All Posts by Gishgeron

Originally posted by DeadlyMage

 

Originally posted by paulscott

OMGZORS someone tries to economize off their hard work differently.  bash them bash them, bash their horse as well.

Sorry just because no one hasn't gotten it right yet doesn't mean it can't be...  perhaps you'd like to convince me that the world is flat as well, since the argument is pretty much identical.

well so far. with the games iv played it wont be done right for a long time,

 

 

il try rohan and see. i may be proven wrong

  Try:

  DOMO

  Flyff

  Shaiya (though, I've HEARD conflicting debates about its CS)

  Dungeon Runners (which is a "premium service" game, but has easily the most fair use of that system I've ever seen)

  AO  (another prem game, since its TECHNICALLY P2P as well....but hey, free is free.)

  Those have been good to me thus far, and I might have more to add as time goes on.  I do not know enough about others, such as Cabal, to make such promises.

Originally posted by DeadlyMage

 

Originally posted by xephonics

Well Rohan is not dependent

and neither is PW (tho pw is highly unbalanced due to cs, but you dont NEED cs)

did you read my post :) the reson i did not like f2 was becuse it was unbalanced due to the tash shop.

 

any way. il try rohan

  Flyff was also not dependent on its CS.  Most of what they sold was purely cosmetic in use.  The one and only thing that was even remotely related to actual game functions (in a way that mattered) were the Gpros and Spros, both of which relate to upgrading items and protecting them from being broken if it fails.  Truth be told, though, you neither NEEDED those items...and even if you felt you DID, the CS items in that game were trade-able which meant people sold them all the time.  If you even try to find good ways to make money, its beyond easy to afford it...even from early levels. 

  My level 50 Merc was packing a few hundred million penya for just two days (no more than an hour each day) of work.

  Silkroad is the WORST about being dependent on its CS.  They deliberately let their servers go to shit so that you HAD to pay for gold tickets (which cost 15 a month, ha ha ha) just to be able to log on to the game.  I knew that was coming, though.  I knew from the moment the ticket system was even suggested, and ran from that game like crazy. 

  I haven't noticed that DOMO is dependent either, and truth be told it has the BEST class system of any game I've played....P2P or not.  I prefer skill systems, but if you are gonna tout a level/class system there isn't much better.  The cell shading in that game was beautiful as well.

Originally posted by laleb
What I think is great is how he wants to get people all riled up and uses language like that. You do not win a debate by screaming YEAH FUCK YOU. Simple minds resort to this kind of language because they do not know how to properly argue. If he really talks like this I can see why he was fired.

  Now now, that phrase has its place.  Just as all the vulgar phrases do.  Its just a matter of understanding where that place is, and not just using it for the sake of using it.  I'm actually rather glad he DID use his language poorly, however, as it allows us simple and quick reminders to ignore anything he might have to say.  I enjoy having those checks in place, it tells me to skip the rest of the blog.  Which....I did.

  It didn't help, either, that what he was talking about just so happened to be the very opposite of the actions his past would show he has taken.

Originally posted by norrisn

i was on about people flaming him is justified, the guy messed up and now ranting about cliches and the like - just makes me think hypocrite.

 

  And as I promised, my post is now updated correctly to avoid kicking you for no reason :P

  Sorry about that.

  I'll play.  I'll even list my 3 reasons in a step format that I feel the game will follow in its trend.

  1:  Initial bugs, and serious game flaws.  The game released too early, there is no denying that.  Most people can, and will, manage past this stage though...but the sour taste it will leave in their mouths will ill prepare them to maintain patience for the issues in stage 2.  Dropping the game with such major issues like the basic stat system not even working and female characters having attack speed issues is a bad ideal, but one some people can trudge through as long as its worked on quickly. 

  2:  End Game design flow.   The PvP side of the game will likely never be fleshed out to the taste of PvP'ers who come from long time games that have already long since moved past the "Gee, how do you make it work?" step in their games' life.  Regardless of what the devs say, the gear issues WILL be noticed as the stat system get fixed and the realization that the raiding system will take priority as Funcom trys desperately to compete in that department until they can truly flesh out the MANY thousand issues that arise in a PvP setting.  Once the gamers realize they are re-entering the very same treadmill they have been on for years...the past mistakes from the early release will resurface and people will lose all patience with this team, knowing full well that they managed to basically copy a design system thats been around for a decade and STILL managed to bork it out the gate. 

