Do You Believe in the Holy Trinity of MMORPG Gamedesign?

Do You Believe in the Holy Trinity of MMORPG Gamedesign?

As in?

What do you mean? The holy trinity of MMO design is:

1. Lay it out good

2. Lay it out well

3. Lay it out enough

I usually play solo, but there's a reason why there are only three archetypes available when you do a random WOW dungeon.

It's fundamentally solid, it's just been done to death. I don't think just dropping group dynamic entirely is much of a solution either. Having a role to fill within a team and having that co-operation come off is genuinely satisfying - games which drop that in favour of everybody just wailing on everything ultimately feel pretty hollow. A co-ordinated team should be more than the sum of its parts.

There have to be decent alternatives to Holy Trinity though, like maybe a stronger emphasis on positioning, or on DA2 style group combos, or dynamic interaction with the environment.

Every time I have seen people try something else it always just ends up being 1-2 classes that can do everything, that everyone plays with, while the rest get neglected and poo pooed on when you try to play as it in a team setting. I would be willing to try alternatives, but I have yet to see it done well and I don't see the problem with the trinity.
 
All that said, my favourite class to play in any MMO is the buff/de-buffer controller class. I have been playing City of Heroes since it launched, and to this day my favourite class is the controller. It is pure crowd control with its primary skill set and your choice of buff/de-buff/heal, or some combination there of, depending on your choice of skill set. Makes me sad that it's not the Holy Quatrology that's standard as I find tank/DPS mind numbingly tedious to play and, as much as I love healing, being a pure healer sucks.

It's fundamentally solid, it's just been done to death. I don't think just dropping group dynamic entirely is much of a solution either. Having a role to fill within a team and having that co-operation come off is genuinely satisfying - games which drop that in favour of everybody just wailing on everything ultimately feel pretty hollow. A co-ordinated team should be more than the sum of its parts.

There have to be decent alternatives to Holy Trinity though, like maybe a stronger emphasis on positioning, or on DA2 style group combos, or dynamic interaction with the environment.

I agree that for mass market appeal Tank, DPS, and Healer is the best way to go, but I'm sad that the idea of a buffer/debuffer/controller class seems to have fallen to the wayside.

I agree that for mass market appeal Tank, DPS, and Healer is the best way to go, but I'm sad that the idea of a buffer/debuffer/controller class seems to have fallen to the wayside.

no I'm an MMO atheist though having played Guild Wars 2 Pax Demo last year that game is fucking good.

@Seppli said:

@Jimbo said:

It's fundamentally solid, it's just been done to death. I don't think just dropping group dynamic entirely is much of a solution either. Having a role to fill within a team and having that co-operation come off is genuinely satisfying - games which drop that in favour of everybody just wailing on everything ultimately feel pretty hollow. A co-ordinated team should be more than the sum of its parts.

There have to be decent alternatives to Holy Trinity though, like maybe a stronger emphasis on positioning, or on DA2 style group combos, or dynamic interaction with the environment.

Would you say DOTA 2 has group dynamics? It's the same tried and true group dynamics as found in games like DOTA 2 which happen in a 'Holy-Trinity-free' group environment.

I've never played any DOTA games, so I couldn't really say. If it requires you to rely on your teammates to do something which your own character can't do, then sure. If dropping from 4 to 3 players just makes you 25% less effective as a team, then not really.

I agree that what GW2 is doing sounds interesting, I just wonder how well it will stand up over time. Being a vital cog in a machine is satisfying; being one of many entirely dispensable cogs is less satisfying. The combat is going to scale based on how many people there are anyway, so at that point it basically doesn't matter to the team/group whether you're present or not. It will be nice that everything doesn't fall to pieces when somebody goes off in the middle of something to have their dinner or whatever, but ultimately I can see the experience being less satisfying as a result. The gameplay from an individual perspective will need to be very satisfying to make up for that.

@Seppli said:

@StarvingGamer said:

I agree that for mass market appeal Tank, DPS, and Healer is the best way to go, but I'm sad that the idea of a buffer/debuffer/controller class seems to have fallen to the wayside.

I guess these days utility gets spread around to accentuate and differntiate classes, whilst everybody can do comparable and competitive DPS. The vast majority of players enjoy dealing damage over tanking and healing. Buffing, debuffing and crowd control is everybody's bread and butter.

Yeah, like I said, mass market. I always had the most fun playing EQ as an enchanter or a druid though.

@Seppli said:

@Jimbo said:

It's fundamentally solid, it's just been done to death. I don't think just dropping group dynamic entirely is much of a solution either. Having a role to fill within a team and having that co-operation come off is genuinely satisfying - games which drop that in favour of everybody just wailing on everything ultimately feel pretty hollow. A co-ordinated team should be more than the sum of its parts.

There have to be decent alternatives to Holy Trinity though, like maybe a stronger emphasis on positioning, or on DA2 style group combos, or dynamic interaction with the environment.

Would you say DOTA 2 has group dynamics? It's the same tried and true group dynamics as found in games like DOTA 2 which happen in a 'Holy-Trinity-free' group environment.

I've never played any DOTA games, so I couldn't really say. If it requires you to rely on your teammates to do something which your own character can't do, then sure. If dropping from 4 to 3 players just makes you 25% less effective as a team, then not really.

I agree that what GW2 is doing sounds interesting, I just wonder how well it will stand up over time. Being a vital cog in a machine is satisfying; being one of many entirely dispensable cogs is less satisfying. The combat is going to scale based on how many people there are anyway, so at that point it basically doesn't matter to the team/group whether you're present or not. It will be nice that everything doesn't fall to pieces when somebody goes off in the middle of something to have their dinner or whatever, but ultimately I can see the experience being less satisfying as a result. The gameplay from an individual perspective will need to be very satisfying to make up for that.

wat
 
i thought it was warrior-rogue-mage