| 198 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
9/09/07 6:00:23 PM#81
This game just bored the heck out of me. I take beta testing seriously and usually stick with it, but I just couldn't stand to log into this game after a few days. However, that was back in March or April I think so I'll probably try it again after launch. I'd really like a good scifi MMO. It's disheartening to hear all these negative reviews, but perhaps in the next 6 weeks or so they can clean up some of the more egregious problems and launch a decent game. |
|
|
9/09/07 7:02:21 PM#82
Originally posted by Torvac Good to hear from someone who liked it too. I also appreciate all of the detail regarding mission types etc.. Thanks for that. It's also important if collision detection is actually there, and is just a bit buggy in beta. This is much different than a game that simply doesn't have collision detection, which is a real drag. It sounds like some of the richness and diversity in this game is subtle. On the surface it reads like it's quite repetative, but this post suggests more complexity after deeper involvement. Makes me want to check it out ^_^. Thanks for the post. |
|
|
9/09/07 7:05:09 PM#83
Originally posted by jacobR I'm lovin' CoV |
|
|
9/09/07 7:15:14 PM#84
The boot camp portion of the game was good. However when i kill the enemies i dont really feel like I accomplished anything. Then from level 5 on it was just so unbearably boring. The funniest thing however was in beta everyone waiting in line trying to get the logos. THe game should have been fantasy like it was orginially planned. I think someone got into RG's head and told him not to do what he wanted. But TR is not enjoyable so I wont be paying for it.( had such high hopes) |
|
|
9/09/07 7:54:16 PM#85
Originally posted by ArcAngel3 Excellant. People always burn new games on this site, especially when they are something differant, or they just don't "get it". TR is about war. It's constant action, and so many quests to do it's a little overwealming. Been playing Beta myself for quite a while, and will be buying the CE.
|
|
|
9/10/07 5:39:12 AM#86
I have been playing the game (I mean testing :) ) for 6 months and will be buying the game. Obviously not everyone likes it. Its more a massive action game than a deep social game. |
|
|
Arbol
Novice Member
Joined: 9/10/07
I am a man, and nothing human do I consider alien to myself. --Petrarch |
9/10/07 12:19:00 PM#87
I played it a few days, but don't know what to make of it. For one, I had lag problems. Could be my video card (ATI Radeon 1600), but lots of people were complaining about lag. Plus, when I log out, the game resets my video settings, or rather, does not return them to normal, so I have to reset everything myself. Could be my set up, I don't know. It plays like an MMOFPS at this point. No sign of an auction house, as people have noted. I thought the data terminals were for mailing, but perhaps not. I like that you can teleport from place to place - less running back and forth for quests. I was non-plussed by the fact that the skill points for crafting and combat come from the same pool, and you get very few to spend each level - so I can get better at fighting or making ammunition, but not both? Right now it seems like a game for people who like doing a lot of PVE killing, and exploring (though that only works through the first run through). It seems unfinished, content wise. I hope the release game is more fleshed out, and the beta I saw was more for stress-testing the servers, but if this is the game they plan on releasing, I think it's appeal will be limited. |
|
9/10/07 2:51:52 PM#88
I'm torn - I've bene playing beta for a little over a week, and played this weekend a lot - made level 12. It's fun, I like the story, I like the setting, but it's just not a triple-A title - if you compare it to LOTRO (I have a lifetime membership) or even WoW or EQ2, there's just another 'level' of gameplay missing (lots of others have said 'shallow', that might be as good a term as any). The combat is interesting but un-inspired, I like the quests but again, nothing ground-breaking or ultra-immersive like LOTRO. Overall, I'm having a good time, but I just don't see it worth $15 a month to play, it doesn't seem to be in that league, especially when LOTRO is only $10 a month for many people. Maybe at a lower price I'd sign up, but at the current going rate of $15, no, I don't think it's really there. When scary things get scared, that's bad... |
|
|
9/12/07 9:08:36 AM#89
I am never ever this short winded or blunt about a game but I thought TR sucked. I'm not even going to bother going into any details. NCSoft has another write off on their hands, thanks Rich. |
|
|
9/13/07 9:47:55 AM#90
Originally posted by eric1000 Pretty much my feelings unfortunately. Nothing revolutionary, and barely anything evolutionary. IMO they do have a good base for a game with interesting twists BUT it requires some major rework in critical areas, such as class abilities. Too many felt like "why bother" because the skill points investment didn't feel worth it. Take for example healing: Specialist: "I'll heal you" Soldier: "Nevermind I'll use the med pack I crafted, keep shooting" Some other stuff looked cool in higher tier, but playing a support class seemed pretty pointless during my time in there, hardly any grouping going on. I did appreciate the quests with choices though the ones I've seen didn't seem to have any significant impact in the long run. I also liked the fact that grades of gear apparently weren't making or breaking your character: green items simply have fewer bonuses than purple ones. Other than that I got that "This is WoW, pew-pew Edition" feeling :/ Also, a word of advice: if you don't have 2GB of RAM at least (maybe more under Vista), don't bother, unless you want to play a 2007 release that looks worse than Quake 2 to avoid the game freezing for 30 seconds and up, every now and then (and ironically, quite often in the middle of firefights...). "High" texture quality eats up memory, while under the "Low" setting the game just isn't something you want to play in that time and age. Come one, can't be that hard to have a "Medium" option... |