  3:  New games, and the release of the other major contenders.  First, both WoW and WAR will release their projects soon enough.  While we cannot yet say what WAR will become, we CAN assume WotLK will open very nicely and its standing to offer even more gameplay options to the game than before.  It can also be assumed to a lesser degree that WAR will launch with a much more solid PvP environment, and thus quickly draw those players from AoC.  Once AoC has to compete with real contenders, and is no longer the new girl on the block, the players ability to ignore their nearly sacrilegious mistakes will diminish greatly.  Aion and Champions won't be long behind them, along with a long list of other games besides them that are trying to push the envelope in design.  Simply put, while we have been speaking of seeing WoW suffer a major number loss over the years....I think that it will be AoC that suffers one first. 

  WoW always had very solid game strengths to lean on when times got tough.  AoC will not, having decided to leave so much missing from their game AND leave that which made it in so buggy has barely even touched.  The "New kid on the block" syndrome will affect it FAR more, and FAR quicker, than it ever could WoW.  Just the launch of two similar quality contenders will see the game hemorrhaging players as though someone ripped its legs off and left it to die.

  Even still, I think it shall retain a plenty large enough core player base to be very profitable.  Easily, it will have the 150K I've quoted many times as being well enough to repay investment and keep the game floating healthily for years.  However, they missed a great opportunity to soar....and it WILL be reflected when the time comes.

Cryptic:  "I'm givin' her all she's got cap'n!"

Originally posted by Suvroc

 

Originally posted by Gishgeron

 

Originally posted by norrisn

he needs flame proof'd clothing and tbh its justified

 

  I suppose either you can't read...or the link took ME to a different blog post than it did you.

  Here's a quick summary:

 

  "Hey, the market is stagnate with thousands of games which play EXACTLY the same...its not going to work anymore.  I"m mad that no one is even TRYING to make something new and innovative.  Its time to realize the MMO'er is now completely jaded against the stupid, boring crap we've been force fed for YEARS now."

 

  That, point blank, may as well be him also saying "Gee, the NGE was really stupid because it embodies the VERY thing I am screaming about now".  The NGE took, what was innovation and new gameplay, and replaced it with the "same old tired system that is flooding the market".  I have no ideal why anyone would read that and think ANYTHING else.

 

I could be wrong but I don't think Norrisn was saying the NGE was justified.

  Thats possible....it DID follow your post though, and you were talking about whether or not this thread was meant to justify the NGE or not.  That makes two of us whom are confused then.

  Just in case, though, I take it all back if he IS saying what you say he is.  I'll edit it if thats true.

Originally posted by norrisn

he needs flame proof'd clothing and tbh its justified

  Here's a quick summary:

  "Hey, the market is stagnate with thousands of games which play EXACTLY the same...its not going to work anymore.  I"m mad that no one is even TRYING to make something new and innovative.  Its time to realize the MMO'er is now completely jaded against the stupid, boring crap we've been force fed for YEARS now."

  That, point blank, may as well be him also saying "Gee, the NGE was really stupid because it embodies the VERY thing I am screaming about now".  The NGE took, what was innovation and new gameplay, and replaced it with the "same old tired system that is flooding the market". 

EDIT:  Removed sections that were based on misunderstanding

  I would be pretty sad to not have villains.  I didn't even bother buying CoX until the Villains box came out.  The setting, the attitude, the feel...everything was exactly what I wanted from it.  However...that doesn't mean they have to actually develop a "villain" side to the game.  It would actually be a thousand times better (and fit in with their line of thought that the CoV game was playing the same as Heroes, and that there should be another way to do it) if they actually made the whole matter reactive to choices made, rather than a simple button press at startup.  In essence, to make us neither superhero or supervillain...but just super beings, and leave the hero/villain tag to be the result of choices made throughout the game.

  That doesn't fit well with their "arch-enemy" plan though...so I doubt it will work that way.  THe LoTR Monster PvP example one guy gave was also nice...but not quite the same.  I want to PLAY and BUILD a villain...not simply "use" one after I hit endgame.

Originally posted by Retrad

It sounds like a lot of you are just upset that you aren't testing this game in beta, so you point fingers and call out "VAPOR WARE!"

 

Listen, the devs of Darkfall do not have to open it to the public to test out the mechanics of the game. They do not need little 14yr old Jimmy to tell them if there is a bug. They can pay professional testers to do this and who also wont treat their beta like a "free play time bonanza" as most of you do.

