Active combat/real physics in an MMO.

[D-Pad]

Here's the thing with active combat.


From a Developer's perspective, physics is really really hard to integrate into a system where everything you do needs to be uploaded to a server and then distributed to everyone who can see you. Why? Because of the dynamic interactions and scripting that needs to take place. Active Combat is really just annoying to other players.

Since you're bringing up Fable so much, let's say that Lionhead just announced that they're making a Fable MMO with everything a Fable fan could ever dream of. Active Combat, Physics, the works. How hard would that be to achieve, and how would it differ from conventional combat systems?

I'm not sure how WoW scripts their hit and misses, but all games that have recoils (such as Fable and fighting games) have one thing in common. They use either Hitboxes or Colliders, as they're sometimes known. Basically, when Collider A (Ryu's fist, for example) hits Collider B (Ken's head), you have a specific scripted event for exactly what is going to happen. Decapitations and Disarms in Fable/Fable 2 work the same way. It's scripted. If you have two scripted events happening at the same time (two people slashing at the same target, for example) then things can get pretty messy, and a mess is something that you definitely do not want in an MMO, which brings me to the Annoyance part.

So say you're Super Awesome Melee DPS Guy, and you're in a Raid. With 45 people hacking at the same guy, you're going to be pushing him all around the room. How are the Melee DPS going to do their job when they're chasing their target all around the room? Why must the Ranged DPS and Spellcasters reposition themselves whenever they're out of range again? How are AoEs going to be effective if the target will simply be blown out of the targeted area? MMOs are based on things not moving, and watching bullets, arrows, and fireballs auto-home in on their target is just stupid, which brings me to the last part.

The Player Base is not here to play Oblivion. Yeah, that one RPG where everything had to be Aimed. Could you imagine the fast-paced combat of Fable happening in an Oblivion format? It would be impossible. Raiding would be a horrendous experience if everyone had to aim their fireballs and rifles. As said before, it really just does not work. Also, the Hack and Slash method does not work for MMOs, because people like to strategize. The Legend of Zelda has no multiplayer, and the Fable Series limits Multi to two at a time. Why? Because bigger parties require coordination. And in order to coordinate, you need to have a reference point for how much damage everyone is doing, and when you're target is going to die. Hence the numbers and Health Bar system. It all goes back to the table top D&D games where eveyome would see the dragon, talk it out, then proceed to kill it. If the Dungeon Master throws out something unexpected, then the party simply re-evaluates. There is no pause button in an MMO, so everyone needs to be coordinated in a way that is not possible to do with current "non-conventional" systems.

Tl;dr: Doesn't work. Don't worry about it, go play Rift or GW2 when it comes out. Both have very inventive Combat systems, it seems.

 

[Ranorak]

Lets not even mention balance.

Say you really needed to push a button to block, actively roll and dodge.
In a PvP MMO, you'd be screwed in a 2VSyou fight.

Warrior A attacks, You block.
Warrior B attacks right after that, you can't block that, dead.

Not to mention the ineffectiveness of some spells.
Pyroblast? Yawn! *dodge* *chop*

Warlocks with their instance, non-travel-time DoT's would be in a massive advantage as well.
This is all fine for singleplayer, because you can be sure what the NPC enemy does.

But in a PvP setting this is very hard to pull off.

 

[Blackpapa]

Yeah well..

I'm assuming this is a skill vs stat based MMO discussion.

The reason stat-based MMOs are the norm is because it's easier.

The mother of all problems is latency. This creates a lot of other, secondary problems.

1. Security
An MMORPG needs high security. It being a persistent world it has to be far more secure than FPSes. Games that want to focus on reflexes and skills have to sacrifice some security. No matter how deep your rootkits go (hello Blizzard's Warden) there will always be a way around them and an aimbot will always be better than a human.

2. Latency vs player base
If you can guarantee a huge player base then it's fine to split players into continents, countries or any other localized group with low latency. Thing is you rarely have that guarantee. Otherwise you're faced with ponderous pings of several seconds which make it impossible for a player to take an active part in battle. Commander, artillery, support/logistics sure, but not rifleman.

3. Processing power and scalability
Skill-based games have a quicker pace and have more number-crunching involved. Not only because of the mechanics themselves but also the synchronization, verification and all that auxiliary stuff. Servers cost money and while it's bad to have to pay 5 times as much for the hardware as your competition it's even worse if you know that your server will crash if 30% of the players start fighting at the same time. Or if some particular feature can max your server load very, very quickly. Or that the CPU usage for players using machineguns in an area goes up exponentially.

That's not even counting that you couldn't afford the luxury of writing your server in a language that suits you, vide Eve Online, instead having to squeeze every bit of performance.

4. R&D
Stat-based MMOs have been done to death. They're simple and there's a knowledgebase to draw experience from. There are experienced developers out there who've finished projects and can give you an estimate on the time and costs. On the other hand you're much more likely to run into new technical challenges when developing a skill-based MMO. Which makes estimating anything much harder. And if a problem arises there's a chance you'll have to home-brew some hacky solution or spend two years debugging your TotallyAwesomeOnPaper idea. And even then there's no guarantee it'll work in the real world. SupCom 1's multiplayer backend solution would be a great example. And the worst part is only the people who consider 1024 a round number will ever appreciate the effort.

 

[Continuity]

All I am trying to say is that just because a game is an RPG doesn't mean we have to stick to the same old dungeon and dragon statsheet/diceroll model. That there can easily be more and better hybrids out there yet the fact people stick the same old formula somewhat frustrates me. Its not... I can't tink of a better way to put this, "moving forward?"

I understand where you're coming from but you also have to understand that a lot of people like the combat just how it is... to a lot of people making it action based would not be moving forward but rather throwing the baby out with the bath water.

