Would you play FFXIV if it had action combat?

[Rokke]

Yaaaaassssss~ I played TERA for a few years and the fast paced healing was ridiculously fun. It took me a while to get used to XIV's slower pace and tbh, if it weren't for race/gender locked classes I'd probably still be playing TERA more.

[Shurrikhan]

A middle-ground I think a lot of players might like is simply reticule / free-mouse swapping. This allows you to target via your character facing at will, so that you can still move comfortably while selecting a target, or target vs. a free mouse, whichever you prefer at the time, toggle-able with any given bind (I tend to make this my mouse's "Fire" key). You could even swap between two completely different key configurations in the process, including or excluding LMB, RMB, etc. from regular play. Given that I find the reticule more intuitive, especially when needing to target from among many mobs or during periods of movement, I'd probably spend most of my time there, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't swap back for healing, etc., especially if I could program a third intercepting set to allow me to cast LMB, RMB, and mod keys (Shift, Alt, Ctrl) for each on party or alliance members via direct clicks or the party list or attack spells via clicks on my target bar. At that point I'd rather my keys be auto-aimed at my current target.

Just some concepts I'd like to toss out:

Action combat doesn't have to be especially APM/IPM* intensive. Button holds can provide as much play unless allowing for changes to combos based on input delay (e.g. in Devil May Cry). By that matter, XIV could still have just as much nuance even if one were to simply hold down or hit once to automate "Thrust Chain" instead of hitting the skill 5 times, inserting oGCDs between. The issue is only tangential to either style of combat. FFXIV suffers from button bloat because it's been specifically designed as such, not because it's tab targetted. BDO has about as many actions in just 6 keys because it's smart about it, not necessarily because it's an Action MMO. You can have high APM/IPM, soft targeting, finely differentiated manual timing, AoE integration, and 4 hotbars worth of keys, for instance. Which then would you call it?

(*I prefer to consider APM as the differentiated actions a character takes per minute, and IPM as the number of inputs, keystrokes or clicks, that created that, but APM is the standard term for both, so have both.)

Action combat doesn't have to break the "holy trinity". While I would rather players actually have ways to skillfully outmaneuver damage, one could still have a satisfying amount of avoidable damage even while topping it off with enough unavoidable or uptime-reducing (potential) damage to warrant a healer. It'd just take a lot more potential damage overall, and may also warrant some QoL-like ways to deal with really poor players, such as each heal also tacking on some amount of bonus mitigation for a time, and may encourage a view of Support that's not limited to healing and MP/TP battery replacement alone. It just makes the decision more realistic. How much time can be saved by bringing a support. In some cases, the fight might not be clearable without it. Others, the added aggression possible for the remaining DPS outweighs the loss of one. But, you don't simply die outright to a composition check. (The same concerns of course affect tanks as well.)

[Fyrebrand]

This game still can't even give a consistently rock-solid indicator of when an enemy's AoE attack will hit. Whether an attack hits you or not is still calculated well before the animation actually occurs, often creating absurd scenarios where your corpse lies well outside of the blast radius. Full-blown action combat with attacks striking precise areas in real time is completely out of the question.

But technical concerns aside, I don't even find the question to be valid. You can't just plunk action combat into an MMORPG with traditional tab-targeting, with all the content designed and balanced under that system. It just doesn't work that way. You are basically asking to change the whole genre of the game and alter the mechanics at their core -- might as well be trying to make FFXIV into a 2D side-scrolling platformer.

That said, before FFXIV came out I was actually hoping it would lean more towards a somewhat action-based style. Maybe something like Guild Wars 2, where attacks and projectiles move and strike in real time, but you can still "target" things. But that would have been a very different sort of game, not anything like the FFXIV we know today. Maybe the next Final Fantasy MMO, if there is one, could experiment with this -- but not this game.

[YitharV2]

No.

I prefer the GCD system we have now for it's accessibility and pace that let's me play any role I want or need at any time and succeed.

Hmm, yeah that's probably why they have it, for accessibility reasons. And I can understand that. I know people with disabilities do play this game. I think it's also the reason why tanking and healing is so easy. Although, I kind of wish they would do something to add more engagement to those roles even if they keep the current GCD system.

[JunseiKei]

As the title suggests.

-Pretty much every melee attack is aoe to some degree
-Ranged dps actually have to aim
-Animation locks on every skill (because we all love animation locks)
-Every class/job has a self heal, and dodge/block ability that you can use every 5-10 seconds

Sooooo like Monster Hunter (sans that dodge limitation is pretty bleh)?

Yes.

[Gumbercules]

Think id be better if it was a side scroller personally, like a castlevania game. You know like some platformer action going on. Guess if it was like a screen swiper like the fruit ninja thing id be ok too. Guess they could go like candy crush for the combat though....

My issue is that a game is designed within its design idea. Tera was fun enough and BnS is ok, the issue I have is, would I be ok with it being overhauled to action after playing it as it has been and my answer is no. Something designed with action is going to react differently to something designed without it.

[Kassiekane]

I really don't know what to say, I just now came back to the forums and this thread gets necro'd.

I guess I'll take this opportunity to clarify that I'm quite neutral on this subject. I don't care if its action or not, as long as its interesting.

[Gumbercules]

I really don't know what to say, I just now came back to the forums and this thread gets necro'd.

I guess I'll take this opportunity to clarify that I'm quite neutral on this subject. I don't care if its action or not, as long as its interesting.

well call oriley and spank me with a luffa! didn't even notice this was a necro lol. mea Culpa!

[Bluejay]

As the title suggests.

-Pretty much every melee attack is aoe to some degree
-Ranged dps actually have to aim
-Animation locks on every skill (because we all love animation locks)
-Every class/job has a self heal, and dodge/block ability that you can use every 5-10 seconds

Would anyone prefer this over the traditional combat we have now?

Action combat in this game would be amazing, though maybe you went a bit too far with the suggestions. As you have it, there would be an reduction of roles and trinity game play. While it sounds good, making MMO's single player and getting rid of the trinity has never worked all that well. Loosing the group focus of this game would be to its detriment in my opinion.

[JunseiKei]

Same, but it's kind of interesting how ideas can come full circle with time.