<
>

Page 141 of 166

First

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

Last

All Posts by gestalt11 - 3320 found

9/07/06 11:27 AM
Viewed 5293, Replies 192


Originally posted by Minsc
For those wondering where the current jump may have came from (besides SOE unleashing the NGE), it's likely a direct result of their presence at Gencon Indy, where they launched the CCG, and the leipzig (sp?) convention. They have been plugging the game like crazy at these conferences and it appears that it's working.

Seriousily Beatnik, are you able to even leave your house? Since everybody is out to get you I could see how that would be difficult.


There has been a noticable upturn in Eve advertising over the last six months.  Very noticable, I have seen Eve ads when going to sites for Faqs for single player games.

Also there have been like 5 big game conventions in the last few months.  But I kinda doubt that game covnentions are gonna really bring people in.  The ads in mainstream outlets might though.  Especially since those who have never heard of it probably see good reviews in vairous places.

There is no doubt that the gameplay of Eve can be downright boring for some(many?) people.  But the fact is that Eve has some great design and some nice features.  I often feel obligated to mention it or use it as an example in a post because it often directly refutes many tired old paradigms and the silly dogma of the hidebound MMO community.  Or it is a game that has successfully done what people think has never been done or is not a workable idea.

So essentially Eve gets buzz even from people like me who are not fanboys.  Combine that with advertising and the fact that it is akin to a cult hit movie and you can get rapid increases in subs.  I have no diea if there have been and I really don't care past curiosity, but its possible.

Really MMOs are 80% buzz and hype.  They are social creatures, they could completely mediocre both technically and design wise and still be vastly successful due to social reasons.

9/07/06 11:14 AM
Viewed 5293, Replies 192


Originally posted by Ranma13


Originally posted by Pantastic
I think most people are just annoyed because the EVE nutballs have to make some announcement about EVE basically every day (look! 236 more logins than last time we posted a count! OMG! There's a magazine article about EVE, stop the press... well, start a thread!)

They started posting PCU counts when they reached 20K and now they're up to 30K. There have only been a number of PCU counts reported in between those two, I can remember one at 22K and one at 23K, and I think there was another at 25K but I can't be sure...

Either way, it's hardly every few hundred users like all the anti-fanboys are making it out to be. Every time there's a new PCU record, the anti-fanboys counter with 1 of 3 points:

1. WoW has X million subscribers - but not X million users on one server, it's like comparing apples to oranges.

2. EVE's world is empty so it's easy to do - the world you see is completely client-side. The server is nothing but a huge database. A game could have 5.5 billion trees in its world but that doesn't matter server-side. EVE juggles just as much database data (perhaps even more) than all the other MMORPGs.

3. CCP is such a whore for announcing PCU's ever few K players they get - first of all, they haven't released that many PCU reports at all, it's less than 10. Secondly, for a game that's 3 years old and still increasing in population, that's pretty darned good I'd say.

So before you anti-fanboys get all riled up because EVE threatened your e-penis, try to get your facts straight.


First off all companies are whores.

As far as #2 is concerned, they actually have some pretty impressive stuff going on when you consider there market interface.  The fact that Eve servers are, bar none, the largest MMO world servers to date combined with the fairly impresseive market querying and market histories they keep is a pretty substantial technical achievement.  WoW's auction house is more impressive than people realize but the market system of Eve is even more impressive especially given the scope.  It has lots more information and is at least at responsive over a larger population.  Also when you consider the database of Escrow and player made missions you have even more server side stuff.

Whether you love or hate Eve its not really disputable that technically they are doing more with a server cluster on a larger scale than most any other MMO. 

Those of you who are hating should reconsider and start cheering them on.  You are playing MassivelyMOGs afterall.  Eve is pioneering the Massive part.  If other games follow then that is good for you even if you hate Eve.

Edit: oh and by the way Eve cures cancer, other games kick you in the testicles!!11!!!!

9/06/06 11:45 PM
Viewed 5293, Replies 192


Originally posted by Pantastic

Interesting, I hadn't really thought about it but it makes sense, abd it's obvious to anyone not in the cult that the 170,000 subscribers number is BS (how many subscriptions are there if it's not?). I think most people are just annoyed because the EVE nutballs have to make some announcement about EVE basically every day (look! 236 more logins than last time we posted a count! OMG! There's a magazine article about EVE, stop the press... well, start a thread!), but it's interesting to realize that they're probably just hoping people blow $20 before giving up on it.



