·English·Theme
- Forums
- Final Fantasy XIV
- General Discussion
- Common Misconception of Final Fantasy Games?
Common Misconception of Final Fantasy Games?Follow
Archmage Callinon wrote:
Killua125 wrote:
Too bad they couldn't get Ito to help with ARR's combat system. He created the ATB system and the job change system to begin with. He seems like he has a very good idea of what makes battle systems FUN. He designed Tactics' battle system too. I wonder how in the world he isn't getting work if he wants to be involved with FF again.
Edited, Jul 8th 2013 9:11pm by Killua125
Edited, Jul 8th 2013 9:11pm by Killua125
He did do a good job with those... they're also WAAAAAAY too slow for an MMO. Work great for single-player RPGs though.
Quickness of combat is less important to me than depth. Give me the deepest option in the fastest system and I like it. Give me the deepest combat in a slower system and I like it.
sandpark wrote:
Archmage Callinon wrote:
Killua125 wrote:
Too bad they couldn't get Ito to help with ARR's combat system. He created the ATB system and the job change system to begin with. He seems like he has a very good idea of what makes battle systems FUN. He designed Tactics' battle system too. I wonder how in the world he isn't getting work if he wants to be involved with FF again.
Edited, Jul 8th 2013 9:11pm by Killua125
Edited, Jul 8th 2013 9:11pm by Killua125
He did do a good job with those... they're also WAAAAAAY too slow for an MMO. Work great for single-player RPGs though.
Quickness of combat is less important to me than depth. Give me the deepest option in the fastest system and I like it. Give me the deepest combat in a slower system and I like it.
Depth is important, for sure. But can we at least agree that sluggish combat is not the best fit for an MMO?
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
Archmage Callinon wrote:
sandpark wrote:
Archmage Callinon wrote:
Killua125 wrote:
Too bad they couldn't get Ito to help with ARR's combat system. He created the ATB system and the job change system to begin with. He seems like he has a very good idea of what makes battle systems FUN. He designed Tactics' battle system too. I wonder how in the world he isn't getting work if he wants to be involved with FF again.
Edited, Jul 8th 2013 9:11pm by Killua125
Edited, Jul 8th 2013 9:11pm by Killua125
He did do a good job with those... they're also WAAAAAAY too slow for an MMO. Work great for single-player RPGs though.
Quickness of combat is less important to me than depth. Give me the deepest option in the fastest system and I like it. Give me the deepest combat in a slower system and I like it.
Depth is important, for sure. But can we at least agree that sluggish combat is not the best fit for an MMO?
There's actually zero evidence to support the idea that a MMORPG's combat system needs to be faster than a single player combat system. There isn't even any evidence to support the idea that a turn-based system like FF9 wouldn't work with a MMO. In fact there are a few smaller MMORPGs which do have turn-based systems and they work quit well. At the very least those combat systems are more fun than whatever ARR has going on.
You're making the same mistake that Yoshi-P is making in your thinking. "Just because it's not like WoW, it's not fit for an MMO." The global standard is a lie. Think outside the box a little
I wasn't even really suggesting that the combat system should be slow, but slow doesn't equal bad, for sure. ARR's combat is "fast", but it sucks.
Edited, Jul 8th 2013 11:34pm by Killua125
Quote:
There's actually zero evidence to support the idea that a MMORPG's combat system needs to be faster than a single player combat system. There isn't even any evidence to support the idea that a turn-based system like FF9 wouldn't work with a MMO. In fact there are a few smaller MMORPGs which do have turn-based systems and they work quit well. At the very least those combat systems are more fun than whatever ARR has going on.
Well...FF9 doesn't have a turn-based system... it uses ATB, which is not the same thing. Consider too that in ATB systems in single-player games, you're given as much time as you're given because you're managing 3-5 party members yourself. In an MMO you're managing 1. You would get bored out of your skull if you had to wait 5-10 seconds between all your actions. I realize it doesn't SOUND like a long time, but it is, and it'd add up.
Like I said above I've only ever played 1 MMO that used a turn-based system, that was The Realm Online, back in the mid 90s. While I've never heard of another MMO that did that, it could certainly have happened. If you'd like to recommend one that did it well, I'd be happy to check it out.
Quote:
You're making the same mistake that Yoshi-P is making in your thinking. "Just because it's not like WoW, it's not fit for an MMO." The global standard is a lie.
It's really not. Please consider that when WoW was brand new, it wasn't even original. It took aspects of existing contemporary games that it liked and tweaked them to make the game more friendly to solo players. At the time, the idea of doing something solo in an MMO was pretty nuts, and keeping people on the grind for as long as possible was the mission statement of the era.
