All Posts by markyturnip

Toejam and Earl online.

oh yeah.

weird... this thread seems to have ended up on one of those forums that is unreachable... where are these obscure forums listed?

oo - just found it at the top. wow.. never realised

Hmm.. downloaded, got an account, started playing and it was clear within all of three minutes that I would not want to play this game.

Guess there's simply nothing to do till AoC arrives.

Looking at your avatar, it dawns on me that Toejam and Earl online is the best idea since MUDs began

Well, that 5mmos better than wow article inspired me to check out Dream of Mirror Online.

I did not even know of it before... what experiences have people had with the game?

bump

Thanks for this, although personally I will not do it - I want to experience AoC from the bottom up.

But I look forward to reading about people's impressions - especially concerning the different classes.

That was a great post, Avery, but unfortunately in response to a silly silly argument.

I may as well post a powerfully convincing rebuttal of the contention that the moon is made of cheese.

This whole effort to pit Darkfall against AoC is bizarre.. 

One is an idea, with very little to show for it but which represents everything that a large community of gamers would like to see in a game. The other is a living breathing game in late stages of development. The two are not comparable.

Gah.. I just fell into the trap!

Originally posted by mmonkeyboy

I'm sorry, but unless you've spent several years following the Darkfall forums, you have no clue how bad developer-feedback can be.  (Personally, I believe the Darkfall forums are serving as someone's Ph.D. thesis on how much abuse people will take online, and still keep coming back for more.)

Remember, Mythic has a LOT of stuff on their plate right now, and addressing every controversy about videos, etc. has to have a low priority.  The truth will be known in time.  I would just relax until you hear something official.

 

Originally posted by GrumpyJester

Originally posted by markyturnip

Originally posted by GrumpyJester

Age of Conan will not be a game for people that score high on "Exploration" in the Bartle test.

So heartbreaking. It really is so so heartbreaking. But what can ya do...

Well, like many have said, the only way to really find out is to try the game yourself. There could be a lot of stuff compensating for the lack of free-roaming...the lack of free-roaming might have even been adressed somewhat.

Indeed, and I shall, and I hope so.

Originally posted by GrumpyJester

Age of Conan will not be a game for people that score high on "Exploration" in the Bartle test.

So heartbreaking. It really is so so heartbreaking. But what can ya do...

Originally posted by Xasapis

I think you're confusing invisible walls with natural world borders.

Look at my post history for the answer you need ;)

Truth be told, the zone issue is far less pressing for me. While it would be nice to have the sense that you can traverse a vast seamless land, I can understand that there are technological limitations to that in every mmo... they just use different tools to disguise the fact, some more effectively than others. All I hope is that AoC does something to allow me to suspend disbelief, and pretend I actually am crossing a vast land.

The invisible walls issue is more pressing, however, as it affects core gameplay, including open world FFA PVP. I am convinced that there will be great demand for open PVP by the Conan playerbase, and with WAR heading our way, its success may well the determining factor in the long-term success of this game.

Bah... either way I will try AoC. Am just yakking because I am tired of the wait.

But one can always hope that if a community expresses itself forcefully enough in favour of no invisible walls, Funcom might wrack its brains to see if it can mitigate the issue.

What strikes me is I have seen both versions of the invisible wall saga expressed with absolute certainty. I mean, total, utter conviction that both version a and version b are correct.

Perhaps there is an element of taste as to what constitutes an open world, but this does not make sense. Someone is not telling the truth. Either there will be invisible walls all over the place, or there will not.

The difference is clear. GW is a game with walls. Wow is a game without (and yes, you may say mountains between zones constitute walls, but the overwhelming feel is of open gameplay). And DDO was a game with effectively no open world at all, save a city which led to various instance entrances - but which was still pretty entertaining for a while.

I am not sure why this is such a great secret to be honest. Will it be invisibly walled or not? Simple question, I would have thought it would have a simple answer.

This does look very nice... the animations appear convincing, the graphics come across well even on a youtube. More realistic than WoW, but still comic-like enough to avoid the uncanny valley.

I love that the healers have to position themsleves to heal with a cone, making them much more interesting.

I like it that everyone can stealth.

I am still missing, however, any real sense of a caster's gameplay... have never seen spellweaving etc.

Overall, I think this could be a pretty fun game as long as I abandon my dreams of a vast world to explore, and accept something in between Lotro and DDO.

Truth is I really enjoyed myself in ddo as long as it lasted... in fact, I still think the combat in that game was the best of any mmo i have played yet - but obviously I missed the presence of a large living world, and a lack of content, which made me give up once my guild had finished the dragon. (sigh... will any spell ever be as fun as otto's irresistable dance I wonder...)

I see two basic versions of this:

a) Invisible walls were a beta testing tool, and will not be in for release. The devs wanted an exploration friendly game and will deliver one.

b) Invisible walls were a necessary evil to allow the good graphics to run on low-end systems, and will remain - meaning the zones are all effectively very small, and further restricted by vast amounts of mobs blocking your every move. Exploration is limited, GW style.

Which is the more accurate position?

Thanks.

Originally posted by Zeaph

Age of Conan is gonna be awesome game, but its only gonna hold me over for Darkfall really

 

so, quite a while then...

The way I see it, the only major difference between the two games is summed up here (and no, this is not a rickroll... that's getting old)

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Ssh71hePR8Q&feature=related

Originally posted by Ugarit

Originally posted by Pyrostasis

Open betas and NDA drops dont kill games... bad games kill themselves. Tabula rasa died because it was a poor design that didnt appeal to many.

Agree
 + And poor gameplay.

Originally posted by AmazingAvery

I cant quote about half a dozen game mechanics from AoC that might not generally be new or innovative, but have essentially been copied by other games due out.

The game director said on Norweigan TV that beta will be by invite only (open beta) and that it might start around May 1st and run for 2 weeks or so. There might be a special beta weekend before this though coming up soon.

what does the open in open beta mean if it's invite only? surely an invite-only open beta is inherently contradictory.

This is all making me very tempted to try POTC

As a matter of interest, why is it not on this list?