Well whatever the actual current numbers, Sir Bruce's figures on Eve have shown steady growth over the years.  I'm pretty sure Eve is still growing.  The concurrent numbers are shown to all Eve user at login, so unless CCP is lying or the software/hardware is wrong the 30k number is probably accurate.  The 170k number seemes like quite a jump but I am fairly certain Eve is still growing.  All the data points in that direction.

9/06/06 6:39 PM
Viewed 319, Replies 17


Originally posted by Chessack
I think Elnator's classified things about right, give or take.

I think that there are areas where games can be "sandboxy" or "fixed". If they are sandboxy that means they are open-ended or that aspect is player-controlled (rather than set in stone). If they are fixed then that means they are more or less immutable. These areas are:

Character Abilities (skills, levels, classes, etc)
World Attributes (housing, player towns, etc)
Gameplay (Questing, story arcs, etc)

So to expand on what Elnator was saying, some examples (I'll leave the rest as an exercise to the reader)...

pre-CU SWG (at launch and shortly after):
Character Abilities: Sandbox (skills, bought however you want, from as many profs as you want)
World Attributes: Sandbox (build your own house, town, etc)
Gameplay: Sandbox (no quests, "make your own content")

City of Heroes/Villains:
Character Abilities: Fixed (levels, powers "open up" as you level)
World Attributes: Fixed (you cannot own any property... bases ('guild halls') are a bit sandboxy but that's minor).
Gameplay: Fixed (all quest/story based)

Guild Wars:
Character Abilities: Quasi-fixed (levels and classes, but within classes you have probably 100 skills, only 8 of which you can use at a time).
World Attributes: Fixed
Gameplay: Fixed (in PVE)

Saga of Ryzom:
Character Abilities: Sandbox (skills, levelled up individually as you choose, no limits on how many skills you can learn).
World Attributes: Fixed (there is housing but it's 100% instanced and does not affect the world)
Gameplay: Sandbox (no real quests, player-driven events)

C



Whenever I use the term sandbox I refer to change/control of the actual world and whether or not that is truly persistent.  Otherwise I just say its "open" or "free" character or quest ssytem.  For me sandbox has an implication of building and changing the world, not just having no restrictions on character choices such as advancement or quests.

For example in Auto Assault you can destroy buildings, but those buildings repops in about 30 seconds.  The world itself is pertty much static.   If you could build and destroy those buildings as a player and there was no repop mechanisms that game would seem very sandboxy to me even though AA is a class system.

When devs talk about such things they say phrases like "the world as sandbox" I do not think you can really talk about the term sandbox without talking about the actual state of the world in total.  And character systems are essentially separate from the state of the world.  I mean you could easily transfer a character from the Neocron Terra server to the Neocron Mars server and different factions would be controling different outposts but your character would be exactly the same (well except for his apartment maybe).  You might need to learn german but that's different :P.   Contrasted to WoW a server transfer means nothing really, every part of the entire server is the same, just different people.

I would use Eve as an example but its all on one server(well until china server gets outa beta), which is a rather interesting extreme that highlights an aspect of what I am saying.  The "world as sandbox" aspect of some games, most especially UO and Eve but shown better in UO, is the each server is actually a different place.  Its not a clone, it is its own unique world.

If Eve had different world servers one could be so amazingly different than the other as far as control and what player created stuff was in a system.  A heavily defened system on one server could be empty on another.

Or to put it simply there are two states that are stored in an MMO.  Character state and world state.  I think that sandbox implies being able to change world state and have that persist.  Other things are "open" or "free" in regards to things that affect character state (such as quests, or skill versus class).  All RPGs have at least some choices in regards to character state, some are more or less restrictive but they all have that.  But many RPGs have no options for changing world state at all.



9/06/06 6:06 PM
Viewed 319, Replies 17

I would say Eve and Ryzom are the two most sandboxy as far as affects the world right now that are prominent.

Both have:
-player created missions
-resource based systems
-players controlled areas
-Significant politics, as a result.


Some might add:
-heavily crafting based

-Eve has player anchorable items such as POS(limited my moons in systems, ie. finite) and canisters.  Not sure if Ryzom has that.