WoW's model has been copied and iterated on a whole bunch since then. Many direct clones have fallen away, a few that innovated well have stuck around. The global standard, as you call it, is what's come out of that evolution. Things like actionbars, WASD-based movement, trackable quests, and solo leveling content.
Combat was not one of those things. Combat is actually something virtually everyone has done differently, each in their own way. WoW combat is not the same as GW2 combat is not the same as Secret World combat. They're all different, even if they did come from the same root (Everquest). XIV has its own style of combat too, a little on the slower side, but with an emphasis on skill combos and party dynamics (the limit break system here is unique in my experience). Could it do what it does better? Absolutely. And with time it very well might. But it's got a good beginning and a clear direction to grow in.
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
Archmage Callinon wrote:
Quote:
There's actually zero evidence to support the idea that a MMORPG's combat system needs to be faster than a single player combat system. There isn't even any evidence to support the idea that a turn-based system like FF9 wouldn't work with a MMO. In fact there are a few smaller MMORPGs which do have turn-based systems and they work quit well. At the very least those combat systems are more fun than whatever ARR has going on.
Well...FF9 doesn't have a turn-based system... it uses ATB, which is not the same thing. Consider too that in ATB systems in single-player games, you're given as much time as you're given because you're managing 3-5 party members yourself. In an MMO you're managing 1. You would get bored out of your skull if you had to wait 5-10 seconds between all your actions. I realize it doesn't SOUND like a long time, but it is, and it'd add up.
Like I said above I've only ever played 1 MMO that used a turn-based system, that was The Realm Online, back in the mid 90s. While I've never heard of another MMO that did that, it could certainly have happened. If you'd like to recommend one that did it well, I'd be happy to check it out.
Quote:
You're making the same mistake that Yoshi-P is making in your thinking. "Just because it's not like WoW, it's not fit for an MMO." The global standard is a lie.
It's really not. Please consider that when WoW was brand new, it wasn't even original. It took aspects of existing contemporary games that it liked and tweaked them to make the game more friendly to solo players. At the time, the idea of doing something solo in an MMO was pretty nuts, and keeping people on the grind for as long as possible was the mission statement of the era.
WoW's model has been copied and iterated on a whole bunch since then. Many direct clones have fallen away, a few that innovated well have stuck around. The global standard, as you call it, is what's come out of that evolution. Things like actionbars, WASD-based movement, trackable quests, and solo leveling content.
Combat was not one of those things. Combat is actually something virtually everyone has done differently, each in their own way. WoW combat is not the same as GW2 combat is not the same as Secret World combat. They're all different, even if they did come from the same root (Everquest). XIV has its own style of combat too, a little on the slower side, but with an emphasis on skill combos and party dynamics (the limit break system here is unique in my experience). Could it do what it does better? Absolutely. And with time it very well might. But it's got a good beginning and a clear direction to grow in.
Yeah we can agree sluggish combat is not wanted or the initial release of XIV wouldn't have removed the stamina system. I'm going to comment on ATB in an mmo and it is not that I think it's better or wanted by me. An ATB could work without being too slow if the job system centered around changing jobs on the fly with no restrictions like X-2. ARR could pull this off if they capped all dungeons or endgame content to 4-8 members. But then the question would be.
Would that really be an mmo with no 16+ man raids?
I think pretty much anything could be soloed if was one was skilled enough.
I think I prefer ATB or turn-based to stay in my offline rpgs. Maybe XVI could have an online endgame like WTC has, I don't know.
Stilivan wrote:
Now my question to you and your friend is: What's wrong with a turned based game? We really can't give you an explanation if your friend is being dumb.
its teh ssme thing/excuse that EVERYONE gives...
"those games are stupid.. you just stand still and take turns hitting eachother.. who fights like that?"
DuoMaxwellxx wrote:
Stilivan wrote:
Now my question to you and your friend is: What's wrong with a turned based game? We really can't give you an explanation if your friend is being dumb.
its teh ssme thing/excuse that EVERYONE gives...
"those games are stupid.. you just stand still and take turns hitting eachother.. who fights like that?"
Typically your Dex or Agility in other FF games determines when your turn comes up. Turn based is just a different type of strategy. I guess I can see why some people don't like to be made to wait, but that's what makes you have to be more mindful of your actions. I like anything with combos/chains, or button sequences (Sabin!)
Edited, Jul 9th 2013 1:54am by ErikHighwind
8 posts
I asked a friend why people don't like ff-fanboys he said that:
*ff-fanboys think that think ff is the best game (not true as most gamers have not 1 favourite since it's hard to compare different types of game)
*ff-fanboys are rude when someone tells why they don't like something in a game. (I have seen many of those in ffxiv beta testing forums and even due that does not speak for them all it does give the aspect.)