The reason why open beta is going to be so short is because Darkfall, unlike most recent games *cough* AoC *cough*, will be basically ready for shipment. I believe open beta will be a sort of marketing scheme and also a way to stress test their servers.

I've already attacked this kind of nonsense in my earlier post.  Do read it over, and realize that you have no ideal what you are talking about.  Open beta (and even closed, when using actual players) is not just marketing, nor is it just a stress test.  These poor developers cannot afford to build every possible computer that meets their system requirements, and thus have no other way to properly test how well the game will run across different configurations without resorting to a test that involves many different players on many different machines.  You will notice that most beta applications come standard with the question "What are your system specs".  Thats not just for kicks.

He mentioned that it will be a "couple" of weeks. A "couple" does not mean two weeks or less, especially coming from someone who speaks English as their second language. My parents are immigrants and I can tell you that they misused words very often when I was a kid. Time is different in Europe than it is here in the states, you have to realize this. If you fail to realize this then you're ignorant and feed the "Ugly American" stereotype. I've learned this growing up with my parents, but I've also learned this in college and interning at a company in Germany last summer.

All you trolls just need to shut your mouths and keep your idiotic comments to yourselves. If you don't like the game, or don't think it's coming out...keep it to one thread and stop spreading your ignorant statements over every single thread.

<modedit>

 <modedit>

  All I have to say here is....

  Repotin' Fer Duty!

I won't even dive into my normal "this game is a sharade" speech I usually do, because there are technical matters to be discussed.  I like technical matters, because they can be researched and understood.  They exist in a world of facts.  My personal opinions about DF being real or not rely more on common sense, and regardless of how NICE common sense is...it is NOT centered in absolutes.

  First, I'm going to approach this whole "beta" thing.  Lets get this out of the way...there is no bot program testing a game.  Just the ideal of such a thing is stupid...and technology has already proven to be unable to deal with such a thing.  Don't believe me?  I'll use a tame example.  During the AoC beta they ran a simple debugger at all times.  Just this one program (which, mind you, performed mere menial tasks) diced player performance to its very bone.  Trying to run all of these bot programs (which would need to be terribly complex...far more so than any mere debugger) locally WHILE keeping the game running optimally to ensure the bots tested properly would be impossible.  The BEST likely result would be watching their entire server system erupt in flames as the computers themselves rose up to slay their slave driving, merciless masters.  In not-make-believe-terms that would essentially be me saying, shit would crash, the game would be unplayable from lag, and someone would likely need a nitrogen cooling system to prevent the bloody office from catching aflame.

  The second issue, and the one MOST relevant to the matter of using ACTUAL players en masse in a beta, is the matter of optimizing system code.  Without an actual beta, using actual player...and MANY of them, you cannot possibly optimize your code properly.  You see, there is virtually no other way to test multiple configurations.  So, unless you want us to believe that Aventurine has enough money to build every possible configuration available to their required specs...the ideal that they CAN test well enough without real players is bullshot.  Just look over at AoC and its own issues, many PC's running with its recommended requirements cannot even play the game.  That's because some interesting configurations managed to slip though their ignorantly short and controlled beta process.  For a polished game that is playable to as many people in your chosen demographic as possible...you MUST employ a beta open to the public in order to catch those issues before the game hits live.  Free trial or not, a person will often never return to a game once experiencing those kinds of problems on a live server.

  Now, if any of you would like to discuss anything I've said here...feel free.  But, I'm going to tell you straight out that I'm not even going to bother replying to a post if I notice even a glimpse of blind faith involved when technology is concerned.

<modedit>

Originally posted by Aragon100

 

Originally posted by StyleMonkey

It's not my fault DF's gameplay style caters to the lowest common denominator.

All hardcore PvP games with little rules and regulations do. It attracts all the losers like flies to shit.

Darkfall is for the mature veteran players where for example Age of Conan PvP with no consequences, no rules and no regulations caters for the lowest of the lowest players. Just look at the spawncamping going on in Age of Conan, thats where you find the wannabee PvP:ers, the lamers and the worst griefers.

 

Darkfall have consequences, rules and a very good alignement system which will punish you for behaving like a moron. Thats how a PvP game should be. Building the game arround PvP and not add it as some cool features like in Age of Conan with no consequences, no rules and no alignement system.

The real PvP:ers is gonna play Darkfall.

