All Posts by Thillian

Originally posted by Recant

 

 

Why don't you counter our arguments with logic and fact instead of changing the subject all the time, and then mocking us? 

Oh that's right, because you're wrong.

Yeh your counter with that average gamer's age was brilliant.

Originally posted by Recant

 

The average PC gamer is around 27 years old with a large disposable income.  Do your research boy!

 

A'ia hydra A'ia Dagon Cthulhu Fh'tagn. I believe more those words then your source.

Originally posted by Bama1267

 

 Dont get off the subject. It isnt about the masses.......its about number of subscribers meaning nothing? Sims with 25 million copies means something as well. While I wouldnt play Sims, its stil a good game to a huge amount of people.

 

....that means something.

Originally posted by Bama1267

 

Originally posted by Ranlawl

Originally posted by Bama1267

 

Originally posted by Thillian

Uff, fortunately popularity and the number of subscribers says nothing about the quality of a game. Otherwise we would need to consider Britney Spears and Eminem the greatest artists of our time. Let's say WoW brought all the btnet kids into MMORPG genre showing them how would EQ1 and AC2 look like if they replace deep system with simplicity and overcommercialized mediocrity.

 

 The number of subscribers says nothing........thats brilliant.

 

 

...no really ....thats a good one.

Its the truth, like at the beginning, Bush is the best president!!!!! ya elected two years in a row, clearly the best guy out of all other possible canidates.............. you sure are the one who deserves the crazy finger guy, here you go, 

 Subscribers mean nothing ......im still in awe. Over 8 million people flocked to a game that absolutely sucks......

 

...and managed to stay. 

So it means nothing?

Aye and there are 25mil of Sims sold copies. You should check that out fast, if you like what masses like. Go  on and join the masses.

Originally posted by Recant

 

Originally posted by Ranlawl

Originally posted by Thillian

Uff, fortunately popularity and the number of subscribers says nothing about the quality of a game. Otherwise we would need to consider Britney Spears and Eminem the greatest artists of our time. Let's say WoW brought all the btnet kids into MMORPG genre showing them how would EQ1 and AC2 look like if they replace deep system with simplicity and overcommercialized mediocrity.

 

Amen

 

That's not a relevant analogy.  Brittney Spears doesn't get favorable reviews from well known music critics,  yet,  World of Warcraft is probably the most critically acclaimed MMO out there. 

So your Brittney comparison begins to crumble under the slightest of scrutiny.  Language can be a useful tool, but only when used in conjunction with the brain.

Now seriously who thinks that video-game reviewers have a valid opinion on games. In 99% games the rating is almost identical to user's rating (just check www.metacritic.com).. Then compare the movie critic ratings with user ratings, you will find out they differ a lot. The point is that current video-game reviewers are not much older then Ultima from 1997, and they always try to agree with user ratings.

Originally posted by Akousmata

 

Originally posted by Ruthgar

If you can play with a group of friends, then it is close to DnD. You can't really play DnD solo or just find people to group with, and that is true with DDO. I know they have made great strides with solo play, but when I play with a group of people I know, I really enoyed DDO.

I'd have to agree there.  Give the trial a whack and see if you like it.  If you do, great, but just keep in mind that like any good MMO, it does start to grind after a while.  One thing I didn't like in the game was the XP balance, there are certain quests, that everyone knows give out the most xp and as a result, it's hard to find a group that is willing to do any quests that don't offer the uber loot/xp rewards.

 

Grouping with friends is the best way to go and the best way to give it that true D&D feel.

Cant agree that people tend to do only those dungeons that give most XP. There is plenty of people doing any dungeons, this game is not designed the way to reach lvl 14 as fast as possible. And majority of the subscribers realize that, trying to enjoy every dungeon. If you had different experience, i guess you were just unlucky with the pugs.