|
|
9/13/07 9:52:17 AM#91
this game is the nge without star wars skins. pure crap. no depth. |
|
|
9/13/07 10:58:56 AM#92
Had high hopes of this, especially after seing the videos of Garriott saying about how great it was... Got into beta and was extremely dissapointed. It is tediously boring, very poor animations, the network code is dire - frame rates for people a way away from you are dropped to conserve cpu/gpu - and it notices really badly. The fighting is a good idea but just plain dull in practice. It really is very very dull, lifeless and boring. |
|
|
9/13/07 11:09:34 AM#93
I had high hopes for the game, but the fun factor went away after a short few days it's not so much that the game play was terribly awful the game was just too much of a grind if you like korean grindfests TR might interest you. Truthfully it feels most like a rebadged auto assault graphically it's very similar probably the same game engine same goes for item design just a slightly different atmosphere instead of cars with weapons your foot soldiers with weapons. Overall it really wasn't too entertaining past the first day or two Richard Garriot certainly isn't the mastermind I once thought he was because this game sorely disappointed he should have stuck to the fantasy genre cause he didn't do a very good job at the sci-fi. |
|
|
9/13/07 11:17:20 AM#94
I too was really hoping for this game to be good after waiting so long for it but like always I just couldnt get into this game as some of you pointed out it got exremly boring I dont mean to be harsh there wil be other people who will like it but Im gonna pass on this one. |
|
|
9/13/07 7:40:12 PM#95
Beta tested it for a while and was disappointed. I noticed it was very similar to Auto Assault (even the soundtracks) but at least driving around and shooting/blowing up things was actually FUN in Auto Assault.
|
|
|
9/14/07 11:10:56 AM#96
Originally posted by Krytycal A lot of people seem to be making the AutoAssault comparison. I saw one person argue, however, that AA had a lot of bugs at launch. He felt that TR, tho buggy, was a lot cleaner than AA and would do a lot better at launch in terms of players. What do you think? |
|
|
9/14/07 4:10:22 PM#97
Originally posted by prophets I didn't get to beta test AA, I played the retail version, which was fairly polished. There are definitely similarities between AA and TR (which is probably another reason why NCSoft decided to pull the plug off AA). IMO AA wasn't a very good MMORPG, it lacked a lot of essential things that good MMOs today have. However, I'd be lying if I told you I didn't enjoy AA's combat system, I thought it was solid. They got "fastest, most destructive" right. TR has all the negatives of AA (trading poorly customizable vehicles for poorly customizable characters), PLUS, the biggest letdown of all IMO, the half-RPG, half-FPS and all-SUCK combat system, which is horrible.
A smooth launch is definitely a plus but if you can't deliver a game that's fun to play then all the polishing is useless. At its current state, I personally wouldn't recommend buying TR. Heck, I wouldn't recommend buying it at all unless its combat system gets a massive overhaul. Some folks seem to enjoy it though, so definitely give a try and come up with your own conclusions.
|
|
|
nakuma
Novice Member
Joined: 5/04/06
"then again I could be wrong, but that's just my opinion" -Dennis Miller |
9/14/07 4:53:21 PM#98
Originally posted by Kenze
3.4ghz Phenom II X4 965, 8GB PC12800 DDR3 GSKILL, EVGA 285 GTX 1GB, 640GB HD SATA II, BFG 1000WATT PSU. MSI NF980-G65 TRI-SLI MOBO. |
|
9/14/07 5:44:17 PM#99
Originally posted by Krytycal I agree with you. I just never played Auto Assault, so I'm not sure how applicable the comparison truly was. Just curious. Thanks. |
|
|
johnmatthais
Tipster
Joined: 4/28/07
Maybe if I'm going to have my Xfire profile up, I should start using Xfire... |
9/15/07 10:19:08 AM#100
honestly, I like this game...true, it isn't up to NC standards (the performance with better graphics could've been WAAAYY better) but, I enjoyed it and probably will play it after release. I guess I just like it cuz it's different and because I really lik shooter games...PvP could've been better but then again, we don't want another Phylon...I really like the idea that we can all share the battlefield, rather than have instances. I also like that monsters spawn from being beamed down from a ship rather than just appear. True, it is in beta and everyone seems to be doing the same missions but, it'll get much better after everyone's made it to higher levels and those that fell behind just have to catch up...honestly, I think it's better than the rumor about Hellgate being instanced (anyone allowed to tell me if that's true?) because I hate instancing and I hated Guild Wars because of the instancing...it may make for easier missions but, it kills the already dead social aspect of the game... here's how I see TR: a Halo MMORPG in the eyes of the marines...great idea, great graphics, poor performance, enjoyable gameplay I'll stick by NC's side this time, though. I respect that they dared to be different, especially with all the medieval games they've made recently...true, CoX was different, but it felt like WoW with superheroes (no offense, it just did). I enjoy that there is no auto-lock and that every shot is made manually. Also, if I remember correctly, wasn't their objective to make a living, breathing online battlefield? |