Originally posted by Vanpry

Worse thing they stole from single player rpgs.

...and single-player CRPGS stole it from pen-and-paper rpgs.

Back when Gygax first came up with the idea for an incredibly abstracted representation of medieval combat, it made perfect sense.  In an pnp game, players needed a system that had no depth.  And, since they could take as much time as they wanted to think through every move, they wanted one that gave them steady and predictable progress, even within the course of a single fight. 

Once players got used to the idea of focusing on steadily-dropping hitpoint bars, developers were afraid to try anything new.  The same dynamic got translated into turn-based computer games, where it still made a tiny bit of sense.  But then it continued into the first primitive non-turn-based games, just because it was what players expected.  And today, when computers are a MILLION TIMES more powerful than they were thirty years ago, the exact same process continues.

You don't have to go far to figure out why that is.  Just look at this thread: some people are screaming like stuck pigs, not about any particular system, but at the very THOUGHT of losing their security blanket.  Few developers are willing to incur that kind of hatred in the easy market in the hopes of ferreting out what the people who are silently bored to death are looking for. 

The problem is that game has now been DONE.  It made perfect sense for Blizzard to not only copy the standard system, but even dumb it down further with their button-refresh delays. That was a very wise and clever move.  All they had to do was take the best game out there, remove 99% of its bugs, and then make it so that a reasonably intelligent six-year-old can easily master the combat system.

Blizzard's move was brilliant.  But now we see dozens of developers trying to copy it -- and that is foolish.

Just picking one example:  has anyone here tried Algonan yet?   It's the same game as WoW - just not as well made.  People are rejoicing that they decided to spend six more months polishing it.  What's the damned point?  If they spent six YEARS they might - might - get it polished to the same degree as WoW is.  But even if they could do that, who cares?  It would be the same game.

MMORPG's are not blue jeans.  You can't just make a knock-off, repackage it, and sell it in a different city.  There's only one internet, and the same virtual product design can be replicated for an infinite number of users.

In order to have a successful MMORPG, you have to be either better than everyone else, or markedly different from everyone else.  And unfortunately, only one company can be better than everyone else.

Originally posted by kopema

You don't have to go far to figure out why that is.  Just look at this thread: some people are screaming like stuck pigs, not about any particular system, but at the very THOUGHT of losing their security blanket.  Few developers are willing to incur that kind of hatred in the easy market in the hopes of ferreting out what the people who are silently bored to death are looking for. 

Or, those people may not actually be looking for a real game. They are  just bitching about some imaginary game they think would be fun since it doesn't exist, but would actually suck if you made it.

Sort of like when a candidate for political office announces he's running for the first time, he gets huge positive numbers. Everyone thinks he's going to what they would like. Then they figure out what he really stands for, and his numbers drop like a rock.

We all love the perfect MMORPG that doesn't exist in reality.

I haven't read this thread but to answer the title, no I'm quite bored of this game mechanic. The only mmo that I've personally played that doesn't have this is guild wars. Every other game has this mechanic and it's quite stale. The genre has been out for quite a while, time to have new ideas put in.

If the roles are implemented in a way that's fun to play, then I enjoy it.

 

you're asking for collision detection. This raises a whole new set of problems. Things like griefing by blocking doorways for example, and this also doesn't work very well with any lag. This would be easier to implement in a smaller game, like a first person shooter, rather than in a Massive game like an MMO, which typically has more lag.

Collision detection only attracts griefers if the Devs are still squarely INSIDE the box. The equation is simple. Why is X a griefer tool. THen fix X.    If collision allows griefing, then fix it. Why is it griefing? Someone standing in a doorway blocks everyone in and they all die from a grenade. IRL, you shove that guy out of the way.  Now, if that guy is actively TRYING to keep you from getting by, then that is different. Many times this person is an ally....cause if it was an enemy, you'd just kill it. So, you add in the ability to jostle past an ally in a doorway. There is SOME collision, you are slowed down, but not stopped.  

Quit poo pooing ideas just because you are incapable of climbing out of the box.

The answer to the Holy Trinity issue, it seems (after reading ALL the posts here) is to add a more intelligent and natural AI behviour to the MOBS.  Players cannot just stand there and TANK if the mobs will simply run away or around you.  You must actively engage the enemy to get their attention. And, could you engage several at a time? Different Mobs have different modes of operation.  Some will pack hunt and all attack one target.  Some will come in an each engage one of you (5 human thugs each take one of the group, or maybe gang up on one person...make it random!).

Instead of making me a DPS, make me a hero. Instead of making me a healer, make me a hero! Instead of making me a tank, make me a hero. Faster action, intelligent AI.

Can I also ask for a non static world? HAHAHA. A topic for another thread....one that i've posted on many times.

IRL, a kid with a knife can take out a gangster boss. In MMO's this is simply not the case.

Originally posted by Isaak

Instead of making me a DPS, make me a hero. Instead of making me a healer, make me a hero! Instead of making me a tank, make me a hero. Faster action, intelligent AI.

So basically make an MMOG instead of an MMORPG?   The game you propose seems to make everyone the same generic "hero" class, without distinction.  Players like distinction.