  Thats terribly bold, assumptive, and ignorant a thing to say all at once.

  First, what is a 'rea' PvP'er?  Is this a title left only to those who deal in equal and fair competitive PvP?   That player would be better off in either WoW Tourneys (which equally gear all players) or Guild Wars (which is a thousand times better on a competitive level than anything suggested by DF)

  Perhaps its left to ONLY those who want substantial and meaningful battles over locations.  Those whom wish to have towns and capitals to destroy.  But...then would it not be best to play EVE, or even AoC?  Both of those games already have years worth of time spent on them, and EVE has already been through so much and added so much you'd be backpedalling to do anything else.

  What IS a real PvP'er?  I cannot say, but I can say this:  Any PvP'er worth his salt wants to be where the most players are.  That leaves you with very little to choose from, I'm afraid...and its the most honest thing a person can say.  Why do you THINK so many PvP'ers are still with WoW when it obviously offers sub-standard PvP compared to others?  I can tell you, its numbers.  More people to play against, more battles to be had.  That means DF would have a LONG, HARD road to get to be what you claim it will.

  Last, DF is at this moment the biggest joke in the gaming industry.  Based on every logical comparison a person can make...its not even real.  Every last excuse used by fans and devs alike to explain the lack of any actual showcased work have so many holes in them it isn't funny.  By any stretch of the imagination...we aren't comparing apples to oranges here, we are comparing Santa Claus to Samuel Jackson.  Maybe Sammy isn't your favorite man alive, but by god....you can go shake his hand and at least confirm his own existence.

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

  You have to do the exact same thing as in a level based game to increase those skills.

  Actually, the typically used example of skill-based games stands to disprove you on this.  Using SWG as a base (oh, I could have chose another...but I think many will relate to this example more readily.) a person did not level, say....doctor trees, by killing mobs.  You did so by USING doctor abilities.  You gained (and this isn't a joke) "doctor" xp for using "doctor" skills which was then spent to raise you ability tiers to another level.  That is far removed from the level game, in which you can only get better at things by doing ONE thing.  XP grind.  It does not matter in what form it arrives...in the end monsters must die.

  Now there ARE ways a level based game could actually emulate this effect.  What it would require is a quest system so diverse that it would make your head explode.  Instead of JUST kill 'x' monsters...you could have one which repeats daily and gives a set % of level for you having ressurected 'x' players, or for having healed "x" damage (and it would only count ACTUAL damage healed..not just potential).   You could have quests for "x" doors lockpicked, or "x" herbs gathered.  The possibilities are quite endless, and would do most level based games well to remove you from simple monster hunts all day.

  I skimmed over your post rather hurriedly because I already had an answer in mind when I saw the title to this thread.

  Try City of Heros / Villains.  Seriously, while not everyone will like the actual GAME, its MORE than worth a download and 14 days free JUST to use the character creator.  I kid you not when I say I'd gladly pay the monthly cost at least once a year JUST to make toons on that game.  The creator is a game in and unto itself. 

  Now, as for the actual GAME, I happen to like it.  I do not mind the mission farming (don't ask, if you even try to play the game you'll understand this one soon enough) and rather like the set up of the game.  I do think they could have done a ton better...and I look forward to Champions online to see just how much they've grown as an MMO developer.  One thing is for sure, once you taste travel powers in this game (and you get them as early as level 14) every other MMO will feel like sloshing through mud.

EDIT:

  I noticed you spoke quite a bit about pets...Villain side has an Archetype called "Mastermind" which is essentially the last pet class you will ever want to play.  By the time you are done, that class will have you in total control of 6 minions, each of which are capable of killing something their level alone.  Taste that for a moment if you like pets enough.  I especially enjoy doing mayhem missions (big, city sized instances where you rob a bank that are full of destroyable things.  Like cars, phones, booths, trucks, boxes, trash cans, light poles, meters, ect...) and watching my screen light up in a flurry of laser fire and exploding cars and enemies being sent sailing through the air by repulsion from laser fire.

  It would appear that someone here does not think you can suitably make a Zelda MMO without using the main three characters in it.  I can prove this wrong, and even lay down a very believable story to accompany it AND set the stage for the whole game.

