no click to move in GW2

WASD Keyboard movement is only an intuitive control scheme for people who are used to playing games using that scheme.

For pay-once games, higher rates of player drain aren't as big a concern as lower sales.

There are huge distributional implications. Good play and bad play are separated by a very fine line. Seemingly small changes have large impacts.

This is also why there is so much fighting over nerfs and changes to game mechanics.

Market's dominated by them. They're called FPS and consoles (analog sticks are built on the old d-pad, which is a WASD scheme).

People that leave buy the next game at lower rates. ANet doesn't want you playing 24/7. They want you to take large breaks. But they do want you to come back for the next installment or game. Make it more costly to do so, and fewer players make the next purchase.

If I want to move correctly I use the WADS. If I want to mve with one hand I use the one-hand movement trick (Click and hold the right mouse button, then click and hold the left, you'll move while holding both buttons)

I find the click to move quite annoying, because it tends to get stuck everywhere.

The options to completely turn off click to move, to double click to activate instead a single click and the 'lose target' options were amongst the best additions to the controls of the game.

To cope with rubberbanding the best option is selecting and activating (i.e.: space) even with click to move, you may be going to a place where you don't want, since targets may rubberband too.

For the most part, there's a consensus that the control system is fine, and removing click-to-move is pointless (and damaging).

When Warhammer Online (which I think we all know uses the WASD system) was in beta, I argued quite fervently regarding implementing some form of click-to-attack system like we have in Guild Wars. It's not quite like click-to-move but it is very similar (and the code between the two is probably intertwined).

My reasoning was that it made the game such a horrid clickfest, the result of constant WASD movement and constant skill spam. A lot of people were engaged in running and jumping circles around their opponents to get behind them. It was terrible.

I would hate it if Guild Wars devolved into that sort of thing.

Click to move is somewhat irrelevant to me as I have a laptop and find it unwieldy. However, you need it in PvP and therefore it should stay. As a Necro, I tend to become the target of melee rather quickly and CTM allows me to kite(no one runs away quite like a Necro!) while changing armor/weapons and contemplating my next move.

I currently reside in New Zealand and get a relatively high ping to both American and Euro servers. PvP is definitely the sole reason I have stuck to this game, however due to ping I am unable to play at least two of ten professions to their full ability.

Removing click to move has a seriously negative impact on higher ping players, and will effectively eliminate the possibility of playing a melee class at a competitive level in pvp for those of us affected. This has become very apparent to me after attempting to play several other MMOs. Due to the delay between client and server it becomes incredibly difficult to actually know where you are in relation to your opponent at any given time (as opposed to what it shows on your client), and click to move/follow mitigates a large part of this problem.

As others have mentioned, click to move is the more precise of the systems, and allows for tactics such as quarterstepping that effectively enhance the level of skill one is able to attain. Why try and fix what isn't broken?

So what your saying is that they should use an inferior system because you don't like change and its what others have done.

Thats the kind of thinking which will stagnate video games.

No, I'm saying that they should use an inferior control system because it sells games. You want to market a competitive game to people, you use the controls they're used to. Small improvements in latency aren't enough of a reason to abandon the standard. You use WASD, everyone is negatively impacted equally.

ANet's not trying to build the perfect game. They're trying to sell as many games as possible. Best recipe? Find a dimension you can differentiate on. Valve did it with AI and storyline. GW did it by creating a deep skill set and limiting the skills you could bring to the party, creating multi-layered strategy.

Click-to-move isn't a revolutionary new control scheme that's going to sell games. So why make it harder for your potential customers to pick up your game by implementing unfamiliar controls?

My desire is that both options remain. I know I can do without it because I have, but I prefer click to move be there. I've always you've used both options to move depending on what I'm doing.

What I can't get used to and am bugged by is the inability to target an NPC and autorun to. When in a city or outpost, especially if crowded, it stinks to have to manually run around to get to an npc rather than target-space. It's even worse if the game is backwards and has collision/body-blocking between players, rather than player-mob.

In my opinion I find it much easier to use the mouse to move and it leaves my off hand free for whatever else I need to do. If they could have both options in GW1 there is no reason that can't have both in GW2.

You're being ridiculous.

Click-to-move isn't a revolutionary new control scheme. It's a staple of the genre we're dealing with here. Diablo II had click-to-move for crying out loud. Sold plenty.