He also said that all ff games are the same because of the you don't aim and they all turned based.
But because a game is turned based does not make it a bad game.
Edited, Jul 9th 2013 10:53am by GelbeDattelwein
*ff-fanboys think that think ff is the best game (not true as most gamers have not 1 favourite since it's hard to compare different types of game)
*ff-fanboys are rude when someone tells why they don't like something in a game. (I have seen many of those in ffxiv beta testing forums and even due that does not speak for them all it does give the aspect.)
He also said that all ff games are the same because of the you don't aim and they all turned based.
But because a game is turned based does not make it a bad game.
Edited, Jul 9th 2013 10:53am by GelbeDattelwein
GelbeDattelwein wrote:
I asked a friend why people don't like ff-fanboys he said that:
*ff-fanboys think that think ff is the best game (not true as most gamers have not 1 favourite since it's hard to compare different types of game)
*ff-fanboys are rude when someone tells why they don't like something in a game. (I have seen many of those in ffxiv beta testing forums and even due that does not speak for them all it does give the aspect.)
He also said that all ff games are the same because of the you don't aim and they all turned based.
But because a game is turned based does not make it a bad game.
Edited, Jul 9th 2013 10:53am by GelbeDattelwein
*ff-fanboys think that think ff is the best game (not true as most gamers have not 1 favourite since it's hard to compare different types of game)
*ff-fanboys are rude when someone tells why they don't like something in a game. (I have seen many of those in ffxiv beta testing forums and even due that does not speak for them all it does give the aspect.)
He also said that all ff games are the same because of the you don't aim and they all turned based.
But because a game is turned based does not make it a bad game.
Edited, Jul 9th 2013 10:53am by GelbeDattelwein
Sounds like he really has an open mind about it too.
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
You don't "aim" because it's not a first person shooter.
That doesn't mean you can't miss, or be too far away or too close or a variety of other things. It just means they simplify things a hell of a lot by having a target lock on.
Edited, Jul 9th 2013 10:59am by Catwho
That doesn't mean you can't miss, or be too far away or too close or a variety of other things. It just means they simplify things a hell of a lot by having a target lock on.
Edited, Jul 9th 2013 10:59am by Catwho
Catwho wrote:
You don't "aim" because it's not a first person shooter.
That doesn't mean you can't miss, or be too far away or too close or a variety of other things. It just means they simplify things a hell of a lot by having a target lock on.
Edited, Jul 9th 2013 10:59am by Catwho
That doesn't mean you can't miss, or be too far away or too close or a variety of other things. It just means they simplify things a hell of a lot by having a target lock on.
Edited, Jul 9th 2013 10:59am by Catwho
Not to mention from what I've heard of the THM limitbreak and likely other higher up spells, you do have to aim some things.
IvanStine207 wrote:
Now I talk to someone on World of Warcraft about Final Fantasy games and he is more of a Kingdom Hearts fan and he says he doesn't play Final Fantasy that much because he claims its turned base but he has only played Final Fantasy Crisis Core and a little bit of FF XIII-1 which I can assume is very turn-based. Now I know there are turn-based games in Final Fantasy like Final Fantasy Tactics and X. FF 10 seems to be as turn-based as the series could get. When I think of turn based games, chess comes in mind. The person also thinks FF XIII is a turn-based game which confuses me. The battle system in FF XIII-1 seems more like a active time battle system due to the fact that pace action is really fast. In other words you wait for a bar to fill up and once it gets past a certain point you will be able to attack the enemy and if you do nothing you would get slaughtered by the enemy since they will continue to go regardless of whether you select your commands or not. I told him this but he never responded or created any argument to explain to me why it is a turn-based game. I also asked Trade Chat due to the amount of people there but no one seemed interested to respond. It's kind of annoying how I'm not getting an explanation, especially if its just ignorance coming out of people who have maybe played the game series only once like a 7-10 years ago?
I like kingdom hearts better than FF series. I didn't like FF at all till I played FFXI... I like the FF mmo's for some reason over the other mmo's. suikoden was my favorite rpg... I know I have odd tastes.
Edited, Jul 10th 2013 12:33pm by Nashred
FFXI: Nashred
Server: Phoenix
FFXIV : Sir Nashred
server: Ultros
Server: Phoenix
FFXIV : Sir Nashred
server: Ultros
Recent Visitors: 221
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (221)
- Forums
- Final Fantasy XIV
- General Discussion
- Common Misconception of Final Fantasy Games?
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC