MMO's and spell casting.

[Credge]

This won't be as much a discussion as it will be a rant, although I welcome discussion.

Combat in traditional sword and spell MMO's consists primarily of two things: Melee combat and casting (archery is a general exception to this, but fewer classes use archery in MMO's than melee or casting).

Melee combat has slowly evolved over time. From UO's click fest with no skills to EQ's two to three skills with auto-attack to DAoC's combo system with auto-attack to DDO's real time combat system, to WoW's class-dependent system, to AoC's button combination combo system. There have been marked changes and a gradual evolution. Whether it is for better or worse is up for debate, although I find the changes to be great.

Casting on the other hand has really only changed once from UO to EQ, and has stayed pretty consistent with some minor changes to casting mechanics here and there. This is where my rant kicks in.

What's the difference between a Necromancer from EQ and a Warlock from WoW? Are there really any? What about a Cleric from EQ and a Priest from WoW? How about a Demonologist from AoC and a Wizard from EQ or a Mage from WoW?

If you interchanged any of those classes with the other they are most comparable to and then balanced them for the game they are in, they'd be identical.

Can we say the same thing about Warriors in EQ and Warriors from WoW? What about Rogues from EQ with Rogues from WoW or Assassins from AoC or Shadowblades from DAoC? What about Paladins from EQ with Paladins from DAoC with Paladins from WoW?

All are vastly different even when they are incredibly similar primarily due to the change in melee combat.

So, why has casting remained the same for so long? Is it really that much fun? Game developers have the know-how on making casting interesting. Take a look at the rare truly unique casting class. It still uses out-dated casting mechanics but it finds a way to be engrossing. An example of this would be the Blood Mage from Vanguard.

I guess what I'm getting at is this:

Spells can do anything. They can summon comets of ice from the sky, charm rabid beasts to fight for you, conjure up spirits, suck the blood out of enemies and give that blood to you, heal your wounded allies, have the ground split in two, cause your enemies to stand there in bewilderment, conjure up demons and undead, turn a fist of sand in to a fireball that freezes the enemy... anything.

Why hasn't spell casting changed one bit? For all of the neat things spells can do surely developers can come up with something neat for me to do in an MMO other than TABX3 1,1,3,2,6.

Because that doesn't work for melee combat anymore either.

Edit: I'm talking about games at launch. I'm well aware of the changes that have happened in both UO and EQ.

 

[Flying-Emu]

Because it's easy, of course.

It's fairly obvious that it is much easier to design, draw, and animate a physical action rather than a grandiose display of magic. It's... inefficient.

There's also the fact that there isn't much to do with the actual mechanics of magic. You have to stand still for a number of seconds before the spell is completed and launched. You can't exactly spice that up anyway.

As for the differing spell-types... that just sounds like a graphical change. It'd still be the main mechanics.

In essence, I fail to see the point to this rant.

 

[caster272]

There was an mmo a few years back that had a system for building spells. Each spell required a specific series of items and if you messed up the creation of the spell you lost all the stuff you used to make it. But eventually people figured out how the system worked and if you knew enough about the system you could watch someone cast a spell you knew nothing about and could pretty easily piece it together yourself. I'm sorry I can't remember the name of the mmo at the moment though.

 

[PlasticTree]

There are indeed quite some classes in different MMO's that look a lot like eachother, yes. But that doesn't mean that casters can't differ from eachother. For example, World of Warcraft. Warlocks and mages. They are both cloth-wearing classes whose prime goal is to do damage with magic. Yet, if you've played those classes, you know the gameplay is drastically different. On the same level a rogue differs from a warrior. Gamedevelopers are only tied to the idea that magic casters, well, cast magic. But as you said, magic is limitless, it can do anything. In contrary to meleeclasses, since their limits are fairly obvious. So a mage and a warlock share resemblance on first sight, but thanks to the many, many variations in spells, they provide a whole different experience. Warlocks have to lean on things as damage over time, a team of different summons, etc etc, while mages lean on their ability to do 'full frontal' damage while limiting the actions and movement of their opponents.

And this is only one example, from one game. Plus, a lot of the things gamedevelopers use to create differences between meleeclasses can also be aplied to casters. Manabars that work differently (do they fill when you do damage, when you take damage or when you ain't fighting at all?), different types of clothing, the ability to make yourself better, others better or others worse, etc etc. Magic casters have limits for gamedevelopers, but not more than meleefighters do.

 

[Hitty25]

What CAN a developer do to make spellcasting, and more specifically, the classes themselves, like a mage for instance, "better"? If the system works, why change it? They are a well thought of class, and though generic, work well in most game worlds.

And to be honest, i thought AoC melee fighting was a cheap gimmick compared to what it could have been. I wish it would have been something more akin to Mount and Blade then "Auto-attack, now with style!"

 

[Credge]

Because it's easy, of course.

It's fairly obvious that it is much easier to design, draw, and animate a physical action rather than a grandiose display of magic. It's... inefficient.

There's also the fact that there isn't much to do with the actual mechanics of magic. You have to stand still for a number of seconds before the spell is completed and launched. You can't exactly spice that up anyway.

Why can't you?

They did it with normal combat and continue to do it.

Developers constantly expand upon casting in single player games, making it more and more interactive and less and less "CLICK SPELL IT CASTS" like MMO's have had for >10 years<.

As for the differing spell-types... that just sounds like a graphical change. It'd still be the main mechanics.

In essence, I fail to see the point to this rant.

Yeah, you didn't really comment on what I was ranting about. I wasn't commenting on how spells should be different. That misses the point entirely. I could care less if fireball 1 from one game looks different from fireball 2 from another.

Whats important is HOW you go about doing it. Is it more fun to cast a fireball in WoW as compared to EQ? No, it's exactly the same, but maybe one game has a shinier effect while the other has it do more damage.

Can anyone really say that spell casting in WoW is more fun than it is in EQ? What about DAoC? or AoC? Or AC? Or AO? Or UO?

There are indeed quite some classes in different MMO's that look a lot like eachother, yes. But that doesn't mean that casters can't differ from eachother. For example, World of Warcraft. Warlocks and mages. They are both cloth-wearing classes whose prime goal is to do damage with magic.

You're missing the point entirely.

I don't care about the differences between the classes. Of course mages and warlocks are different, just like wizards and enchanters are different in EQ and wizards and sorcerers are different in D&D.

The point isn't that there are common things between them. The point is that the game play hasn't changed since EQ.

You select a target.

You click one spell.

You wait until it finishes casting.

You repeat.

When you compare this with how much melee combat has changed from an 'auto attack' only affair to an intricate dance of player inputs it's not even comparable. It's as if developers have stopped trying to improve upon something.

To summarize, if I don't like hitting things with weapons, what reason do I have to play YOUR game? What DIFFERENCE does it make if I cast a fireball or an iceball when ALL I'm doing is hitting the number 1 on my keyboard?

What CAN a developer do to make spellcasting, and more specifically, the classes themselves, like a mage for instance, "better"? If the system works, why change it? They are a well thought of class, and though generic, work well in most game worlds.

I'll just throw some stuff out here:

Optional Aiming

Optional spell based gestures (pointing at the sky and then at your target to cast a lightning spell, as an example)

A combo system a-la AoC

Anything other than pressing a single button to summon an ice comet from the sky.

And to be honest, i thought AoC melee fighting was a cheap gimmick compared to what it could have been. I wish it would have been something more akin to Mount and Blade then "Auto-attack, now with style!"

There's no auto-attack in Age of Conan broseph.

 

[Helnurath]

This won't be as much a discussion as it will be a rant, although I welcome discussion.

Combat in traditional sword and spell MMO's consists primarily of two things: Melee combat and casting (archery is a general exception to this, but fewer classes use archery in MMO's than melee or casting).

Melee combat has slowly evolved over time. From UO's click fest with no skills to EQ's two to three skills with auto-attack to DAoC's combo system with auto-attack to DDO's real time combat system, to WoW's class-dependent system, to AoC's button combination combo system. There have been marked changes and a gradual evolution. Whether it is for better or worse is up for debate, although I find the changes to be great.

Casting on the other hand has really only changed once from UO to EQ, and has stayed pretty consistent with some minor changes to casting mechanics here and there. This is where my rant kicks in.

What's the difference between a Necromancer from EQ and a Warlock from WoW? Are there really any? What about a Cleric from EQ and a Priest from WoW? How about a Demonologist from AoC and a Wizard from EQ or a Mage from WoW?

If you interchanged any of those classes with the other they are most comparable to and then balanced them for the game they are in, they'd be identical.

Can we say the same thing about Warriors in EQ and Warriors from WoW? What about Rogues from EQ with Rogues from WoW or Assassins from AoC or Shadowblades from DAoC? What about Paladins from EQ with Paladins from DAoC with Paladins from WoW?

