be using here? I guess for now, I'm just going to say that people who have played the game for more than 2 hours will be able to tell you that it was more than possible to hit people consistently and *gasp* even have fun.

I agree with the OP.  So called twitch based mmo are a joke compared to the real thing.  Before I got into mmo's I was heavy into fps quake style games, sometimes 8 hours a day on my days off.  I got pretty good, and pulled off some insane kills.  For instance, running along a platform, a guy shoots a rocket at me....I leap over the rocket, headshot him before I land, jump to another platform while switching to rocket launcher, blast a guy, recoil back from my own damage, turn midair and blast a few guys skirmishing below.  Comparing that kind of frenetic pace with so called twitch based mmo is laughable.

Originally posted by Terranah

I agree with the OP.  So called twitch based mmo are a joke compared to the real thing.  Before I got into mmo's I was heavy into fps quake style games, sometimes 8 hours a day on my days off.  I got pretty good, and pulled off some insane kills.  For instance, running along a platform, a guy shoots a rocket at me....I leap over the rocket, headshot him before I land, jump to another platform while switching to rocket launcher, blast a guy, recoil back from my own damage, turn midair and blast a few guys skirmishing below.  Comparing that kind of frenetic pace with so called twitch based mmo is laughable.

 

 

I dont think that type of furious action would be in a twitch MMO, but then again I dunno. I played Neocron since release (quit a year ago) and it was the perfect style of twitch-based combat.

Think Deus Ex. That was perfect! (at the time of course) But in this generation, something a little faster and deeper would be nice. If planetside had a huge amount of content and character customization like say Fallout or something, i'd cream my pants so hard.

I think a big reason I site oblivion as something these "twitch based" MMORPGs should strive for is not because of it's "responsiveness" (this I didn't really have an issue with personally) but because of how much more realistic the physics (not talking about the jumping, talking about combat) and hit detection seem. When I swing a sword I feel like I'm swinging a sword. When I hit a guy with an arrow and am close enough to hear it and see it or get hit with one it feels and sounds like it actually went in them. When I play these so called "twitch based" MMORPGs not only do they often feel clunky and awkward they also fail to capture a more realistic and engaging feeling of combat IMO. I mean if they happen to not be awkward and not be "unresponsive" the combat feels just about as advanced as that 4 player co-op arcade game where you went around and hacked and slashed (can't remember it's name for the life of me right now).

Again. just my opinion, tell me how you feel, I want to keep this discussion production haha no more argueing about Planetside! :p

I just played a game session of DDO, and that game is kind-of twitchy. But I dont feel like im swinging a sword or hitting someone with an axe.

Maybe! if there was an mmo made with twitch mechanics and the source engine! wait.....that's Twilight War (post apoc mmo) and last i heard it got cancelled and replaced by fallen earth.

Originally posted by MajorBiggs

I just played a game session of DDO, and that game is kind-of twitchy. But I dont feel like im swinging a sword or hitting someone with an axe.

Maybe! if there was an mmo made with twitch mechanics and the source engine! wait.....that's Twilight War (post apoc mmo) and last i heard it got cancelled and replaced by fallen earth.

Right, well... we'll see when it comes out.

Originally posted by Magnum2103

Are you high? I'm listening to a cracking album atm so I'm in a spanking mood atm so I'm going to try to agree with you at all costs. For a single player game, yes client side is king. That's the best I can do I'm afraid.

Uh, of course a single player game is going to use client side hit detection.  THERE IS NO SERVER.  Please point out a single triple A title FPS that uses server side hit detection.  I sure don't know of any.  At least not any that have been made in the past 6-7 years or so.

Have you actually played a F2P game that uses it like Gunz?  A single lagger can ruin a game.  Your only option is to boot the person if you can or find a new game.  When you compare this to the downside of client side hit detection (aimbots) you'll find that laggers are much more rampant.  It's much easier to force lag than program or find an aimbot.  It's also easier to deal with players who aimbot over laggers, since much of the time it's not the laggers fault they are lagging and they should be allowed to have as much of an enjoyable game experience as someone with a better connection than them (and certainly shouldn't ruin the person with a better connection's game experience).

