Quote:
Originally Posted by Kika Maslyaka
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
This is why EQ2 and even WoW has superior combat mechanics compared to EQ1.
Auto-attack means shit in terms of DPS, if you not aggressively using your activateable abilities. There is no double attack in eq2 and wow for example, so you don't produce double dps by just hitting A and having mob targeted.
EQ2 combo strikes are especially cool
|
There's some thigns I don't like about where Sony is taking its games. But I won't go there since I think anybody here that's reading these posts probably has a good idea what I'd say about it.
Other than that, I would actually agree. For example, the AA abilities on live can be very appropriate and fill in that hole that's present here on p1999. For example, sometimes you get outdone and the DPS AA abilities on live can save your group. They can be used every 15 min, 30 min, every hour, or something similar. This also applies to the disciplines, like the ranger weapon shield disc or the paladin's holyforge. It makes you feel resourceful and isn't overpowering. It's kind of like the monk mend ability or the paladin lay on hands, which we have on p1999.
I like these kind of reactive, circumstantial abilities. They're not something you do repetitiously every 15 second interval. In fact, my ranger on live would rarely use his full range of abilities and instead saved them for those situations where the group (or I) was in peril. Having them be only available every 15 min or 30 or 60 encourages you to use them well and not waste them on trivial situations. It hones you into becoming a smart player.
I think this type of gameplay isn't just about exploiting weaknesses, as I already stated in a different post, it's about having an answer for most everything. In EQ, there're a lot of times when there's no answer. If you fail to prevent the circumstance then you simply die honorably or die angry. If you fail to spot the red thing then it swats you like a fly. If you fail to see the add then you're toast. If you fail to see the cliff, then your coffin is a pancake.
The key problem isn't that there's a red thing or that there're too many adds. Too often people see it that way, so the developers remove red things and adds. This fixes the problem, doesn't it? No, because it oversimplifies the game. That's not what should be done. the problem is that, too often, there's no answer to these problems AFTER they happen. This isn't how it should be. When I die, I should be able to blame myself and not the game. It shouldn't just be about preventing mortal affliction, it should also be about the choices you make in between affliction and total loss. There should be a string of choices between "There's a red thing on us!" and
Loading, Please Wait...
I've been frowned on for thinking it would be cool to combine every class in the game into one. What would it be like to be EVERY class at once? For one, you'd have an answer for most everything. YOu would have abundant tools at your disposal. You could pause the game by feign deathing. You could rez your corpse. There's a lot. You'd be a very busy player keeping on top of it all. It would be a lot more challenging that it seems from the outside. Juggling all of these abilities is not easy. Power of this magnitude means nothing if you don't know how to use it. Imagine having to know how to be a warrior, a cleric, a ranger, a bard, a chanter, a druid and all the other classes: all at once? A challenge! The key thing here is that you can't just rush into things. You have to know what you're doing. But instead of just having to know one or two things, you have to know how to do lots and lots of things. You have an answer for almost everything.
And that's hte problem. In EQ, there's not enough answers. Too often, the answer is to have a rogue in your group (or a cleric, or a...). Or the answer is to have 2000 ac instead of 1500. But that's not how it should be. Answers should be less based on numbers and more based on circumstance. And less based on hard restrictions, like player population. That doesn't mean you throw out numbers and restrictions. It means that you simply up the meaningfulness of choices. That's all. Weapons SHOULD have stats. There should be numbers. There should be people that specialize and are better than others. I'm not denying any of that. Just don't make HARD walls, but fluid, changing walls that still retain their character. For example, if I'm in a dungeon and a door is locked, my first thought is to grab a rogue friend to lock pick it. But I should also have the option to break the door down. Maybe if I hit it long enough it will. A rogue would certainly make it easier.
Am I saying EQ should be easier? No. I'm saying it should have more choices in it. Staring blankly ahead because you cannot find a rogue to pick the lock, is not a choice: it's the lack thereof. This is just one example.
I don't want a dumbed down game. I don't want things handed to me. I hate with a fury passion when I walk up to a supposed violent creature in a game and it sits there until I hit it. I hate when I jump off a cliff in a game and receive no damage when I hit the ground. I hate when I can swim forever without needing air. I hate when creatures don't help each other to thwart my efforts. I hate when a game is too simple and painless. I hate when developers fix the wrong thing. Give me all of it! Give me cliffs that can kill me. Give me creatures that help each other because they want to kill me. Give me water that I can't breath in forever. Give me a world that will kill me when I fail to make the right choices. But don't give me a world where I cannot overcome those things. Don't give me a world where I feel like it's the game, not the creatures, that I'm fighting. Try to have an answer for everything that doesn't have hard restrictions.
Restrictions should be permeable. Kind of like how a weapon wears thin with repeated use.
Hard restrictions = linear. And that's what I hate most. We need non-linear gameplay.