All are vastly different even when they are incredibly similar primarily due to the change in melee combat.

So, why has casting remained the same for so long? Is it really that much fun? Game developers have the know-how on making casting interesting. Take a look at the rare truly unique casting class. It still uses out-dated casting mechanics but it finds a way to be engrossing. An example of this would be the Blood Mage from Vanguard.

I guess what I'm getting at is this:

Spells can do anything. They can summon comets of ice from the sky, charm rabid beasts to fight for you, conjure up spirits, suck the blood out of enemies and give that blood to you, heal your wounded allies, have the ground split in two, cause your enemies to stand there in bewilderment, conjure up demons and undead, turn a fist of sand in to a fireball that freezes the enemy... anything.

Why hasn't spell casting changed one bit? For all of the neat things spells can do surely developers can come up with something neat for me to do in an MMO other than TABX3 1,1,3,2,6.

Because that doesn't work for melee combat anymore either.

Edit: I'm talking about games at launch. I'm well aware of the changes that have happened in both UO and EQ.

No worries in 10 years you'll be able to shake your penis at the moniter to cast magic missile rank 1.

 

[Partyjerk]

This won't be as much a discussion as it will be a rant, although I welcome discussion.

Combat in traditional sword and spell MMO's consists primarily of two things: Melee combat and casting (archery is a general exception to this, but fewer classes use archery in MMO's than melee or casting).

Melee combat has slowly evolved over time. From UO's click fest with no skills to EQ's two to three skills with auto-attack to DAoC's combo system with auto-attack to DDO's real time combat system, to WoW's class-dependent system, to AoC's button combination combo system. There have been marked changes and a gradual evolution. Whether it is for better or worse is up for debate, although I find the changes to be great.

Casting on the other hand has really only changed once from UO to EQ, and has stayed pretty consistent with some minor changes to casting mechanics here and there. This is where my rant kicks in.

What's the difference between a Necromancer from EQ and a Warlock from WoW? Are there really any? What about a Cleric from EQ and a Priest from WoW? How about a Demonologist from AoC and a Wizard from EQ or a Mage from WoW?

If you interchanged any of those classes with the other they are most comparable to and then balanced them for the game they are in, they'd be identical.

Can we say the same thing about Warriors in EQ and Warriors from WoW? What about Rogues from EQ with Rogues from WoW or Assassins from AoC or Shadowblades from DAoC? What about Paladins from EQ with Paladins from DAoC with Paladins from WoW?

All are vastly different even when they are incredibly similar primarily due to the change in melee combat.

So, why has casting remained the same for so long? Is it really that much fun? Game developers have the know-how on making casting interesting. Take a look at the rare truly unique casting class. It still uses out-dated casting mechanics but it finds a way to be engrossing. An example of this would be the Blood Mage from Vanguard.

I guess what I'm getting at is this:

Spells can do anything. They can summon comets of ice from the sky, charm rabid beasts to fight for you, conjure up spirits, suck the blood out of enemies and give that blood to you, heal your wounded allies, have the ground split in two, cause your enemies to stand there in bewilderment, conjure up demons and undead, turn a fist of sand in to a fireball that freezes the enemy... anything.

Why hasn't spell casting changed one bit? For all of the neat things spells can do surely developers can come up with something neat for me to do in an MMO other than TABX3 1,1,3,2,6.

Because that doesn't work for melee combat anymore either.

Edit: I'm talking about games at launch. I'm well aware of the changes that have happened in both UO and EQ.

No worries in 10 years you'll be able to shake your penis at the moniter to cast magic missile rank 1.

songs a bit backhanded tbh.

But i like the character class system in MMO's, and its nice that the always add some gun-wankers or bow/xbow users , but the ammo/bullet thing is quite annoying in WoW/silkroad, cuz it takes some space in the backpack/inventory.

 

[Hitty25]

What CAN a developer do to make spellcasting, and more specifically, the classes themselves, like a mage for instance, "better"? If the system works, why change it? They are a well thought of class, and though generic, work well in most game worlds.

I'll just throw some stuff out here:

Optional Aiming

Optional spell based gestures (pointing at the sky and then at your target to cast a lightning spell, as an example)

A combo system a-la AoC

Anything other than pressing a single button to summon an ice comet from the sky.

And to be honest, i thought AoC melee fighting was a cheap gimmick compared to what it could have been. I wish it would have been something more akin to Mount and Blade then "Auto-attack, now with style!"