I do agree with your desire to think outside the box, but you can't just half-ass the solutions without thinking them through either (because if collision's "fix" is being able to shove people out of the way, that becomes an even bigger griefing tool than merely blocking someone.)

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by Isaak

Instead of making me a DPS, make me a hero. Instead of making me a healer, make me a hero! Instead of making me a tank, make me a hero. Faster action, intelligent AI.

 

So basically make an MMOG instead of an MMORPG?   The game you propose seems to make everyone the same generic "hero" class, without distinction.  Players like distinction.

I do agree with your desire to think outside the box, but you can't just half-ass the solutions without thinking them through either (because if collision's "fix" is being able to shove people out of the way, that becomes an even bigger griefing tool than merely blocking someone.)

Axehilt is right.  I rarely harass people(I don't typically ever go so far as griefing), but if that part of the game was there, and my group was bored, we would so stalk random people and shove them and block them and etc to prevent them from getting anything done until we were bored with that.  Of course, at the point we were bored enough to do that, we'd probably end up finding a new game, so the point is moot.

Originally posted by Isaak

 

you're asking for collision detection. This raises a whole new set of problems. Things like griefing by blocking doorways for example, and this also doesn't work very well with any lag. This would be easier to implement in a smaller game, like a first person shooter, rather than in a Massive game like an MMO, which typically has more lag.

 

Collision detection only attracts griefers if the Devs are still squarely INSIDE the box. The equation is simple. Why is X a griefer tool. THen fix X.    If collision allows griefing, then fix it. Why is it griefing? Someone standing in a doorway blocks everyone in and they all die from a grenade. IRL, you shove that guy out of the way.  Now, if that guy is actively TRYING to keep you from getting by, then that is different. Many times this person is an ally....cause if it was an enemy, you'd just kill it. So, you add in the ability to jostle past an ally in a doorway. There is SOME collision, you are slowed down, but not stopped.  

Quit poo pooing ideas just because you are incapable of climbing out of the box.

The answer to the Holy Trinity issue, it seems (after reading ALL the posts here) is to add a more intelligent and natural AI behviour to the MOBS.  Players cannot just stand there and TANK if the mobs will simply run away or around you.  You must actively engage the enemy to get their attention. And, could you engage several at a time? Different Mobs have different modes of operation.  Some will pack hunt and all attack one target.  Some will come in an each engage one of you (5 human thugs each take one of the group, or maybe gang up on one person...make it random!).

Instead of making me a DPS, make me a hero. Instead of making me a healer, make me a hero! Instead of making me a tank, make me a hero. Faster action, intelligent AI.

Can I also ask for a non static world? HAHAHA. A topic for another thread....one that i've posted on many times.

IRL, a kid with a knife can take out a gangster boss. In MMO's this is simply not the case.

Sounds like to me you just climbed into the First Person Shooter box.

Modern Warfare 2 is already on the way.

Well you are simplifying somewhat what game developers are doing currently.  They have expanded on the big three to involve most of the other classes.   While you can argue that the basic big three are the heart of it, the boss fights have moved further and further from it. 

The zerg game everyone talks about works well in many of the fps games, but I see it rarely used in the MMO genre.  I guess people pine for it because of the ease of making up a party. 

Personally I like having a significant portion of the parties available needed in a group.  So I guess I find this much better than a zerg mentality.

There are different ways a Holy Trinity MMO could play. It could play very similar to a sandbox MMO. Just because you can't do everything in the game doesn't make it not sandboxy... Classes are a good way to clearly give the player a role he/she wants to play. It also limits the player so that he/she cannot become a supercharacter and max out every single skill and be the best of everything... It turns into a shooter eventually where character developement just leads to the same destination whereas if you had classes, the end of character developement can mean different things.

I am not against the skill setup, but I do think a Holy Trinity MMO can also be just as fun depending on the other elements of the game. (see Vanguard)

90 votes on the poll at the time of this post, and only 30%, less than 1/3 of respondents say the Holy Trinity is the most fun you can have in an online RPG.

I think this is where you get the solo vs group divide in MMORPGs.

If you're not really into the kind of serious close coordination the holy trinity game mechanics provide, but something closer to a mini zerg, grouping just isn't that important a feature in the game, and doesn't need that much support.

This leads to the kind of game design we see now. I don't really need you to level, you don't really need me, we can both easily solo to the level cap. We can group now and then, but we dont' really have to pay close attention to what the other is doing, and we can just jump in a group, zerg the boss for the phat lewt every now and then at the end of a quest line, kthanx bye, back to the solo quest grind.

That's a very different game experience from being encouraged to group during the entire leveling phase, and soloing now and then while looking for a group, or deciding to spend the real extra time and effort it takes to solo to the level cap.

I know there is probably a lot of people who don't like the tank/healer/DPS idea,but they need to remember a couple things.

1 that "IS" what defines RPG's,it goes way back to that design.It does not mean you can't find variations to create new ideas, but there is a reason you really can't..point 2.