And as I said before I play and love WoW. I've played games like DDO, aions, allods, and all that and while they are good it just pains me to see that people are usually stuck with the same reused formula. Hell even the SW: TOR is going to be a shamelss wow clone ( and please everyone I don't want to hear "But the smuggler can use cover! It's totally dfifferent than wow now!" I mean woah! Hold the Phone! Innovation of the year folks!) look rpg's are good. I just wish we could get out of the mindset they all have to follow the same formula.

Its really not the case that all games use this sort of mechanic, in fact its endangered and on the point of extinction at the moment.. pretty much the only reason its still used in MMO's is the technical constraints in that environment, e.g. lag and latency, plus the fact that MMO's need to be geared to the lowest common denominator in terms of graphics and physics, there is a very large contingent of players out there who are gaming on non-gaming grade hardware which simply wouldn't cope with full physics and blow by blow action.

Also its a lot easier to balance all the stats, classes, abilities, leveling and equipment if you keep it purely down to spreadsheet type mechanics.. you add player skill into the mix in an action mechanic and its a lot more complicated :- which inevitably results in dumbing down of the other elements, and its exactly those elements that make the game worth playing in the first case... you want action? go play CoD, because that is what an action MMO would be reduced to in the long run.

Also on a sidenote: It really pains me when people go into the whole 'RPGS are not about combat rant' as I have heard many times before. It shows people aren't getting the whole picture I am trying to convey, which is, sure an RPG may not be about combat but surely improving it couldn't hurt?

Thats just it, you're not getting it, the "RPG" experience is directly incompatible with full action combat. The more action based the combat the less RPG you have. Its like a sliding scale with full RPG (management/tactics) on one side and full action (player skill) on the other, you cant have both.
RPG is partially defined by the stats/skill/feat/spell/item etc based combat which would be just too complicated and top heavy for an action game, having a multitude of tactical options is not really compatible with action combat where your attention is focused in the blow by blow action... to play a proper RPG you cant afford that loss of focus, you need to manage your health, your mana, and your cooldowns as well as make tactical decisions about what spell/ability to use and where to throw your weight in the fight etc... all of that would be lost with an action heavy game.

Thats not to say that RPG hybrids are a bad thing, there have been some great RPG hybrids, like system shock 2, Deus Ex, and bloodlines.. all with somewhat clunky combat mind... but great RPG elements.

Making a great action game is hard, making a great RPG is harder, making a hybrid of both with both elements great and balanced... practically impossible, or at least it hasn't been done yet.

BTW: If you can find a game that suits my tastes as described I will give you this nickel I just found. Because believe me I've tried MANY times to find a game that can fuse RPG elements with a dynamic combat system. You can find what I found at least somewhat appealing in the OP

I'll have a think but if you're limiting it to MMO's I probably wont be able to help as I don't really play them any more. For single player though there are simply loads of action/adventure or action/RPG type games out there.. the difficulty is in fact finding any pure RPGs anymore.

 

[D-Pad]

The only MMO I've ever played was Global Agenda, and that seemed like a normal TPS.

So that?

GA isn't really an MMO. It's a TPS with a lobby. There's no persistent open world.

I think the OP is dealing strictly with fantasy MMOs anyway.

 

[loc978]

City of Heroes/Villains is the closest thing I've seen to what the OP seems to be looking for. The Player Character is more mobile in combat (especially once they get their main "travel power"), allowing for quick tactical positioning, The game world is full of buildings and such that actually function as cover, and the knockback/knockdown effects of normal moves are exaggerated (comic book-style) to the point of actually being useful for relocating enemy mobs.
Also, its damage rolls are essentially on a D10000 system (tracking success percentage to hundredths of a percent) That allows for very little damage variation between strikes. It's essentially "hit or miss" combat.

 

[Condiments]

I think the real question is an "Action RPG MMO" really necessary? As others have stated it would be difficult to create such large worlds and still have good action combat. Also in the typical MMO format it would also be very boring. Action games like Devil May Cry 3/Ninja Gaiden are great because they require split second reactions and offer dynamic combat encounters. If I were just cutting through swathes of boring "filler" mobs for most of the experience it would be just boring.

Also, one of the best parts of the MMO genre is the character progression aspects, and if that has to be cut down to make the action more interesting it runs contrary to what people want. Make the RPG elements too important and you undermine the action. It slant the system in favor of those who spend the most time, rather than those who have the most skill.

I think the Diablo/PSO/Vindictus method is the best idea for these types of games. They have set levels that can randomized, and you use the lobby to gather parties and move out. While you you don't have a giant persistent world to wander in, you still get combat encounters like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqllIgQrxME

You still have annoying lag scenarios to contend with, but its far less than you would get in a full fledged MMO.

 

[Krois]

What about Dragon Nest? From what I've heard, it's all real-time non-targeting combat.

 

[jesskit]

It seems everyone forgets DDO, it has mouse click combat. It didn't wok that well tbh, often u werent near enough to the monster to hit it even when it looked like you were.

 

[Drizzitdude]

What about Dragon Nest? From what I've heard, it's all real-time non-targeting combat.

I looked this up. I have tosay this game looks pretty solid. I haven't heard it till now. looks pretty good (if i can learn to stand the srt style xD)

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

Global Agenda had 3rd person shooter combat. Too bad they broke the balance post-beta.

 

[Smooth Operator]

You should remove the "real physics" unless you are thinking some sort of army close combat training simulator.

Why MMO's suck at combat - because of lag, true active combat requires precise timing and positioning, in a game with thousands of people active on the same server that simply cannot be done with the current tech.
Guild Wars can do it the best because they use instances and the combat actually feels solid.