Quote:
Originally Posted by Gli
And it still makes sense now, hence the many players who use it in games that offer it, and the many players who do want it in games that threaten not to have it.
|
And there are plenty of gamers out there that would rather WASD and don't like being forced to play click-to-move. You don't observe as many of their posts in this thread due to two selection effects:
1) People that are happy with the design decision are less likely to post than those that are upset.
2) People that like to WASD are, according to the cost theory, more likely to have left the game and stayed away.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gli
Straw man alert! I can do that too, you know:
|
You've missed the point. I build the straw man to illustrate by example the flaw in your logic. Your argument was: click-to-move does not impede the sale of games because Diablo II used it and sold a ton of games. So I picked a particularly terrible feature of Diablo II that players in GW live with and hate. This illustrates that not all features of Diablo II should be copied.
No one complained about that trading system then. They do now. Why? Back then it was fine compared to the alternatives. Not true today.
Ironically, the example you give also happens to illustrate this. Design decisions must be evaluated in the context of the available alternatives at the time. Thus, you can't argue that click-to-move is fine because D2 used it and sold.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy Gus
Because for meaningful competition, click to move is necessitated for what matters (precise character positioning and movement/stopping) in an environment with latency. In FPS it's aiming that needs to be precise, not bodyblocking or move/stop timing, so you wouldn't WASD your crosshairs around while clicking to move.
|
Among other questions that this raises:
1) Should GW PvP be about hyper-precise positioning? I agree that this is presently true: play a relic run in Halls or try to force a boost to see how much this matters. Is this what the designers were trying to market to us, or is it an unintended and undesirable consequence of the mechanics?
2) Is this fun? You could make an argument that Bull's Strike is one of the worst things that ever happened to this game, because it created a ton of opportunities for small latency variations to be decisive.
3) Is click-to-move the only solution if a game based around precision movement is undesirable? Would it not make more sense to remove the problematic mechanics, so that the game is refocused on what was supposed to matter (which skills you bring, which ones you use, and when you use them) and not on movement?