I tried the open beta weekend. Very first thing I noticed was this. Absolutely horrid control combat system, you didn't feel at all connected to the combat within that game, clunky. Again I just can't picture GW2 at least on the PvP side of things being remotely decent without click moving. Then again WAR also suffered from poor performance, used their own bad Engine, UI skill usage/recharge/casting all that was horrible.

It also was released in 2000. Times change. Click-to-move made sense in the fixed-camera, 2D sprites era.

We also live with Diablo 2's trading system in GW - spam in limited population districts and direct trade. I hear that's a popular design decision.

No. You want a competitive game you keep any elements which keep players adhering to a higher standard of competition. Most posters have agreed that click to move is healthier for competitive pvp and I am inclined to agree with them.

This has been the result of every single MMO I have played, GW being the exception. Age of Conan, WoW, Fury, and Warhammer Online are among the most well known culprits, and their pvp is nothing short of terrible for it.

If Anet wants to keep their game unique and competitive then removing click to move is a step in the wrong direction.

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.

Straw man alert! I can do that too, you know: WASD movement was the only option in many early 80's home computer games. They only had a palette of 16 or sometimes even less colors. I hear that's a popular design decision.

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.

I am a click fan and this saddens me

Although i use the keys to move I am a clicker for the skills also for the "O" sh*t moves and when you need to target that hard to grab thing

I use the arrow keys to move around and I much prefer that to anything else. Like someone else said, left hand for skills and right hand to move.

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.

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.

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?

I prefer WASD keys, i use the click when im lazy. lol

Movement is just another aspect within this game, and many other games have featured the importance on it. Why dumb it down Martin? I fail to see how movement currently in GW is a problem mechanic, I'd say it's a desired mechanic in the sense within PvP it's another element that requires attention/skill. Even without click to move and only using WASD you'd still be able to bodyblock, except going down that avenue feels clunky/imprecise.

Come time for the GW2 beta the combat system will be my first concern when I try it, if it doesn't feel right one less copy sold.

Maybe implementing click to move is what is delaying Guild Wars 2 to 2014....

(/sarcasm BTW. I have no idea when GW2 will come out)

I never like losing options. Keep click to move. If it has to be a choice between z-axis, and click to move, I would choose click to move.

I was under the impression that Guildwars advocated skill over time played. Unless I am seriously mistaken the word 'skill' in this context doesn't simply mean one of those colourful squares at the base of your screen.

Anything that takes a significant amount of thought and effort plays a part in evolving the game from a simple variant on paper scissors rock. Dumbing the game down by removing the intricate positioning and movement strategies (Bodyblocking/Quarterstepping) is only going to decrease the amount of thinking and awareness required to fulfill your role, basically taking some of the skill out of the game.

These strategies which enhance the competitive nature of the game are only made possible via click to move. To see this in effect try forcing or breaking a bodyblock via WASD alone on a non home server.

I use click to move a lot. I also use the keyboard a lot. I switch back and forth based on what I am doing. I also frequently have two accounts open, one on my desktop, one on my laptop, for trading etc and have a mouse in each hand. Frankly, having both options available for movement is immensely useful since I have two running at once quite often. I tend to use the keyboard for small movements, or when I have to be precise and the mouse for running and targeting.

WASD-only games with jumping tend to degenerate into circle-hopping around behind your opponent in PvP. Do not want.

1) People that don't exists in droves (i.e. people agreeing with your sentiment that click-to-move shouldn't be an option) are also less likely to post. I'm pretty sure that the vast majority either doesn't care because they don't use click-to-move anyway, or doesn't like the idea of playing without it.
2) So, you think they'll be back on account of the sequel not supporting click-to-move? I wouldn't bet money on that. I can offer one simple fact that's not based on speculation: if they have no click-to-move, I'm not buying.

You do realize that it makes no sense to argue against a desirable feature because a game featuring it also has a bad feature? In any case, my Diablo II example was in response to this: I was mostly aiming to discredit your 'unfamiliar controls' argument by referring to a 9 year old game. They're not unfamiliar, they're a staple of the genre. "Sold plenty." was just an afterthought.

Which I wasn't trying, see above

If it does, it should offer controls to deal with it. If it doesn't, adding hyper-precise controls doesn't adversely affect the game anyway.