  "BAM!  Its been 10-100 years since whatever Zelda game you feel like referencing.  Hyrule has not seen another "Hero" since the last time some guy in green broke his sword over gannons face.  In that time, lots of bad things happened...lots of bad people skipped around and made happy all over the place, and lots of good people from the 4 corners of Hyrule were left with no one to save them.  The leaders of the tribes of Hyrule finally figured out that it wasn't such a bad ideal to start teaching its own people how to take care of business."

  There you have it.  Stage set.  You pick one of at least three races.  Hyrulian, Goron, Zora.  You go out, you slash and stab at things with whatever weapons they feel like using (The Zelda series already makes use of Swords, Spears, Axes, Bows, Crossbows, Bombs, Boomerangs, Punchie facies, scythes, morningstars, flails,...the entire list of medieval weaponry) and help make the world a safer place until such a time comes that the lazy Green Man shows back up. 

  I wouldn't actually use a level system though.  I mean, it could work...and there is nothing wrong with it.  But it would just be more fitting to use the same system that rocks the regular series anyway.  You get hearts, and more damage, and better armor, by completing tasks in the world.  You know, beating dungeons...killing big crazy things...exploring the overworld....doing this games version if the gladiator challenge (the one where you have 100 rooms to go down and each one gets harder).  Levels remove all of the awesome fun there is to be had in the elements that already MAKE the game fun.  It would be SOO nice to actually have a game which rewarded me nicely for just poking my head around the world.

Originally posted by Brezjnev

What struck me more was this part: "World of Warcraft released roughly six months after City of Heroes and we, of course, know its success. One of the truly amazing features was that a player could solo effectively the vast amount of the game. Certainly, this told us something at Cryptic. But more important than that was the feedback from our fans. They simply didn't like the idea that they would need to stop their mission in order to go find help. And you know what? The players were right!" 

I haven't played either game at launch, but just looking at all the fundamental changes to CoH during the first issues, I would say that the big difference was that Blizzard actually managed to launch a polished game, unlike Cryptic . If Jack Emmert thinks what made the difference was that not all ATs in CoH could solo everything, then Champions Online is in for some big trouble.

 

  You'd be quite wrong.  From a fundamental standpoint, we all have expectations on a very basic level when approaching a game.  For instance, if a Mario MMO released today we would all expect to have some sweet platforming involved.  We'd probably have some notions about the act of killing baddies with hammers and shells too.  If a Devil May Cry MMO dropped, we'd expect to be juggling demons in the air with pistols and cleaving marionettes in twain with our awesome swords.

  Bear with me.

  Now, a SUPER HERO MMO hits shelves.  I'm willing to bet that "running around asking for 4 other super heroes to help you take down a single armed thug" is probably the furthest thing from "super" you could imagine.  You'd be rather correct about this, as many other players felt the same way too.  In order for a super hero game to work, you have to fight and FEEL like a super hero.  That means taking on swarms of basic thugs without breaking a sweat.  Even Batman could rock out the simple gang members...and he didn't even have super powers.  So, for CoH to work...yeah...being able to solo IS the most important thing.   Structurally, a super hero game sucks monkey organs if you can't even fight off ONE single un-super thing alone.

  To be honest, CoH had a rather nice launch.  The largest issue it ever had was the mundane mission farming you had to do.  The game was actually nothing BUT instanced quest missions.   Oh, it has great zones...but you don't often actually DO anything in them.  They had some bugs, naturally, but nothing which actually detracted from those two big issues.

  Given the changes they made to CoX, and the lessons they have stated they paid attention to when other games learned them...I think Champions is shaping up to easily be the best thing since sliced cake.  I've not heard them say they are trying to add things I feel they cannot.  Indeed, most of the things they are promising are things they have already touched on in CoX with some additions and improvements.  There is no massive hype being generated...no insane promises, thus far.

Originally posted by Xasapis

To Gishgeron :

What I tried to say (unsuccesfully it seems) is that subscription numbers have an impact to future development but it's not a direct analogy. Past examples have shown that smaller companies have presented more material and expanded their world much further than more established ones.

My point remains however that as far as players are concerned, more subscriptions just mean more servers. And since we usually just spend our time in just one, it doesn't affect our gameplay. To give an example, once upon a time I used to play AO, a game with two servers. Once upon a time I also used to play WoW, a game with ... 800? servers? The bottom line is that I had a blast in my stay in both games, regardless of the amount of people that were playing them.

    Name one.  No seriously, name one small company which has provided more material and better quality than large ones.  Name one game with tiny subs which offers more game play options than games with large subs.

  I cannot think