Other games that have some(or most) of these aspects:

-Neocron (has conquerable outposts, significant crafting)
-Shadowbane has most of these things
-Ultima Online  has most of this stuff
-I think Roma Victor may have some of this stuff

Upcoming games with some aspects:
-AoC (player controled battlekeeps and pve towns)
-WAR (PvP RvR has advancing persistent battlezones, supposedly even able to sack captial cities by waging a campaign across multiple zones).  Up for debate since this would probably reset eventually, state is not truly persistent.

Maybe some others could add to the list but I can't think of much else atm.

9/06/06 5:50 PM
Viewed 75, Replies 8


Originally posted by Vyre

Try Saga of Ryzom or EVE.  Those two are the closest to UO right now.  Plus, they are both actually pretty good games.



Yes, but Ryzom is use based grinding.  Eve has no skills grind it 100% time based.

9/06/06 5:47 PM
Viewed 75, Replies 8


Originally posted by alanguk
thx for replies all,  i have pld wow, for the past 2 years and while i agree that it is a great game i feel that its too restricted, i dont wanna have to do quests after quests to level, they to me are just the same thing over and over, grinding a skill however is more my kinda thing. i know i keep comparing back to uo, which probably isnt gonna help my case at all, but i loved the fact there were hardly any quests etc, it made it more realistic coz in a way u have to make ur own story, so to speak and the chars could have a variety of skills rather than the same for every of that class




Yeah I'm not a big fan of class based systems, I much prefer skill systems.  Class is ok, but after a while it just starts to wear on you unless the rest of the game is really interesting.

Neocron system is interesting everything is skill/stat based.  I haven't seen an RPG quite like it before.  Each skills belong under a stat.  So rifle combat is under dexterity.  You level your stats and then distribute to skills.  Each race/class has a max on their stat, so a gentank can get 60 dex but a spy can get to 100 and thus has more points to distribute for those skills.  But at the same time the advancement system is not exactly use based.  Its a sort of hybrid xp/use system.  When you shoot a rifle you may get xp in dex/int but nothing in con.  But you seem to get xp for each shot to some degree (based on damage I think).  But you could shoot a rifle to raise your construction skill (int based) if you really wanted.  Also each race/class has a learning rate for each stat, so a spy gets int faster than gentank and a gentank get str faster.

Weapons restrictions are both stat based and skill based, so a gentank will never be able to use a dex 100 rifle even though he may be pretty good at the rifle skill.  In some ways it makes more sense for stats to be more restrictive than skills.  No matter how skilled you are if something just too heavy you won't be able to use it etc.


All in all its an interesting hybrid.  Neocron has a lot of hybridization that you really don't see anywhere else.  Its interface, its advancement system, its faction/ffa pvp.  They are all hybridized to some degree.  I cant' say that the game is awesomely put together, but I gotta give them a lot of credit for innovation.  They really break down some of people's preconcieved notions about the various paradigms they think are set in stone. 

Whoever did the terrain was real good too, advancing through zones to mountains feels more real than other games.  Maybe that is the FPS interface but you get real ridges and you can see the gradual incline that can even cross a few zones.  Its pretty nice.  Running ridges with a sniper rifle is pretty fun.  Too bad the graphics are like circa 2001.  I would really like to see their sunsets with Oblivion/Halflife 2 technology.  You actually get pink clouds.  They are pixelated, but they are the right color :P. The lighting is kinda off, but hey what other MMO are flashlights actually useful?  Even in EQ2 torchs are kinda meh. 

WoW actually does a pretty nice outdoor zone layout, but at the same time a hill is just a hill.  If you are experienced in real topography or have done a lot of hiking etc you can tell that it just not quite right, its contrived although nicely put together.  Neocron kinda felt like they took a topo map to make their zones.

At the same time if you are in third person and you jump your legs don't even bend, you just pop upwards :P.  And if you drive a vehicle (I can't beleive this game was released in 2002 and has both normal and vehicle combat and no one else does) and go over a hill or whatever you exactly hug the terrain.  No jumps or bumps or any real physics like in Auto Assault.  Nothing has physics like Auto Assault though. 

9/06/06 4:42 PM
Viewed 319, Replies 17

Some people think it jsut means an open system with a lot of player choice.  But I have always taken it to also erquire an ability to change the characterisics of the online world to some degree.

Example would include:
-player housing (UO style housing not apartments)
-Eve-like stations/defense POS (kinda like housing)
-Permanenting Anchoring things like that dragon made of floating canisters in Eve.
-Conquerable things like outposts in Neocron or stations in Eve.

9/06/06 4:28 PM
Viewed 755, Replies 19

I think freekin nuts is accurate.  But some people like that. 

9/06/06 4:22 PM
Viewed 75, Replies 8


Originally posted by Fion
CoH/CoV is a lot of fun IMHO. But it has very little longevity as of right now. (Devs are working on changing that.)

You haven't tried WoW? I know it's the popular thing to bash the successful, but it really is the best MMOG going. Perfect? Hardly. Best currently? Absolutely. Just.. dont rush through to 60. The beauty of the game is the journey really, and things tend to go down hill a bit at 60. But hell.. that'd still give you something to play and enjoy until the next group of MMOGs come out like Age of Conan, LotRO, WAR, Vanguard, etc.

he said he tried WoW.

Edit: and I disagree that WoW is the best currently.  It has its good points, but best, no way.

9/06/06 4:17 PM
Viewed 75, Replies 8

Yeah I know the feeling, I actually settled on playing Neocron 2 for a while.  Its clunky and has old graphics and a low population.  But is an open system and its different.

Edit: by open I mean its skills based (with races who have certain skill stat caps) and by different its an FPS interface with RPG "to hit" roles.

9/06/06 3:17 PM
Viewed 1379, Replies 63


Originally posted by Anofalye

Originally posted by ste2000

Originally posted by Anofalye
Then go and find yourself a game where "Best groupers deserve to be groupers" period.
May I suggest that masterpiece called DDO? I think that's what you are looking for.
Good luck with it.

You re not gonna get "raped", nobody is forcing you to play this game.
Just find something that suits more your taste...........


But Brad is still lying, trying to get groupers interested in a setting they can't master.  And have no fear, I won't play Vanguard unless they make sure that best groupers are groupers, not raiders.

Yet, I will remain, and pinpoint, as often as needed, that Vanguard is a crappy game as far as grouping is concerned.

DDO is an action game, no thanks.  Vanguard has no such action, yet it dwell in raiding enforcement.

On 1 hand, they keep saying: grouping game.  On the other, folks like STE, tell you to go away, you have to get logical with what your devs says...if they want groupers in their game, they must make the groupers find all he needs, inside groups.

In case you FAIL to notice, even DDO is enforcing "raiding" or planning to, just as all other MMO.  I dunno what happen to all these MMOs devs, they must have some complex or something since they ALL be enforcing raiding or PvP on unwilling players.


"Its not a lie if you believe it, Jerry!"

9/06/06 2:23 PM
Viewed 1026, Replies 43


Originally posted by jimmyman99

Originally posted by gestalt11

Originally posted by jimmyman99


Large Scale combat exists with ransk in Planetside, although I would call that more informal and the game is more squad based it seems.  But it is one of the only games with real "command" ranks and those ranks do grant command powers.

A large scale system destroying fleet in Eve is probably the only truly epic/war like fights in MMOs today.  Most other large scale stuff devolves like QG says.

I think Eve is interesting because of the ship role aspect.  Everyone has a job to do and needs to be trained on the right things.  Dreadnaughts seige and Interdictors tackle and battships snipe etc etc.  Even the newer people can be tacklers or scouts.  Bascially Eve benefits from the already well settled navy ship roles and since ships are a major investment in real life they tend to have important roles even if they are smaller.  In infantry, especailly pre modern Era, a lot of people wind up as cannon fodder.



Good comparison. However, Eve style command and control will not work well in a MMORPG IMO. Ill explain why. IN Eve, command type players are designed specificaly to do just that. I mean they CAN fight and all, but NOT as effectively as a soldier who has no command skill but concentrated on offencive skills only. Another problem may arise when those command players are not available for whatever reasons. In PS, the command type player is just a regular player BUT who invested a lot of time leveling command rank. That means that if we have 1000 players in total, and 900 of those managed to get highest command rank, they can still fight effectively because command rank doesnt take away from any other regular ranks. So in PS< you can easily scale back and forward - any command rank player can scaled down and be just a regular grunt in a squad, OR be a CR and order around if no other CR is available. I think the flexibility of PS command structure is better if applied to a MMORPG type of game then Eve command structure. There will be never a shortage of Command Rank players nor will be any negative effect from too many of them.

There is always one(well two sort of) problem from too many commanders, either you have too many cooks spoiling the broth or you have a certain cadre of regular commanders and other people may get excluded.