Uff, fortunately popularity and the number of subscribers says nothing about the quality of a game. Otherwise we would need to consider Britney Spears and Eminem the greatest artists of our time. Let's say WoW brought all the btnet kids into MMORPG genre showing them how would EQ1 and AC2 look like if they replace deep system with simplicity and overcommercialized mediocrity.

I have vistax64bit, i have 8800gtx and absolutely no problems playing this game.

To sum it up:

- The only real indicator about the community  is the quality of PUGS in game. Yes PUGS show how well the community within the game is. Undoubtedly WoW Pugs are a complete disaster. This is surely not just my opinion, and I dont think anyone can oppose to the quality of the pugs in WoW. So basically I can state that wow community is the worst from all MMORPG's that requires a monthly subscribtion, because of its disastrous pugs.

-  The worst community means, that majority of the players that picked the game are either kids or complete amateurs. The question is: do we really think that those two groups of people have sophisticated opinion about what game is the best? That leads to that if majority of kids and amateurs picked WoW for their favourite game in which they spend 25+hours a week, that means something is wrong. It means WoW can offer them exactly the game style and game play that those people want. And dont try to oppose that wow is a massterpiece that is able to appeal to all gaming groups. Because thats just not possible. Simple as that, WoW appeals to mass market, just like Eminem (in music) or Michael Bay (in films).

Originally posted by Akousmata

 

Originally posted by Thillian

D&D PnP Ruleset is absolutely worst system to use in a regular EQ style MMORPG. If you know the rules at least a little you can imagine how imbalanced soloing would be for different classes. The spells are totally out of control for MMORPG, so many mess spells, even AoE mess, and so many instant kill spells where only the saving throw makes a difference. I can't imagine a MMORPG system for DDo that would work succesfully without a huge nerf of the system. There was only one thing Turbine could do and that is to implement forced grouping with great LFG system, rich quest descriptions and obviously different combat system. And they did a great job in it.

Well, fortunately, it doesn't HAVE to be an EQ style MMORPG.  The thing I was really hoping for was that for once a gaming company would stand up and do something original and not try to make a game that panders to the masses, but stays true to it's IP.  I brought this idea up in a previous post but, D&D isn't designed and never was designed for solo play.  So forget about PvP, it just shouldn't happen in D&D.  You're right in that the ruleset isn't designed that way, but what about Team vs. Team play.  The rule set wasn't entirely designed for that, but it's a possibility. 

 

And the last time I played DDO, you could still use mass mez spells, instant kill spells etc. in both PvP AND PvE, so I don't quite understand your point.  They are being implemented currently without many "nerfs" to the system.

DDo is easily the most original MMORPG that came in years. It is surely not an EQ clone and i never wanted it to be. It  would be impossible to use DD ruleset for EQ style.

Solo playing using D20 cannot be possible, because the differences between classes at every level are huge in terms of solo capability. I dont know,for example half -orc barbarian with 20 STR lvl 1-4 would be killing 10 times faster rate then a wizards levels 1-4. And this is not exaggarating, it would really be 10 times faster.

PvP cannot happen nor team PvP using D20 rules. Take an example of lvl 7 players 3v3 each with cleric. I pressume both would just start casting phantasmal killer spell til finally someone fail its saving throw. Then going for varius mess spells like hold person etc. This kind of PVP would be only and entirely about random saving throws and absolutely no skill will be needed. Impossible to have any kind of PVP with d20 without HUGE nerf.

Yes there is pvp implemented, but that kind of pvp doesnt really offer anything to players other then a short breaks between adventures. Those are really just a tavern brawls. And yes there is plenty of mess spells for PvE, but thats not a problem. Important bosses are imunne to instant kill spells and mess. PvE aspect of the game is perfectly balanced and offers a lot of fun for people that likes to think about their character development in advance and plan every step and every level.