I could do without the minute positioning requirements. But then again, I'm not arguing in favor of click-to-move from a competitive angle, I don't want to play a game lacking the convenience.

What came first? The keyboard or the mouse? I play Perfect World also, and they have mounts, flying, jumping(very radical jumping) and swimming. They also use wasd and a modified point and click(not as good as GW, but you get used to it. That said I repeat from my last post there is no reason not to continue to have both in GW2.

Quoted for emphasis.

Sure, but this also contributes to making the PvP a niche, unaccessible game. There's plenty of importance to positioning at the tactical level that doesn't require pinpoint click precision. Do you expose yourself to attack/cast a skill and risk putting unnecessary pressure on the backline, or hold your present position? What do you defend the base with, given the opposing threat? Where are the opponent's interrupters, and can/will they disrupt me if I cast? Can I beat that by cancelling?

Further, cannot other forms of skill be substituted? What if tons of builds were viable, such that the minutiae of what skill to use when varied greatly from match to match? What if more maps compelled widely varying distributions of forces? What if threats like the catapult were only available at certain, predictable times? There are lots of ways to replace any specific form of "skill" removed.

So, I argue from a known fact (dissatisfied people tend to post) and a theory (the WASD people left the click-to-move regime) to explain the empirical result. You argue from a conjecture (no one wants WASD-only but people want click-to-move) but offer weak support for said conjecture. See next comment.

But that N of 1 doesn't generalize. We have here a small sample of the potential player base here saying that they insist on click-to-move. We also have a large unobserved sample that does not read this board! If you ask the remnants of the player base whether they like click-to-move, of course they like it! The competitive WASD types went elsewhere, because the environment selected against them.

You've missed my argument yet again! You can't infer from D2's sales that the feature is desirable, or that players are used to the control scheme ten years after release. My argument for why the feature is undesirable is that the feature FORCES competitive players to use it by its nature, and that today's competitive players are by and large looking for WASD because that's what they use in other games.

The set of current GW players that also played D2 is smaller than you might think. It's an old game, and the kids today missed it.

Which gets to the questions that another post raises. You can make an argument that GW as it stands requires that level of control. However, it doesn't follow that GW2 should require that level of control.

As I see it, there are three potential problem mechanics here that lead to the need for precise control:
1) flags
2) relics
3) "if target foe is moving" skills

The first two create an emphasis on bodyblocking; the last creates a need to precisely time the beginning and end of your movement.

Right, but this just leads to the converse of your argument: how many players like you with a lexicographic click-to-move preference really exist? More importantly, what's the ratio of such players relative to the WASD players? You insist that your side is correct without good evidence. This thread isn't necessarily a good representation of prospective player preferences because of the selection effects I've pointed out.

Tons, just browse forums concerning Aion, many want click to move, and ask if there is click to move in Aion. If Aion can have wasd, click to move, flying, totally keyboardboard mouse customization why can't GW2?

Good thing I forced myself into keyboard moving. Now I won't have to deal with a nasty switching.

Forget then that I mentioned positioning, as this is somewhat irrelevant. Concentrate instead on what my previous post mentions about movement - ie. bodyblocks and quarterstepping.

I also fail to see how complex movement strategies make pvp niche and unaccessable. When it comes down to it, to be mildly effective in Guild Wars you do not even need to know anything about movement. Basic positioning ensures you don't explode, but for entry level pvp (on a micro level) you don't need to know how to bodyblock. You don't need to predict movement. Understand that I am not talking about macro level movement such as splits and countersplits here, this will not be significantly affected.

Movement never prevented anyone from pvping, but it does help separate the good players from the rest. This encourages players to improve themselves and results in a healthier atmosphere of competition.

Basically every time you remove some aspect of the game that requires skill, coordination, cooperation, awareness, or thought you are narrowing the gap between players who use the above and those who don't. I would much rather see a large effectiveness gap between those two levels of player.

Based solely on my own personal experience, offered a choice of exclusively WASD, exclusively CTM, or both I would say that probably the majority of the playerbase would choose both. And tbh why can't you include both? In all my time playing I don't think I've seen any complaint about either, other than the retarded rubberband effect that is more a product of lack of communication between the client and server than anything.

The only time I ever use click to move in GW is when I am stuck on a ledge that can easily be walked over but for some reason the designers decided that the toons cant walk over a 6 inch ledge. Thank God this will be solved with jumping in GW2!

