I have seen some good points mentioned here, but nobody has come up with the idea that immediately came to my mind. I''ll explain this idea using an RPG as an example.

One person mentioned that running alot should make you faster. OK, this is realistic; you run more and your legs are stronger and your lung capacity is increased. But this gives people who run around all day an advantage. Now let''s take the sniping idea. To become an archer, you must take a test and shoot n targets in x amount of time. WHY CAN''T THESE BE IN THE SAME GAME!?!?!? Some attributes are increased by repitition and some by skill. This means that a skilled player can''t be perfect without playing alot and a player that spends all day online can''t be perfect without skill.

--------------------------------------
I am the master of stories.....
If only I could just write them down...

OMG I sense a flame war coming up, I really have to take a part in this =)

Heh anyways, I think that the whole player skill vs. character skill problem is because of this: some people don't have time to develop an RPG character, other people don't have twitch-based skills (or don't wanna develop them). It's very hard to please both audiences. Personaly I think that a game based on twitch or actual strategy/tactics (something you get better at) is much a much "richer" experience than one based on the character's stats. But that's a matter of personal preference.

I think that a game like that must have challenges (mini-games/aiming/tactics/etc) with rewards appropriate to the skill of the player. Look at the standard game of Counter-Strike. If your reflexes aren't 1 nanosecond faster than the other guy, you die. My games weren't exactly exciting until I had developed some reasonable skill because of this. This is one of the things that seperates these 2 kinds of players. I think that, whatever the system is, it should be more like RPGs in that way (you get a reward appropriate to your level). This way it could be much more appealing to players used to the standard leveling thing.

EDIT: This way Krez would just get a kind of a lower skill when using that meter in Gladius, it wouldn't be like a crucial part of the game is lost because it relies on human skill, you simply have a greater advantage if you're more skilled.

[edited by - Jotaf on March 29, 2004 2:46:51 PM]

quote: Original post by Jotaf
This way Krez would just get a kind of a lower skill when using that meter in Gladius, it wouldn''t be like a crucial part of the game is lost because it relies on human skill, you simply have a greater advantage if you''re more skilled.

all i''m saying is that this doesn''t belong in an RPG; it should be my character''s skills versus your character''s skills, not my skills versus yours.

quote: Original post by krez
all i''m saying is that this doesn''t belong in an RPG; it should be my character''s skills versus your character''s skills, not my skills versus yours.

Oh you are so taking the entire idea out of proportion. For starters there are different levels of the "button mash" scale in the example you offered ( Gladius ). If you can get it to half way up which trivial to do unless you are physically retarded then you get a "normal" hit. It is extremely difficult to get it into the red area which is a "critical" hit and this is exactly how it should be. The ease of most of all of the other meters is actually a huge failing in Gladius, it makes the game way too unbalanced/simple but that''s another topic.

Also the button mashing is different based on class. The skills you are probably taking about are for example the "overhead cleave" skill for a legionnaire. This is a medium type class doing a heavy type attack. Of course its going to be difficult, that is the entire point. Now if you use a centurion and use their button mash attacks ( I do not recall the skills off hand ) then they are extremely trivial to perform because it is a heavy class performing a "heavy" skill. The meter grows much more quickly.

This is the type of attitude that is catered to by MMO''s and also what is completely wrong with MMO''s today. They cater towards the lowest common denominator. Your characters should not be able to score 100% critical rates or always instantly kill a weaker class with a single combo ( DAoC assassins ) with no skill required.

I also used to have extreme difficulty with the ''fast'' button mash meters. They are really the only meter that isn''t completely trivial in Gladius. After a couple of weeks of practice I can now hit criticals most of every time. The fact you gave up immediately because you were not able to immediately solve the problem is exactly what would be positive about this type of system. Those with no motivation to learn their characters would remain with characters inferior to this with players who take the time to actually learn how to play well with their characters. This, what you are complaining about, is the entire point of the system.

This would undoubtedly scare users like you away from any such game, but I am simply wagering that more players are interested in human skill based systems as opposed to ''repetitious skill development'' type systems. The current popularity and success of the proverbial FPS compared to MMO''s supports this point.

Well, it seems that such a system would be welcome in a MMO Adventure Game (MMOAG). I enjoy Zelda games, even though it is my responsibility to ensure that Link''s arrows find their targets and his shield points the right direction. If you''re going to sell it as a role-playing game, though, you''re in for a flood of negative opinion.

RPG players, as a group, prefer a level of passivity in their game-playing. Winning a big fight isn''t an achievement in and of itself, it''s rather the payoff for long hours of careful character building. In an adventure game, you see the energy bolt coming at you and think, "I just have to duck over here and then dodge left and I''ll only take a little damage," whereas in a RPG, you would think, "No problem, Sir Jotul could handle this with one hand tied behind his back, and that Armlet of Magical Mitigation will take care of anything that gets through. Let''s see how this guy likes the taste of Righteous Zeal!"

If you''re looking at making an MMOAG, you might find that you''ll get more griefers and casual saboteurs. After all, once you''ve got the chops to compete in-game, there''s no reason to role-play. If I''m good enough that my soldier can best most of the dopes in the Royal Guard, what''s to prevent me from breaking into their barracks and stealing their gear, and then twitching my way out the back door? Superhuman feats will become commonplace, and the player base will be stratified by skill, as it is in all other twitch-based games.

quote: Original post by haro
Oh you are so taking the entire idea out of proportion.

nope.

quote: For starters there are different levels of the "button mash" scale in the example you offered ( Gladius ). If you can get it to half way up which trivial to do unless you are physically retarded then you get a "normal" hit.

thanks. no really, i enjoy being called names when i''m just expressing my opinion in an on-topic manner. anyway, i don''t recall the exact skills, but with some of them you must get it past half way to get a "normal" hit.

quote: It is extremely difficult to get it into the red area which is a "critical" hit and this is exactly how it should be.

i know this, and it isn''t what i am talking about.

quote: Also the button mashing is different based on class. The skills you are probably taking about are for example the "overhead cleave" skill for a legionnaire. This is a medium type class doing a heavy type attack. Of course its going to be difficult, that is the entire point. Now if you use a centurion and use their button mash attacks ( I do not recall the skills off hand ) then they are extremely trivial to perform because it is a heavy class performing a "heavy" skill. The meter grows much more quickly.

i don''t think any of them should be impossible; i understand that some should be harder than others, but again, that isn''t what i was talking about.

quote: This is the type of attitude that is catered to by MMO''s and also what is completely wrong with MMO''s today. They cater towards the lowest common denominator. Your characters should not be able to score 100% critical rates or always instantly kill a weaker class with a single combo ( DAoC assassins ) with no skill required.

i never said otherwise. MMORPGs do need a lot of work, but i do not think we should throw in player skills when it changes the entire premise of gameplay. i think there are solutions that would fit better with the genre.

quote: I also used to have extreme difficulty with the ''fast'' button mash meters. They are really the only meter that isn''t completely trivial in Gladius. After a couple of weeks of practice I can now hit criticals most of every time.

congratulations. not all of us have weeks to practice button-mashing, just as we do not have time to play out MMORPG characters up to uber levels.

quote: The fact you gave up immediately because you were not able to immediately solve the problem is exactly what would be positive about this type of system.

who said i gave up immediately? and what type of genius would deliberately exclude people from their playerbase and consider it "positive"?

quote: Those with no motivation to learn their characters would remain with characters inferior to this with players who take the time to actually learn how to play well with their characters.

you say "learn their characters", but you really mean "practice arbitrary skills which determine how well their character does".

fast fingers or reflexes should not determine how well the character does in an RPG. sure, you could make a game where you progress by button-mashing or timing or quick reflexes, but it isn''t an RPG anymore and shouldn''t be labeled as such. counterstrike is fun, but it isn''t an RPG, and everyone knows it isn''t when they buy it.

quote: This, what you are complaining about, is the entire point of the system.

