It means exactly that. and your equation demonstrates it. If you have to lower 1/3 to 1/4, that factor is indeed lowered.
Sorry, but clear cut strawman arguments don't really help your case. No one here said that there are no tactics involved in action combat. Fact is that action combat-based MMORPGs have to be less tactics/group synergies-based, to avoid overwhelming players making them less accessible and to avoid overwhelming the servers.The point where we disagree is that you are saying there are no tactics involved in action combat, which is frankly pretty silly. You can't just stand there and spam punches in a well implemented system. If you can, then the system is flawed and needs adjustment.
Big difference in the bolded parts.
Some guy talks with MMO developers between a weekly and a daily base, when he doesn't inverview them. TERA's devs included. He's quite aware of the compromises they had to do in order to make the server structure what it is.The sun rising in the east is a fact. Some guy on the net claiming something is impossible is an opinion. For some reason you seem to be thinking your opinion is a fact. I'm sorry, you are mistaken.
I'm quite sure they know what they're saying for a fact.
What is your opinion based on again?
Like Final Fantasy XI? Or like every long lasting MMORPG we have on the market?Obviously, WoW, being The Holy Grail of MMOs, is successful. Or so people say. It doesn't change the fact nearly every game that tried the same system didn't last long.
One thing is for sure. It's no revolution, and it won't generate any massive audience looking at the results we had so far.Initial hype wearing off, normal phenomenon. The question is, how far this is going to continue? Will the servers become empty? How many will have to close? When? Only time will tell.
To be completely honest most of its appeal on its current userbase is based on the art style, not on its combat.
But it's really not. The difference is in a single keypress, and considering that hitboxes in action-based mmorpg are overly large, there really isn't much difference besides a mere functional one that influences the fun factor very relatively.I didn't say targeting is the only factor defining a MMO. It's one of major defining ones though.
Just pointing out just how weak and incredibly subjective your arguments are.If you don't want to see them as genres, see them as sub-genres, as they're both MMOs, just with different battle systems. You're starting to nitpick at this point though.
Fact is that the definition the OP uses of "the norm" is fallacious to begin with, and shows that he has no idea of what he's talking about, but his contribution to the whole thread pretty much demonstrates that in itself.You missed the point of the thread then. The "norm" the thread is referring to is not the norm in handling an unsuccessful MMO, but the norm of features in a MMO. Basically, the OP wants the SE to do something original again. Whether it's a good idea or not, considering what their last attempt at originality brought us, is another thing altogether.
His idea of "the norm" is limited to very few factors he cares about (he basically uses "the norm" as a derogatory definition to paint what he doesn't like in a negative light, regardless of it being the norm or not), while there are a crapton of factors that define and distingush a MMORPG from "The norm", including ARR.
You could actually easily define action-based MMOs as "the norm", for instance, as action games are a lot more widespread nowadays than games that require more reasoning and have a slower pace.
There are plenty areas where smaller innovations can bring a much larger contribution to the fun factor than radical innovations that attempt to fix what isn't wrong. A good example are TSW's investigative quests.There has to be some progress for it to be called progress, originality and new ideas are part of it when done right. Yes, being original for it's own sake is a bad idea, that doesn't mean everyone should just hold unto safe ideas and recycle them over and over again.
Often going back to past standards pushed away by "innovation" is actually a much better choice than innovating.
Good game design isn't based on time, past, future, innovation or regression, but simply on what is fun and what isn't.
An argument based on not doing "The norm" because someone thinks that an absolutely flawed statistical pool (the commenters on a forum) represents in any way what MMORPG players want is ridiculous. If "the norm" is fun, welcome to "the norm".