|
|
8/26/08 12:32 PM
|
|
Viewed 1454, Replies 55
|
|
Originally posted by L0k1- funny, you and the other guy complain about little children in MMORPGs, yet you act as them....
I was just thinking the same thing myself. |
|
|
|
6/20/08 11:08 AM
|
|
Viewed 232, Replies 6
|
|
|
With the server merges, is roleplay dead? |
|
|
|
5/23/08 5:03 AM
|
|
Viewed 12597, Replies 229
|
|
Originally posted by halteaOriginally posted by DownMonkey Other than a PhD in Computer Science. It's a simple trade off, a HUGE open world will have to pre-load more and more and more than a smaller one, Vanguard is the perfect example of this. The larger the world and more detailed it looks the more of a drain on performance you'll see because the game never really knows which direction you might go in so it ends up pre-loading a lot and chugging along. WoW deals with this by using small zones that have set cut of points between each area, Vanguard is the prefect example of it all going wrong. Zoned games don't have this sort of problem, the down side is of course loading screens and the bigger a zone the longer the load but no reduction in performance while you play. Both methods are viable, both have up and down sides. It doesn't matter how small you think AOC is right now, it has the potential to be huge in size. You sir, are a waste of my time. |
|
|
|
5/23/08 4:43 AM
|
|
Viewed 12597, Replies 229
|
|
Originally posted by markoraos Yeah 'cus no successful MMOs ever use this method. OH wait, they do... |
|
|
|
5/23/08 4:42 AM
|
|
Viewed 12597, Replies 229
|
|
Originally posted by halteaOriginally posted by DownMonkey I'm not going to argue with you, I knew as soon as you said "which are" that you where looking for an argument about things you clearly don't understand. I said smaller worlds as bait and you took it, I could go into detail as to what I mean but I don't see any point, you've made your mind up. |
|
|
|
5/23/08 4:10 AM
|
|
Viewed 12597, Replies 229
|
|
Originally posted by halteaOriginally posted by DownMonkey Smaller worlds. Visually pre-loading worlds could never look like AOC without them performing very badly like Vanguard. There is also a reduction in performance around pre-loading points, try having a large PVP battle in WoW on a pre-load point and you'll see a large drop in performance on a average machine. There is no such thing as a open world, some MMOs just go out of their way to make it seem that way. |
|
|
|
5/23/08 3:48 AM
|
|
Viewed 12597, Replies 229
|
|
Originally posted by AnzieOriginally posted by kitsunegirl Originally posted by Keyalha You are both wrong. Very. WoW zones, it just hides it with pre-loading which has its down sides as well, AOE just goes about it a different way. Zone and pre-loading are just different ways of doing the same thing. Both ways have ups and downs. Come back when you can program please. |
|
|
|
5/19/08 12:21 PM
|
|
Viewed 6938, Replies 131
|
|
Originally posted by Costello121 I'm a 30 year old with a PhD, I play WoW. Ganking is one thing. Zoning and being killed before you've finished loading isn't. Half you "retards" that make stupid posts like this can't actually survive in a real PVP game you just like to talk a lot of shit to deal with your real world issues of being bullied at work. |
|
|
|
5/19/08 7:18 AM
|
|
Viewed 6938, Replies 131
|
|
Originally posted by Zorndorf Is it nice in your dream world? Come back when you understand game technology. Lets face it, you're most likely talking about WoW. It's not open, it gives you the impression that it is. In doing so it could never look as good as a zone game and will have reduced performance on slower machines in areas where the game is pre-loading. Zoning and open worlds BOTH have their up and down sides and neither one should be looked down on. The only thing off the top of my head that has come close to being an open world is Vanguard. |
|
|
|
5/19/08 4:37 AM
|
|
Viewed 6938, Replies 131
|
|
Originally posted by aras420 Way to miss the point. It's not about rolaplaying PVP. People are moving into new zones and while they are loading, people are sat waiting and killing them before they have a chance to do anything about it. Entering a zone with 10% health and under attack isn't roleplay. |
|
|
|
5/19/08 4:17 AM
|
|
Viewed 6938, Replies 131
|
|
Originally posted by wolfmann Totally agree. And before anyone posts again that you can RP anywhere, yes you can RP anywhere and maybe the rules won't be enforced but the point is that at least if a server has a RP tag you know that this is where most RPers are going to go, you're going to find most of the RPers on a server with a RP tag. RP servers might not be perfect but at least you know you'll find other RPers there at some point. Non-official RP servers are always hit and miss. I have no problem with PVP, I grew up on PVP but I had decided I didn't want to waste what little time I have in Conan running back to my body after being ganked. I'm now almost considering not buying. |