well, i think it is a bad system for an RPG.

quote: This would undoubtedly scare users like you away from any such game, but I am simply wagering that more players are interested in human skill based systems as opposed to ''repetitious skill development'' type systems.

yes, and those people don''t play RPGs, because they prefer the human-skill based games.

quote: The current popularity and success of the proverbial FPS compared to MMO''s supports this point.

hopefully you won''t insult me for this one: i don''t think a bastard child of the two would work. the RPG players would be annoyed that they are limited by their eye-hand coordination, and the FPS players would be annoyed that people with less skills can still do well because of their characters'' stats.

quote: Original post by krez
who said i gave up immediately? and what type of genius would deliberately exclude people from their playerbase and consider it "positive"?

Again, more hypocrisy. Is this really so difficult to understand? The current MMO game system deliberately excludes a huge majority of potential players from their games based on massive time requirements to accomplish anything at all. There is literally no effective demographic for the current MMO system with the possible exception of retirees. Considering repetition/time investment is the defacto standard it can be assumed it is viewed in a ''positive'' manner.

quote: hopefully you won''t insult me for this one: i don''t think a bastard child of the MMO/FPS would work. the RPG players would be annoyed that they are limited by their eye-hand coordination, and the FPS players would be annoyed that people with less skills can still do well because of their characters'' stats.

I was not insulting you, if you cannot reach the "average hit" on that bar you must be physically disabled. I will, however, explain why your opinion is quite far off base. First off, if you haven''t noticed, single player RPG''s are quickly becoming exclusively real time. Take NeverWinter Nights as the obvious example. Most publishers won''t even touch non-real time games anymore simply because most people don''t want to play them.

Real time play obviously leads to an aspect of hand-eye-coordination. I have no clue how you cannot realize this. Players are still by no means limited by their reflexes, but players also cannot succede without some level of skill and reflex.

Now take the FPS genre. Character based imbalance has ALWAYS been a major part of FPS. Want to know what its called? Weapons and vehicles. An unskilled player can pick up weapons which are able to kill many players at once with a single shot ( rocket launcher for example ). Does this annoy FPS players? No way! Its a great part of the game. An unskilled player with a rocket launcher is often more of a danger to himself than to anybody else. On top of this, the more skilled players can also pick up a rocket launcher so there is no problem. Applied to MMO''s, any player can eventually level up to match another player''s character stats - the analog to picking up a rocket launcher.

Think a bit about the history of games. What did we call an RPG 15 years ago? Compare that sort of gameplay to what we have today. The games have completely changed in many ways besides graphics. As technology becomes less of a limiting factor, games evolve. MMO''s as we know them today will most likely not exist in 10 years. We are still at the veritable "pong" level of online game development. Think big! The eventual goal is to have an online world where you take on a character and actually become that character see/do everything as if you were him. This would be a true ROLE PLAYING GAME, not just a ROLE OBSERVING GAME as most current games are.

Higher interactivity is the future of gaming, did you know that the PS3 will have dual motion detectors built into the console? Just think about it. Where are games heading? I hope you don''t think we''ll be playing the same old style of games in 20 years especially given the exponential level of technological advancement.

quote: Original post by haro
Again, more hypocrisy.

how so? or do you not know what the word means?

quote: Is this really so difficult to understand?

i understand you, as i am sure anyone else reading this does. however, that does not mean i have to agree with your opinion. i wish you could understand that .

quote: The current MMO game system deliberately excludes a huge majority of potential players from their games based on massive time requirements to accomplish anything at all.

deliberately? nah, they just don''t care, because they are making money anyway (the difference being they think "who cares", whereas you said "good, got rid of him").

quote: There is literally no effective demographic for the current MMO system with the possible exception of retirees.

i am sure that is who all those people on EQ are... i wish those old people would learn how to type proper english

quote: Considering repetition/time investment is the defacto standard it can be assumed it is viewed in a ''positive'' manner.