I would argue it doesn't matter what the majority of players use. Giving players a choice for their preference is always a good thing.

My concern over these mechanics stems from two issues:
a) they create additional opportunities for small latency variations to be decisive
b) they compel mousewalking

I wholeheartedly agree. All I'm saying is that bodyblocking and quarterstepping are not the only way to create that variation. The design can substitute away from mechanics that emphasize stable, low latency and precise clicks, and towards other mechanics that require the same level of awareness and complex decision-making.

Soren Johnson (lead dev on Civ 4) said it best: a good game maximizes the number of "interesting decisions" the player has to make to succeed. However, there's a second, unstated component: it also minimizes the number of opportunities for random chance to be decisive, while still permitting that probability to be somewhat greater than zero. That way, people of varying skill levels can feel that they can win but high level play is rarely decided by chance.

Ah, I was waiting for this one to crop up. Again, this "choice" is not a choice if one movement scheme is demonstrably superior to the other. If you want to be skilled, you have to run the superior scheme.

Also, choices over preferences are not always good. This is a typical American misconception. Providing choice has hidden costs that people just don't notice.

Ex: a restaurant with 100 different items on the menu has to charge higher prices. There are distributional consequences: customers that like the most popular items end up subsidizing the other options, but customers that like the less popular items maximize their preferences.

It's in the restaurant's interest to offer choices because group choices are frequently settled by individuals with outlier preferences, but the average consumer doesn't do so well under this regime.

So what? Anyone willing to be effective in pvp is willing to make any change necessary to do so. The majority of pvers probably won't give a shit, as it hardly affects them.

I had decided I was going to stick with GW long before I stopped using the keyboard to move. For most players their method of control will have no bearing on whether or not they stick with the game. Players seriously wanting to compete will realize that one method is superior, and if they're set on improving, will adapt.

I would much prefer precise clicks as opposed to retarded circle strafing constantly throughout a match. Not to mention that 300 ping makes a melee class completely nonviable for competitive pvp if WASD is your only option.

All true from the perspective of a current top player.

However, the developer wants to maximize game sales. Make it easier for players to transport their skills from what they're currently playing to your game, and you are more likely to attract them. Also, you're more likely to have them return from a hiatus if they do not have to relearn the control scheme all over again.

Not every potential top player shares your preferences. The implicit assumption in your argument is that any top player will expend the cost. That's true of any present top player. However, it ignores all the players that had the potential to be top players but were turned off by having to completely relearn the control scheme to do it.

If you didn't have the drive to relearn the controls, you probably didn't have any real desire to be a top player in the first place. There are far bigger obstacles to overcome, after all.

You ignore half my argument, which was that most people who don't post are people who don't care, not people who actively support it. Ignorance and disinterest are the norm among non-posters, not valliant support. Generally speaking. I'll even argue that people in valliant support are the second biggest group of people likely to post, next to people opposing some issue.

I wasn't trying.

And you're ignore what I'm saying again. I said: "I was mostly aiming to discredit your 'unfamiliar controls' argument by referring to a 9 year old game. They're not unfamiliar, they're a staple of the genre. "Sold plenty." was just an afterthought." Forget the sales part. It was a two-word verbless sentence I stuck at the end of a paragraph. Don't get hung up on them. Amazingly, when I'm saying: "They're not unfamiliar, they're a staple of the genre" I'm really trying to say that they're a staple of the genre. I've played a long progression of games since Diablo II, never using keyboard movement, always using click-to-move. Diablo II was just an example to show that this 'revolutionary new control method' of yours isn't new and isn't revolutionary.

Excuse me, but has it been established that GW2 will require minute precision of movement to be competitive? I think not.

Gee, I must be getting old. Well then, maybe they played one of the other click-to-move games that was published since then.

I could make that argument, but I won't, because frankly, I don't care. And if it doesn't, why shouldn't we have click-to-move?

You're misrepresenting my preference. I want a game with both options. I alternate between them depending on what I'm doing. About the size of the different sides of the argument, I am willing to hazard a guess though:

-There are quite some people who would prefer (or require if they are to buy at all) click-to-move to be part of GW2.
-There are quite some people who don't care whether or not it will be part of GW2.
-And there is you.