I think you'd be hard pressed to find any game programmer or designer who thinks server side hit detection is superior to client side.  I'd like to know your reasoning (you haven't stated one in any of your posts) as to why server side is superior.

Firstly, the single player thing, I know, I was taking the piss. Now on with the rest of the discussion. Why do you think they use cshd? You got it! They have NO CHOICE. For an mmofps to work they HAVE TO use cshd, the internet simply isn't in a possition to support anything else with results that would be playable. Edit: After rereading this Irealised it would be possible but it would require a server array so vast in size that the game would become unprofitable or have subs in the $100's, even then with diminished returns I'm not convinced.

This leads to a few points, what is the reason that all non fps mmo's use serverside? Because people cheat, plain and simple, they cheat whilst even playing single player games. So when they are given the chance to port everywhere and pwn peeps they do. Now in some games that may not be a big thing as it may not impact other peoples game, but in an mmofps is absolutely gamebreaking, as DarkFall is finding out.

Now lets take planetside as an example, I still play and have done since beta because I can accept that there are a huge number of hackers playing but from experience I can still beat them if they are crap or new. But it really doesn't matter how experienced I am if they can instant 2 shot bolt driver me while cloaked. Unless a dev or GM is actively watching at the time they hack there is no way they are getting banned. For most people this is where they hit the unsub button.

Now lets take Darkfall which also uses cs but also has more traditional mmo features such as loot and grinds etc then we are talking a whole new level of fked up. Instead of just invisibly one shotting me he can also loot all my gear and cash. Once people realise (as they eventually did in ps) how easy it is to hack, they leave after pissing around for a bit themselves, the game loses any value or sense of acheivment.

Thats why serverside is not only superior to clientside in an mmo but is imo vital. Now while its true that in games like cod and cs it is still possible to hack it is not possible to port about the place, fly, alter damage values, go invisible. In fact the only aspects of those game that you can hack are.... wait for it.... clientside. But there obviously always has to be a degree of clientside processing the trick is to keep it to a minimum and have no vital data there.

In my 2.5 years of Planetside, perhaps 2-3 fights out of tens of thousands involved cheating. A ridiculously low number. Perhaps things have changed since I played, but 2.5 years is a damn long time to see that little cheating.

So Planetside's "disadvantage" for using CSHD is 2-3 cheaters out of tens of thousands of fights, while its advantage is that in each of those tens of thousands of fights my weapons were responsive, accurate, and landed shots reliably on the enemy. F PS games live or die based on weapon responsiveness - based on seeing your shots hit and knowing they hit. Current SSHD tech is simply incapable of achieving that.

If the naysayers cannot cite example games that use SSHD successfully, they're full of crap.  Because 99.9% of FPSes out there use CSHD, and it's not by accident: it's because it's better.  And the 0.1% of games that try to use SSHD?  They're terrible!

From all I've heard, DFO is simply a poorly managed game.  Poor coding is poor coding.

..which of course brings up the possibility that Gunz is poorly coded -- except that unlike DFO there aren't hundreds of examples of SSHD working in a FPS setting, but there are hundreds of examples of CSHD working.

Maybe that's why I havent had a chance to enjoy a Fpsmmo?

I always thought they felt slow and loose, I could never really get into them like CS or Half-life 2.

Maybe one day someone will create one with tight controls and i'll change my tune about RPG only combat systems in mmos.

Originally posted by Axehilt

In my 2.5 years of Planetside, perhaps 2-3 fights out of tens of thousands involved cheating. A ridiculously low number. Perhaps things have changed since I played, but 2.5 years is a damn long time to see that little cheating.

To recap, Planetside's "disadvantage" for using CSHD is 2-3 cheaters out of tens of thousands of fights, while its advantage is that in each of those tens of thousands of fights my weapons were responsive, accurate, and landed shots reliably on the enemy.

If the naysayers cannot cite example games that use SSHD successfully, they're full of crap.  Because 99.9% of FPSes out there use CSHD, and it's not by accident: it's because it's better.  And the 0.1% of games that try to use SSHD?  They're terrible!

FPS games live or die based on weapon responsiveness - based on seeing your shots hit and knowing they hit.  SSHD cannot achieve that.