because they are in it for the money, and they know that type of gameplay is addictive (due to the intermittent rewards of gaining levels -- it is the most effective form of reinforcement training), they keep the players playing. then they make it take a long time (i.e. a whole lot of repetition) because then they get subscriptions for years instead of months.

quote: I was not insulting you, if you cannot reach the "average hit" on that bar you must be physically disabled.

telling someone they are "physically retarded" because they cannot mash buttons to your standards is an insult. it would be like me calling you "socially retarded" because you repeatedly make nasty comments when you are supposed to be discussing game design (luckily i''m trying to be nice).

quote: I will, however, explain why your opinion is quite far off base.

no, your opinion is wrong. and before you point out how that comment is ridiculous, i didn''t mean it; i was just mocking you.

quote: First off, if you haven''t noticed, single player RPG''s are quickly becoming exclusively real time. Take NeverWinter Nights as the obvious example. Most publishers won''t even touch non-real time games anymore simply because most people don''t want to play them.

i haven''t noticed, in fact the last few i played were turn-based. besides, as you pointed out, what is published hardly represents the way games should be.

quote: Real time play obviously leads to an aspect of hand-eye-coordination. I have no clue how you cannot realize this.

i never said otherwise. i said that hand-eye coordination based games are a different genre than an RPG, which traditionally has character stats determine the outcome of everything. you are the one that does not understand what i am saying, although i suspect you aren''t trying to (or maybe you''re just not reading carefully enough).

quote: Players are still by no means limited by their reflexes, but players also cannot succede without some level of skill and reflex.

wrong. if "human skills" are used to determine the outcome, then a lack of those skills will put other players at an unfair advantage. i don''t mean the learning period where you don''t stand a chance because you are figuring out the controls, i mean the way some people can kill you 100% of the time with a pistol no matter what gun you have in counterstrike. the only way around that is to practice for so long that it is comparable to the time needed for MMORPGs now anyway.

quote: Now take the FPS genre. Character based imbalance has ALWAYS been a major part of FPS. Want to know what its called? Weapons and vehicles.

that''s a faulty analogy. anyone can pick any weapon or jump into a vehicle.

quote: An unskilled player can pick up weapons which are able to kill many players at once with a single shot ( rocket launcher for example ).

a skilled player can do the same, so it isn''t exactly character-based. in fact, everyone can get the same weapons as everyone else.

quote: Does this annoy FPS players? No way! Its a great part of the game.

actually, it does. if you played you might have heard people bitching about "rocket launcher whores", i.e. players who always use the rocket launcher.

quote: Applied to MMO''s, any player can eventually level up to match another player''s character stats - the analog to picking up a rocket launcher.

except that picking up a rocket launcher takes a half a second, whereas leveling up takes a long time.

quote: blah blah blah... Think big!

yeah, because anything but your game ideas isn''t big

quote: The eventual goal is to have an online world where you take on a character and actually become that character see/do everything as if you were him. This would be a true ROLE PLAYING GAME, not just a ROLE OBSERVING GAME as most current games are.

perhaps for you. some of us still like abstraction, so we don''t have to worry about real life interfering with the exploits of our hero characters.

quote: I hope you don''t think we''ll be playing the same old style of games in 20 years especially given the exponential level of technological advancement.

i like how you can turn my simple statement of my opinion into me being against progress. so, let me try one last time to get through to you:

if a game relies on the player''s reflexes instead of the character''s skill stats, it is not an RPG. any other argument that you think i am making is just you being delusional.

krez, with all due respect, you are completely ignorant in the sales of MMO''s and your opinion is thusly invalid. Do you realize how absolutely horrible MMO''s are business wise? Do you have knowledge regarding success rate of MMO''s ( developed by professional studios ) compared to any other genre? Do you know how tiny the MMO market ( or PC gaming market for that matter ) is, compared to the entire gaming market? Do you realize that this is the reason very few companies even approach these genres and that many who do end up dropping the projects?