There's no auto-attack in Age of Conan broseph.

The system is so lame, that in my opinion, like i said "cheap gimmick" that is becomes the same, boring gameplay as autoattacking...but with style...i said it all right there.

Having to spam out spells at an incredible rate like in WoW, in say Ulduar, trying to heal a boss through a Enrage portion of a fight, i don't see a combo-system being useful at all! Unless they wanted to slow down the gameplay a ton to allow casters to keep up...and then we would never hear the end of the whining. That is a good portion of why i did not like AoC, and probably why it has been flopping terribly. The confusion coming from keeping track of say, a warlocks many, many skills during any sort of fight would be hilarious.

AND IM NOT YOUR BROSEPH .

 

[HyenaThePirate]

It's simple.

Spells are more powerful than melee.
In order to balance games, you have to make casters who tend to have the heavier firepower, weak to the blows of melee character so that things balance out.

Unfortunately, since melee characters dont have to make 'sword-swing' motions to hack your ass off, it would be unfair to force such a system upon caster classes.

Honestly, UO had the best idea in MMO's as far as I'm concerned. Let everyone learn ANYTHING, don't pigeon hole us into certain classes. I see no reason why a mage cant use a sword adequately or learn to shoot a bow, and I dont see why a warrior cant pick up a few spells here and there to help himself out. I think the having to have "reagents" in order to cast spells added more fun, as well as the requirement for some sort of "condition". One of the best games I've seen for magic, surprisingly was the last Harry Potter game.
In it, you had to use your mouse to make a motion that was translated as a spell... (think Okami but instead of a brush, you had a wand, and you didnt have to 'pause' the game to do it, you just did it while holding down the ctrl or alt button).

Just like sword swings can miss, spells need to fizzle, go awry or even backfire. And they should be environment specific... if you're standing in the middle of the Land of Burning Hot Lava, using an avalanche spell should sensibly enough not be possible.

 

[Oneirius]

How different does a magic system need to be in order for you to define it as "different"? Taking WOW as an example, is the Death Knight's unique(among the different classes, of course) runic magic system "different" then the one used by other casters?

 

[NeutralDrow]

So...melee classes have finally caught up with spellcasting classes, then. They've gone from being boring as all get out to actually requiring more strategy than "stand there, hit a button once, and absorb damage."

Can anyone really say that spell casting in WoW is more fun than it is in EQ? What about DAoC? or AoC? Or AC? Or AO? Or UO?

Beats me. You don't even explain how the melee classes differ from game to game. If what you're implying is true, then no. You can't say one game has more fun spellcasting than the others. They're all equally fun.

There are indeed quite some classes in different MMO's that look a lot like eachother, yes. But that doesn't mean that casters can't differ from eachother. For example, World of Warcraft. Warlocks and mages. They are both cloth-wearing classes whose prime goal is to do damage with magic.

You're missing the point entirely.

I don't care about the differences between the classes. Of course mages and warlocks are different, just like wizards and enchanters are different in EQ and wizards and sorcerers are different in D&D.

The point isn't that there are common things between them. The point is that the game play hasn't changed since EQ.

You select a target.

You click one spell.

You wait until it finishes casting.

You repeat.

When you compare this with how much melee combat has changed from an 'auto attack' only affair to an intricate dance of player inputs it's not even comparable. It's as if developers have stopped trying to improve upon something.

If that's really how you play spellcasting classes, I wonder if you're trying to make it boring. Or if you're trying to make it sound boring to make a point.

To summarize, if I don't like hitting things with weapons, what reason do I have to play YOUR game? What DIFFERENCE does it make if I cast a fireball or an iceball when ALL I'm doing is hitting the number 1 on my keyboard?

Again, as opposed to what? Playing a melee class using only your thoughts?

What CAN a developer do to make spellcasting, and more specifically, the classes themselves, like a mage for instance, "better"? If the system works, why change it? They are a well thought of class, and though generic, work well in most game worlds.

I'll just throw some stuff out here:

Optional Aiming

Optional spell based gestures (pointing at the sky and then at your target to cast a lightning spell, as an example)

A combo system a-la AoC

Anything other than pressing a single button to summon an ice comet from the sky.

There's a fine line between "better" and "needlessly complicated" (if any of the complaints I've heard about AoC are valid). I'm not sure what you mean by "optional aiming," though; that sounds like it might be interesting.