What would XIV look like as an "action" game?

[Shurrikhan]

I realize there are a ton of different preconceptions on what makes an "action" game. For many, it means oversimplified combat where all combos step from a mere two to three action choices, trinity-less gameplay, and constant timing concerns. For me, it simply implies a higher standard of button efficiency, more frequent poll rates, enough server hubs to keep your average player's ping under whatever point makes a crucial difference (SE will say 220 is the bar for XIV, but that doesn't even allow for non-clipping on a single short oGCD, while sub-80 is necessary for double-weaves, which most melee rotations necessitate for optimal play; I get around 140 ms ping here, and sub-30 for every "action" MMO I've played due to the greater number, and therefore proximity, of available servers), and the mechanics in order to make use of that quality for added depth without added bloat. "Action conventions" to me alludes to things like a dynamic movement key (cover, close, dash, vault, climb, sprint), dynamic hotbar slots (auto-swapping based on combos and conditionals), timing and positional dependencies, momentum systems, ragdoll effects, damage-based interruption, a plethora of statuses (knocked down, airborne, dazed, stunned, bound), conditionals, "open" combos, "analog" resources, etc.

Assuming the target is still the same largely trinity-based gameplay we have now, what do you imagine might change or be added into the game if any "action" tools were added? How might the interface change? What about responsibilities, job mechanics, etc.?

I'll try and toss in my own example in a bit. Reserving next post.

[Shurrikhan]

Reserved...

[ManuelBravo]

Maybe like Castlevania Lords of Shadow with an action skill tree.

[gumas]

Eh i can see it work wonder in "dungeon fighter online" style or "kritika online" style

This day people love doing mad combo in action style rpg

[MetatronPrime]

The combat system is what keeps this game from being a 10/10. Visceral combat is the best way to move forward, especially for this MMO. Tab-targeting is a relic of the past. Newer MMOs are ditching it for true action combat and this game needs the resources for the overhaul. I seriously think we, as a community, need to constantly voice our opinion on this matter because the combat is the most important thing in FFXIV that we spend most of our time participating in. It's not an easy task but it's needed. FFXIV can become the greatest MMO on the market without a doubt. As it stands, the combat system as it is leaves some doubts to that.

[RopeDrink]

I may be alone in disagreeing with that. There have been a spat of games lately that have taken a hybrid approach (Riders of Icarus being one example that springs to mind). It's primarily a tab-target affair but with the Action-Combat option tacked on - in the end, both felt horrible as a result of the attempted mechanics blend. I have no problem with the tab-target formula at all, and having played the likes of WoW, Allods Online and god-knows how many other tab-target MMORPGs, FFXIV felt like a nice blend when I discovered it (at least once I got into the 50+ range where the dungeon-pace ramps up). Before the tweaks to RR content (when mobs took 5+ seconds to perform tiny AoE's that could be sidestepped in one key-press), everything felt sluggish - then I was thrown into the likes of Ultima's Bane and everything changed.


Sure, avoiding huge/numerous danger-zones with a side order of casual not-bullet-hell doesn't make it action combat, but it damn well felt good after a decade of WoW, where basic tank & spank dominated for way, way too long. That isn't saying the formula can't be improved on - I'm just not convinced removing tab-target alone is an answer for it.

[Acidblood]

Can't say I agree. One of the things I really like about FFXIV is that the combat feels almost like a good JPRG in real-time, and a lot more tactical than a lot of the so called 'action combat MMOs' (sorry, but action combat in MMOs, and RPGs generally, is simply pathetic compared to the likes of Devil May Cry et al.).

Could the combat in FFXIV be improved upon? Definitely, but that is more to do with better designed abilities, mechanics, reducing things like animation lock, and a bit more meaningful character customisation, than anything approaching a full overhaul; hopefully 4.0 will be a good step in this direction (for both high and low level combat).

[Khalithar]

What would FFXIV look like as an action game? Honestly?

TERA. That is what I think FFXIV would look like as an action game.

[Driavna]

True action combat requires extreme low ping to really work, check this videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meDtc3QqQeI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qwaz_aAih-A

Players with "high" ping will underperform so badly that people will request for "low" ping to do certain content.

[Shurrikhan]

True action combat requires extreme low ping to really work, check this videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meDtc3QqQeI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qwaz_aAih-A

Players with "high" ping will underperform so badly that people will request for "low" ping to do certain content.

Although less frequent due to the long animation times (i.e. internal cooldowns or animation-lock), we still experience the exact same thing in XIV. Just as the difference in B&S, BDO, and Tera quickly tapers off around sub-100 ping, any ping above ~80 at a 2.4 GCD on a double-weave class will typically cost uptime due to clipping the GCD. This can significantly affect the performance of min-maxed rotations on classes like Ninjas, Bards, and Dragoons.

It's not a difference of "true" or pseudo action games so much as the ability to queue and trigger a release of sequential skills at a certain portion of the first's remaining internal cooldown enough to recover for a given amount of latency. If a skill requires a 1.4 second ICD but already accepts and locks in the next queue at .7 seconds, the game would theoretically have .7 seconds to make the skills seamless in their transition. Of course, that's assuming it's not bottlenecked by some sort of check for the last skill's completion; if it is thus choked, then that choke would have to precede the ICD's completion by at least the player's ping in order to appear seamless or otherwise maintain the nominal uptime.

Changes to NIN enhanced the apparent reactivity, smoothness, and (for higher ping players) speed of Ninjutsu by allowing for those completion checks for each mudra on the client side, so that, as far as I can tell, the only thing actually being sent to the server is the final Ninjutsu. This effectively removed any additional uptime/clipping difference from ping for all but the last oGCD in a (multi-)mudra-ninjutsu series of actions, and reduced vulnerability to latency spikes and packet loss. Again, that as merely as far as I have heard or can guess from the information passed down and from NIN mains who've been testing with this. There might well be some other sort of check to ensure people aren't able to create exploits wherein the mudra ICDs are reduced. I haven't heard of any NINs finding such an exploit yet, and given the PVP scene this might point more at it being impossible than at the honor of our community.

The same might be done for all other oGCDs eventually, but I suspect there's an issue. The durations of mudras are irrelevant; they're supposed to be replaced as rapidly as possible. But even .5 seconds of duration, giving or taking an ICD, can allow a player to shave some otherwise inferior skill speed while still achieving, say, a double-EA opener on Bard. If the server really is receiving the GCD's worth of information together, that may have some effect on the relative duration of the first of a pair of double-weaved oGCD buffs, unless tracked appropriately by a client-side clock, which may then open the game up further to exploits...