However you must admit the incentive to cheat in a persistant world is much greater than in a game where losing is merely a statistic. In an MMO a simple rumor people are cheating is enough to make paying customers quit. Also you may have been cheated hundreds of times and not know it. Only stupid people cheat in obvious ways.

Originally posted by zymurgeist 

However you must admit the incentive to cheat in a persistant world is much greater than in a game where losing is merely a statistic. 

That's partly why I'm so convinced CSHD works (that, and the legions of other working CSHD games, and the tiny room of 1 malfunctioning SSHD game.)

All that incentive, yet I seriously only witnessed cheating those 2-3 times.

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by zymurgeist 

However you must admit the incentive to cheat in a persistant world is much greater than in a game where losing is merely a statistic. 

That's partly why I'm so convinced CSHD works (that, and the legions of other working CSHD games, and the tiny room of 1 malfunctioning SSHD game.)

All that incentive, yet I was seriously only witnessed cheating those 2-3 times.

So you were only caught cheating 2-3 times? I'm not sure I get your point.

I think what zymur was aluding to is that the current fps's mmo or not that use cshd are awashed with hackers, counterstrike or planetside for example. Those are games where there is little to gain from killing, the enemy simply rezzes and heads back with no detriment other than time. In games where there are other things at stake such as loot, flying boats, clan castles etc the draw to cheat and benefits from doing are so much more rewarding how bad will those games be?

On a side note if you think you were only killed by cheats 2-3 time in 2.5 years you're delusional. Only last night we had a breko on banning people for being idiots, they were going around insta-capping basses on a cont. He later told everyone how they were all 5 year-vets, how likely do you think it is they only just started cheating and doing something so blatant.

If everyone saw atleast 2-3 cheaters in game wouldn;t that mean a whole bunch of cheating was going on?

Originally posted by whatamidoing

The thread basically says most of it all. First of all what's wrong with them?...every MMO that I've played that's tried to implement free aiming/FPS style aiming has felt slow, unresponsive, clunky and awkward to boot (basically they tend to feel like so pop-up games where you shoot the targets).

You said can't even remember the combat from DDO. There have only been a few MMOG's that have tried to implement free aiming systems. Which ones did you try? The only other two I can think of are Darkfall and Spellborn. Both were first time MMOG's by small companies. Just to clarify, I'm talking about non-shooter MMOG's since Oblivion was used as an example.

Also, saying that its slow, clunky, or unresponsive is a matter of reference. Compared to other MMOG's both Spellborn and and DDO are much more responsive and less clunky than games like WAR, LotRO, and WoW. Compared to pure shooters they probably do seem clunky, but pure shooters are nothing like Oblivion either.

So lately I've revisited Arx Fatalis. Its pure first person, manual aiming, and definitely feels like you're swinging a sword. Its almost just like Oblivion in many regards. But I seriously don't think the combat system would be desirable in a MMOG. It ends up being repetitive hack hack block, hack hack block. Its fun for a change, but would be boring as hell in the long run. Combat systems really need things like the weapon selections of DDO, or the skill deck of Spellborn to keep them interesting.

Coming up we have a few shooter MMOG's. Crimecraft is nothing more than a persistent lobby with CS-like matches. It will have the right shooter feel, but not the right MMOG feel. Then there is Fallen Earth, but it hardly counts since its twitch aiming is very rudimentary. I definitely wouldn't call it a twitch game. I know there are other games, but those are the only two I have seen in action.

Of all these games, DDO takes the crown for twitch and reflexes. All the level 5+ content requires a fair amount of player skill, coordination, planning, and knowledge. If only they made the game a bit more persistent open world with a real crafting system...

Originally posted by JGMIII

If everyone saw atleast 2-3 cheaters in game wouldn;t that mean a whole bunch of cheating was going on?

 

Cheating was not bad or really relevant until the game hit its 5th year. People need to keep in mind, this game was the first of its kind, no other FPS had this kind of battles (still don't), and it came out in 2003.

People have had a LONG time to make hacks, and due to SOE not developing the game, it only got worse.

Its a very old game, with a very old code base, and many many years under its belt. However, until recently, hacking/cheating was not rampant.

Say what you want, but it is one of the greatest MMOFPS of all time. You will still, to this day, not find the game play it provides.