Fortunately for Planetside, as an FPS type game, its all about action, so I think this is somewhat minimized.

But as with any command structure you run into problems of supply and demand.

Command ships in Eve are more like clerics and buffbots than actual fleet Admirals.  The admiral could really be anywhere,  the real fleet admiral could easily be in a dreadnaguht as I understand that is actually quite boring and would leave you with a lot of free attention for fleet tactics and strategy.

But I think the real point is that in a game no one really wants to just be one out of 100 guys marchign in a line at 100 other guys in a line ala 18th and 19th century war tactics.  No one really wants to be a number with a sword, they will do it if they have to, but that isn't really fun.  That is why having diverse roles and multiple kinds of objectives is good.  In an Eve system assault you gotta deal the tacklers and defenders, you gotta deal with the Point Defense stations, you gotta do a lot of scouting and monitoring of gates.  And not dealing well with any of those could cause you to stall or get ambushed.

But something like a system assault takes tons of planning and if some important commander (ie. one of the planners) doesn't show up well you are kidna doomed anyway.

Planetside is about action, that is why I termed it as more informal.  An Eve system assault is a planned out thing that can take weeks to do and weeks to plan.  Planetside you can log in and get on the command global and see if some sector needs some help or its a good time to push or just go frag some people etc.


9/06/06 1:57 PM
Viewed 244, Replies 14


Originally posted by MarleVVLL
Its just an EQ rip-off. If it had more people playing, I'd pay to play it for sure. Try it out.

How can you rip off a game that was a rip off?  There were thousands of MUDs doing the same general thing as EQ for over a decade before it was made.  EQ is based on a DIKU MUD that Brad "The vision" used to play/dev.  Please get over the EQ hype.

9/06/06 12:38 PM
Viewed 1096, Replies 26

Sony will force you to use memory sticks to play the game!

9/06/06 11:40 AM
Viewed 1026, Replies 43


Originally posted by jimmyman99
The battles where PCs and/or NPCs play a role of a pawn/soldier while being commanded by higher ranking PCs is a great idea, AND it works (most of the time) in a game called Planetside - a true PvP oriented MMOFPS. In there, a high level CR (Command Rank) players CAN give out orders (although you dont HAVE to follow them, usualy people do) to other troops. Granded it is often abused by immature people who managed to gain CR5 (the level required to be bale to talk in the global command chat) but it is rather uncommon. I think a strong RTS element in a MMORPG would benefit it greately. I love Army vs Army combat.
Large Scale combat exists with ransk in Planetside, although I would call that more informal and the game is more squad based it seems.  But it is one of the only games with real "command" ranks and those ranks do grant command powers.

A large scale system destroying fleet in Eve is probably the only truly epic/war like fights in MMOs today.  Most other large scale stuff devolves like QG says.

I think Eve is interesting because of the ship role aspect.  Everyone has a job to do and needs to be trained on the right things.  Dreadnaughts seige and Interdictors tackle and battships snipe etc etc.  Even the newer people can be tacklers or scouts.  Bascially Eve benefits from the already well settled navy ship roles and since ships are a major investment in real life they tend to have important roles even if they are smaller.  In infantry, especailly pre modern Era, a lot of people wind up as cannon fodder.


9/06/06 11:27 AM
Viewed 1026, Replies 43


Originally posted by QuikeG

Hello, guys

Well, I might be a "rara avis" here, but I for one would love the type of battle I've described above.  I have no problem with being "just" a private/pawn/tiny bottom piece in a great battle, as far as I can enjoy the immersion in a meaningful and huge confrontation. I don't mind if someone else gives the orders, I'm in the frontline, fighting my way through, and the thick of battle can provide fun for everyone involved, be it Lord or pleb.

So hardcore players would be frustrated if they aren't the King that Rules the Army?  Let them compete for that position.  Let the hardest one lead the gang.  Let the other candidates be sergeants for army units. Let the rest be privates for that battle. 

My "concern" about huge battles without hierarchy is that they are all the same in the long run.

I see your point: few gamers would enjoy this setting, and you are probably right. And thanks for sharing your view.


Yes there are some like you I just doubt there are enough.  I also believe that the MMO market will not be growing as much as some anticipate.  Its not that your idea is bad its just that I don't think there is a market that will bear it.

JackBauer- if you want NPC's as pawns then you should look into God & Heroes.