|
|
|
8/20/07 7:54 AM
|
|
Viewed 7783, Replies 181
|
|
Originally posted by iwantmyswg we did make fuss about it when we had the chance soe banned us from the game forums when we did. What are you talking about? Why would they ban you for making posts about how much you love the game? People wanted the game fixing, it was a mess before the CU. There was none of this "we love SWG it's the best game over" posting on the boards when people demanded changes. SOE screwed up the changes but don't act like SWG was some wonder game, it was the players that made SWG worth playing. Combat was a mess and utterly un-balanced. |
|
|
|
8/20/07 6:49 AM
|
|
Viewed 7783, Replies 181
|
|
Originally posted by iwantmyswg Whatever, it's clear there is no getting though to you all. I know people who used to post/whine on the SWG forums daily about how the game "needed fixing" and then after the NGE are constant "bring back the old SWG it was the bestest gamez everz" posters. SWG was a mess. It needed fixing. The CU didn't help. Don't try and pretend it was the holy grail of MMORPGs. If you loved it that much you should have been making this much fuss about how much you loved it when you had the chance. |
|
|
|
8/20/07 6:04 AM
|
|
Viewed 7783, Replies 181
|
|
OKAY, SWG was a mess, a big fat mess. It needed fixing and SOE tried to do that, they screwed up but they at least tried, they didn't do it to kill the game. What half of you whining SOE haters seem to forget or ignore was SWG was a mess and broken, it was losing players and was well known as a bug ridden mess. GET over it, SWG was already dying and SOE tried to fix it. It was NOT this amazing game that you all keep making out it was. |
|
|
|
8/19/07 7:50 AM
|
|
Viewed 7783, Replies 181
|
|
|
And then add to that the fact that the very nature of MMOs is change, like I said before; you wouldn't sue Blizzard because of major class changes. |
|
|
|
8/19/07 6:08 AM
|
|
Viewed 7783, Replies 181
|
|
Originally posted by stevesmithjr It's funny but we've been saying that to you SOE haters for years, only most of us have been saying it without dropping to the point of insults and "pretend" cussing. Maybe if most of you didn't act like babies throwing rattles we'd listen to you more. |
|
|
|
8/18/07 9:05 PM
|
|
Viewed 7783, Replies 181
|
|
Originally posted by FikusOfAhazi Look, no offence but if in your words you "know it's not the same" why use it as a point at all. The fact of the matter is that they didn't do anything like change Windows XP to 95, they changed the way you engage in combat in a game. They didn't do it to upset people, they didn't do it because they thought it was a funny way to ruin the game they THOUGHT they were helping to fix a broken mess of a game. It was a big mistake, it's been said by SOE already that they see it was a big mistake and that they have learned from it. EQ2 just happens to be one of the only MMORPGs I know of where the players are really listened to. We don't get upset about people discussing their rights, we get SICK of the same old SOE whines day in and day out. MMORPGs change EVERY day, it's the nature of the beast, this class gets a buff, that class gets a nurf and so on. The only leg I really see people having to stand on over all this is the way people felt mislead over the Trials expansion. |
|
|
|
8/18/07 1:44 PM
|
|
Viewed 7783, Replies 181
|
|
Originally posted by Esquire1980 Jessh you SWG cry babies REALLY need to get over this, REALLY need to get over it. Lets sue SOE and then while we're at it why don't a few people sue Blizzard because their Rogue got "nurfed" and so on and so on. Dear Gods. |
|
|
|
8/17/07 5:08 AM
|
|
Viewed 19240, Replies 311
|
|
Originally posted by nirvanarocks This isn't progress, DX9 can do everything that DX10 can do, DX10 just does it with a better FPS. As pointed out there is no reason for DX10 being Vista only anymore, it's just locking people into Vista for the sake of Microsoft making more cash and pushing their new operating system. Microsoft still claim that DX10 wouldn't work in XP, and I wonder where I've heard that before. OH yes that's right I heard it from Microsoft when they claimed that Internet Explorer and MSN couldn't be removed from XP and look what happened there. |
|
|
|
8/14/07 2:52 PM
|
|
Viewed 19240, Replies 311
|
|
Originally posted by gamerman98 That can't be fun on the 360 without a mouse/keyboard. |
|