2 The reason you really can't change the structure is simple and no matter how you slice and dice it,the reason is that ,the mob can ONLY be striking one foe at a time.SO it only makes sense to keep a fight well structured so that it is ORGANIZED.I mean even a poorly designed RAID fight still has the players trying to organize it as best they can,so that theory never goes away.

What is your other option?uncontrolled Chaos,i cannot see anyone enjoying that option,it not only makes no sense ,but is sloppy game play.

What makes for great combat is how the game structures the hate formula's.I have seen in many games where it is done VERY poorly and to most,i do not think they even understand how it works,they just blindly play.Many games have what i call "cheap"auto aggro,witch basically means ,no matter what anyone does,the mob starts it's hate at the healer and works from there.

I really do not think crowd control ideas are good,they again fall into my "cheap" mechanic,like rooting or completely removing mobs from fighting,example "FEAR" mechanics that can make a mob run.It not only is cheap but looks unrealistic,the mob runs in fear ,then automatically does a 360 once the timer is up.I think at the very least ,using a mechanic such as that ,should ONLY cause fear to the one that casts the spell,then the HATE meter should switch to the next in line,the mob should not totally run from the whole party.So it should be a mechanic to drop him down the hate meter more so than a fear mechanic.

This is why i look to the combat structure in games as the place i find the most enjoyment.I think most players just look at killing as a mechanic to level up,they find no enjoyment form combat and in most cases ,call it a grind.Most of the WOW generation of player,think they should be rewarded for killing,not just some reward but a large one,again anything less,they use the term "grind",to the people who actually play for fun,combat is just that ,a challenge and fun,we do not look to rewards for satisfaction.

The basic 3 type structure works,because it is designed to allow a group to co ordinate abilities,it allows for careful consideration when using spells and abilities,there is other players to worry about ,other than just yourself,witch is why solo play really waters down combat,to where it is not even enjoyable.

Originally posted by Wizardry

I

2 The reason you really can't change the structure is simple and no matter how you slice and dice it,the reason is that ,the mob can ONLY be striking one foe at a time.SO it only makes sense to keep a fight well structured so that it is ORGANIZED.I mean even a poorly designed RAID fight still has the players trying to organize it as best they can,so that theory never goes away.

What is your other option?uncontrolled Chaos,i cannot see anyone enjoying that option,it not only makes no sense ,but is sloppy game play.

I think most players in current solo friendly games not only enjoy that option, but openly ask for more if it in many of the threads we see here.

The only thing the Holy Trinity does is make everyone identical. All healers are expected to fit a particular mold, all tanks are supposed to be the same, etc.  It does away with individuality when everyone has to be interchangable so you can jump into any group and fulfill the exact same functions.

No thanks, I pass.

Originally posted by Cephus404

The only thing the Holy Trinity does is make everyone identical. All healers are expected to fit a particular mold, all tanks are supposed to be the same, etc.  It does away with individuality when everyone has to be interchangable so you can jump into any group and fulfill the exact same functions.

No thanks, I pass.

As opposed to everyone in the game being a tank mage? That's what you think is "unique" in a game?

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

As opposed to everyone in the game being a tank mage? That's what you think is "unique" in a game?

No, it's about having lots of choices and having none of those choices being so much better than the alternatives that you have a wide range of character types and character builds.  Every character is an individual, not a min/max stereotype.

But you knew that, this is just another of your ridiculous "I want to group!" threads where you've already seen that you're in the minority.  Give up already.

@ Cephus404

Consider 'the mold' you reference earlier.. who is to say that 'all healers' need to fill it? Even by using conventional terms of healing, there are quite a few ways you can incorporate the mechanic:

- Cast heals

- Instant-cast heals

- Heal over time

- Direct heals

- Preemptive heals (when hit, heal for x)

- Protection heals (shields for x, acts as an addition to health)

These are 6 examples that can be mixed and matched and included or excluded from certain 'classes' of 'healer' to make all healers play in a very unique way. There doesn't need to be a 'mold' that 'all healers' need to fit into.

This sample breakdown of how a single mechanic can be shaped and used can easily be applied to a 'tank' or a 'controller' or a 'utility' or a 'dps' or any other sort of class classification you should choose to have a unique denominator.

Edit: Format.

I don't know about holy trinity but can someone explain to me how a cloth wearing priest can take down a fully plated warrior?

Originally posted by Briansho

I don't know about holy trinity but can someone explain to me how a cloth wearing priest can take down a fully plated warrior?

We're not talking about a RL priest, we're talking about someone who has a direct connection to an actual deity and can use that connection to obliterate you in their god's name.

That, and imbalanced games aren't fun.

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

90 votes on the poll at the time of this post, and only 30%, less than 1/3 of respondents say the Holy Trinity is the most fun you can have in an online RPG.

Well you didn't exactly word it "do you like playing a distinct, interesting role in RPGs?"   Wording of the poll has a good deal of impact.

Your poll was basically a step away from "Do you enjoy the same tired old mechanic you've seen in a hundred games?" which doesn't exactly get people excited to vote yes, even if role-based gameplay ends up being an excellent catalyst for the types of gaming communities player like.