D&D PnP Ruleset is absolutely worst system to use in a regular EQ style MMORPG. If you know the rules at least a little you can imagine how imbalanced soloing would be for different classes. The spells are totally out of control for MMORPG, so many mess spells, even AoE mess, and so many instant kill spells where only the saving throw makes a difference. I can't imagine a MMORPG system for DDo that would work succesfully without a huge nerf of the system. There was only one thing Turbine could do and that is to implement forced grouping with great LFG system, rich quest descriptions and obviously different combat system. And they did a great job in it.

I have no problem playing any MMORPG (EQ2, Vanguard, Lotro, DDo) with Windows Vista x64bit.

Originally posted by Thedrizzle

And to the Wowhammer guy, please stick to DDO if you want to play boring, point and click, instanced games where exploration is impossible.  It is clear you want your games spoon fed to you and you are affraid to get "ganked" by something that doesn't have AI and may actually offer up a challenge.

Warhammer online and WoW will both appeal the same mass market customers. It has nothing to do about copying each other, I am aware of that warhammer is much older world then warcraft.

Originally posted by CoryD
The repair cost is the death penalty. Funny that one of the things that made you leave is something else you said there isn't enough of.

"Just another way to penalize people for dying," "If you don't have a death penalty it makes dying actually a friendly process."

I'm rather confused by what you're after. Your posts contradict each other in three ways. Not enough death penalty. Too Much death penalty, and "People shouldn't die at all."

Originally posted by Celestian

 

 

DD0 appeals to anyone? *laugh* DD0 is a flop and didn't try to appeal to a small set, it was a failure because it didn't appeal to anyone not even the D&D players it was supposedly made for!

 

Thanks, you too!

Are you trying to prove yourself something here?

I was reffering to the competition currently on the market. WoWhammer I mentioned in the matter about what kind of people it will try to appeal to.

Originally posted by defenestrate

Originally posted by Thillian
WoWhammer in the means it appeals on mass market same as WoW did. You can argue that everyone tries to make the most money, but I would oppose that everyone has a different approach. Some appeals to mass market consisted of 14 years old kids, some appeal to alternative side of the community like DDo did.

WHile I agree that DDO appealed to the alternative side of the community, it wasnt because of it's game play or graphics, it was because of it's title and thats it. While not a huge success the Dungeons & Dragons setting is probably what got almost all of their subscribers. Warhammer will have somewhat of the same effect, seeing as how Warhammer has been a highly successful tabletop hobby for years.There are things that WAR will have that DDO didnt though such as:

1. More than 1 city
2. Realm Verse Realm Combat
3. Trophies
4. More playable classes
5. The whole world wont be instanced
6. A recognizable history ( Who the hell played Eberron? )
7. Physical Character Advancement, such as Black orcs get bigger, Dwarves Beards get longer etc.
8. Public Quests
9. Sackable Cities
10. Rewards for pretty much everything, RVR, PQ's, and normal war effort quests.


So how does WAR appeal to the 14 year old side of the market again? If it's the graphics, who the hell wants to play a super realistic looking game anyways? I for one dont, and my graphics card agree's with me.

More playable classes? Where DDO shines is surely the character customization. Yes its hell difficult to understand the system (even if you played d20 you will have to do a research about the feets in game.. etc). There is any combination playable... You want to heal? Go take a level of cleric, you want to heal and sneak? Go multiclass cleric/rogue, you want to do some heavy ranged damage to it? -- take some fighter or ranger classes to your cleric/rogue/--- combination. And still within a class there is so many different ways. Two lvl 14 classes are never the same. And its the only game system where you can really mess up your character, if you know nothing about it.

For those people who actually play DDo, they dont really need zones to explore, long travel times, or farming some faction points or whatever. We want to log in for one hour, do some dungeon with a friends, and logout. We dont want to first spend 20 minutes to travel somewhere, then kill some X/X mobs for some useless quest and then be ganked by some adolescent. I realize this is a huge minority of the MMORPG community, thats why DDO is heavily an alternative mmo, which can never have more then 100.000 subscribers.