Originally posted by Mars505
I have a pretty good understanding of "Linear"
Tell me how do you go from levels 1-75 in lineage 2 , if it was not linear it would be dynamic, and dynamic would mean I would have other avenues of gaining xp. Again , with any game that has you grinding from a..................z ,is linear.

Again you want linear to be only a word you can use, linear is not jjust about picking skills but about the over all content. EVE is LINEAR , you never get out of your space ship ? you only have a space ship that flys around space, doesn't get much more linear then that.  Can you get out of your space ship and walk around ? Can you board another players spaceship ? Nope, LINEAR , you have 1 access of visual, being you spaceship.

LotrO Epic story line has a clear path, that is what makes it awesome, here is why, cause there will always be a party for it. No matter what part of the Epic line your on ,you will always find a group and that is what makes it dynamic. Dynamic in social interaction . That is the game breaker for a lot of games, the linear quality of how they (don't) bring people together. Turbine seems to have created the building block or Innovation (I said it) on game design with this Epic Story system.

Now for the Combat, you say because it is a tree , it can't be fun. I always found the combat in mmo something secondary, it isn't what I look for in a mmo that makes or breaks a game. This combat system is a traditional system at a glance and seems very stale and "linear" but once you start seeing you can level each individual skill , it becomes a little more dynamic. Then you see you can get traits to equip that enhance skills and also give you new moves and skills, then it does become dynamic.

For me LotrO is very dynamic in it's presentation, but for you, the only real limit is your own .

1. having the form of a line; straight.
2. (Mathematics) of a class of polynomial of the form y = a.x + b.
3. (Mathematics) an approximation to first order.
4. (Physics) a type of length measurement involving only one spatial dimension (as contrasted with a higher-dimensional measurement such as area or volume.

Originally posted by Yamota

Why do people find it necessary to misuse well defined words in order to make their point seem more intelligent? 

Linear has a VERY specific meaning in gaming.  LINEAR means that the gameplay follows a SPECIFIC predefined path from which you cannot deviate.  A STORY driven RPG  where the story elements "unlock" as you complete specific predetermined tasks and all lead to ONE ending, is linear.   A game like Oblivon, or ALL MMOs by their basic fundamental design, are NON LINEAR.  They are non linear because you dont have to *do* anything.  You can just run around like an idiot from one end of the world to the other with very few exceptions.  There is NO cohesive "story" because the game is not designed to end.  Even in single player Oblivion, the "main quest" isnt really mandatory and you can play 100s of hours ignoring it.

In a linear RPG, if you dont move the ball forward, you stay in the first 10 minutes of content with NPCs repeating the same things forever.  Linear or non-linear in game design has nothing to do with walking in a line vs flying in space or leveling vs assigning skills.  Just because the WORD linear can be applied to one of those actions doesnt and cant change the fact that within the CONTEXT of game design, it has SPECIFIC meaning.

Among game designers and developers these terms are not ambiguous.  Terms arent just freely exchangeable because someone feels the definition kind of sort of maybe could fit something else.  This is just like the debate over the term "sandbox".  Just choose a different (non well defined) term if you need one.  Context means alot when you're talking within a specific discipline. 

Originally posted by mlambert890

Originally posted by Cerion

 

---

Originally posted by Manmadegod

---

Originally posted by Brabus
First, I havent mentioned vanguard once in my post, second, I do not have an active account there anyway. So why change the topic??

---

His argument didn't stand a chance, so he changed topics... It's typical of a poster who doesn't read the entire post usually.... Like I could be doing right now, I didn't actually read a lot of what was said, but still gave an oracle like answer...

---

No.  Actually I'm f**ing bored to death with the same old tired, unispired commentary on LOTRO.  I have on numerous occasions refuted these arguments.  I could not stand one more spleen gushing, so I wanted to make this thread less boring to me.

Oh and here's a nice summary of the OPs history:

Declining Playerbase

LOTRO Very disappointed so far

Seems the OP has a vendetta. Sad that he can't let it go.

Originally posted by pollux667

Originally posted by Cerion

 

---

Originally posted by Manmadegod

---

Originally posted by Brabus
First, I havent mentioned vanguard once in my post, second, I do not have an active account there anyway. So why change the topic??

---

His argument didn't stand a chance, so he changed topics... It's typical of a poster who doesn't read the entire post usually.... Like I could be doing right now, I didn't actually read a lot of what was said, but still gave an oracle like answer...

---

No.  Actually I'm f**ing bored to death with the same old tired, unispired commentary on LOTRO.  I have on numerous occasions refuted these arguments.  I could not stand one more spleen gushing, so I wanted to make this thread less boring to me.

Oh and here's a nice summary of the OPs history:

Declining Playerbase

LOTRO Very disappointed so far

Seems the OP has a vendetta. Sad that he can't let it go.

Come one guys it is so obvious, the OP is Brad making some viral reverse marketing :-)

It does have the "party line" quality of an inept viral marketing secret agent person. 

Hokay, /sarcasmon

It is entirely true that LotRO is both linear and a WoW clone; conclusive proof follows!

It is a well known fact, is it not, that in LotRO, you MUST achieve level 2 before even beginning to be allowed to barely begin to reach level 3! An intolerable strait jacket!!  And anyone can see that WoW uses the very same system???  Clone????  You decide!!!!!

/sarcasmoff

WoW borrowed a lot of its UI from Horizons, which had a very advanced (for its day) UI, and which worked very well. And Hz, even though it had many innovations, built on the best of previous efforts. (EQ not among them.  I hated the EQ interface. ) And of course many, many other MMO conventions are shared between them, and with many other games as well. But a game is (or better be!) much more than its list of mechanics and features. 

For me, the key question is "Does playing one game feel like the other?"  I don't find that playing LotRO feels like playing WoW. Both games' mechanics are polished enough, and the UI is transparent enough that those qualities are pretty well transparent, leaving you with the essence of the games.  At that level, reduced to the reason we buy a game, I find the two to be quite different.

The quest instancing and epic story line are major differentiators, let along the Canon.

A thoughtful post.  The problem is that what matters in a game differs for so many people; and a game is much more than a checklist of features. (Or less, see VG for one of many examples.)  I have become convinced that useful research is difficult.  Some, perhaps most MMO's simply have to be tried.  For example, EVE is a unique experience, very difficult to describe completely. But it does what it does very well indeed.

A consensus usually does eventually emerge, but even that is not trustworthy.  Horizons was, by consensus, a terrible game, but many who did try it found it innovative and excellent. Before the last sale, 58% of the trial players subscribed.  An incredible figure. (After many improvements of course.) WoW has a lot of detractors these days, but even more subscribers. 

There do seem to be paid shills, both for and against, reminiscent of the Microsofties who smeared Word Perfect at every opportunity.  Part of the reason too, is that there are often misstatements, deliberate or otherwise.  Deliberate is assumed of course, especially when it seems clear that the detractor has never set paw into the game.  That of course offends one's sense of fairness, etc. etc. 

I could give you a list of reasons why LotRO is great, and what its major flaw is; but the flaw is the economy which is in the process of being balanced, and which will be different Real Soon Now. Useful info?  Not really, since it's going to change. (Three patches already, and counting. )

But the biggest problem is the subjective quality of any review.  What's important to me, may not matter at all to you... I don't do PvP, so my opinion of LotRO's Monster/Player unique feature won't mean much to a PvP'er. 

In LotRO's case, I found the site to be accurately descriptive.  In VG's case, ummm  less so.  I understand from a beta tester that Chronicles of Spellborn lives up to and past its description. 

So you gotta try 'em all.