You seem to be under the influence that Sony/EA/Mythic/etc are perfectly happy with their sales and are willing to pump out countless sequels since the market is so lucrative. This couldn''t be much further from the truth, look into the EA example for some especially striking information to the contrary.

As to you calling the EQ players a strong demographic, do you even understand the purpose of a targetted demographic? The current MMO demographic tends to be young boys with excessive amounts of spare time. Incidentally there is a little problem when you target people with no money as a demographic. You do not want a third party demographic ( ie- the little boys mommies and daddies ). As well, even were the EQ demographic to completely stabilize, it is still quite small

As far as the hypocrisy goes, since you seem to be unable to understand the concept I will spell it out for you. You say that you want a game that has no non-in-game requirements. However you acknowledge that the current system has massive time requirements. This excludes a huge majority of people and any effective demographic.

MMO''s in South Korea for example, have curved this problem due to the fact that their is an entirely different online gaming culture. Lineage is a social activity as opposed to sitting in a dark room in your parents'' basement for 20 hours at a time.

Anyhow, krez you seem to have lost the spirit of debate. All you seem to be able to do is quote my remarks and then add a one liner after each. I hate to take the elitist path but please learn about what you are trying to argue. It is not an opinion that MMO''s are currently a failing genre. They may be the future and some companies are still willing to take a gamble ( namely Square/Blizzard ) but there needs to be a revolutionary change as opposed to an evoluationary change for them to become something more than a tiny niche, especially in the USA.

I will not be responding to your next series of one liners, so their is no need to waste your time.

quote: Original post by haro
krez, with all due respect, you are completely ignorant in the sales of MMO''s and your opinion is thusly invalid.

haro, with all due respect, you are completely ignorant of what i was talking about. i made no claims about the sales of MMOs; you are apparently scanning over what i write, and then imagining something completely different, and replying to it.

quote: Do you realize how absolutely horrible MMO''s are business wise? Do you have knowledge regarding success rate of MMO''s ( developed by professional studios ) compared to any other genre? Do you know how tiny the MMO market ( or PC gaming market for that matter ) is, compared to the entire gaming market? Do you realize that this is the reason very few companies even approach these genres and that many who do end up dropping the projects?

and what does that have to do with what i said?

quote: As to you calling the EQ players a strong demographic, do you even understand the purpose of a targetted demographic?

although you seem to object to the "quote-response" form of debate (probably because you aren''t arguing against anything anyone actually said), it would still be nice if you could point point where i said anything about strong demographics. yes, i stated that MMOs are in it for the money, but anything beyond that is your delusions.

quote: As far as the hypocrisy goes, since you seem to be unable to understand the concept I will spell it out for you. You say that you want a game that has no non-in-game requirements. However you acknowledge that the current system has massive time requirements. This excludes a huge majority of people and any effective demographic.

that''s a pretty skewed view of my statements, and what i would call a misuse of the word "hypocricy". i said that a game with reflex or hand-eye-coordination based gameplay rather than in-game stats is no longer an RPG . although you claim you aren''t going to reply to me, if you change your mind please repeat that or quote it so i know you at least saw it.

quote: Anyhow, krez you seem to have lost the spirit of debate. All you seem to be able to do is quote my remarks and then add a one liner after each.

i have lost the spirit of debate? you are the one who cannot actually read my replies; you are the one who can''t handle a point-by-point refutation! you bring up things that are completely tangental (at best), and when i respond you call it one-liners. you belong in the lounge, buddy, not in a real discussion.

quote: I hate to take the elitist path but please learn about what you are trying to argue.

you''d have to be elite before you can be elitist. at least, if you want anyone to believe it.

quote: It is not an opinion that MMO''s are currently a failing genre.

and i never said otherwise. is english not your first language?

quote: I will not be responding to your next series of one liners, so their is no need to waste your time.

that''s ok, you don''t do it right anyway.

but, all "one-liners" aside, do you have anything to dispute the one point i actually made:

quote: Original post by krez
all i''m saying is that this doesn''t belong in an RPG; it should be my character''s skills versus your character''s skills, not my skills versus yours.