| 43 posts found | |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
8/08/08 3:06:37 PM#21
Originally posted by SignusM
You just proved my point the game just looks sooo bland, generic and ugly looking. I mean look at how plastic everything is and how bad the character models are and the nasty plastic tree's too. All I see in them screenshots is a room with nothing in but a mob or a landscape with nothing in but a pre generated building, a tree and a mob.
What's your point? That's what makes up a game world. Maybe you want to see some dungeons? Those are absolutely jaw dropping, definetly the best dungeons on the market right now. http://forums.station.sony.com/vg/posts/list.m?topic_id=36618 Look at some screenshots on that page. It could just very well be a style of taste (I hear some people actually like WoW graphics!) but really, if you don't want landscape, or trees, or players, or mobs, or class pets (the zombies) then what DO you want?
Though I think Vanguard has some fine points, thosee really aren't the best dungeons on the market right now. If one plays Vanguard one has to adopt a sort of retro gaming mentality. Part of that is in the graphics. I mean, if one were to compare those dungeons to "the tower of insolence" or Giants Cave or cruma tower there would be no contest. (lineage 2)
|
|||
|
8/08/08 5:25:41 PM#22
All MMO's all the time
|
|||
|
8/08/08 5:50:21 PM#23
Pre-CU SWG had the most potential of any MMO on the market. It had a large virtual world, a skill-based sandbox system, and a great social aspect that almost every other MMO lacks. It was fun enough to keep people like me happy, but it lacked a great deal of content. The new genre of games that are linear and have no social aspects to them are what they are... No amount of patching is going to fix that. Content can always be added but game mechanics require serious change. I will never spend money and time on a game that I feel is mechanically incomplete. Never again. AoC isn't going to get a dime from me until it's fixed. WAR won't. Really, there are no good MMO games out right now. You're better off playing games like Elder Scrolls or RTS games against other players. Now that PS3 and Xbox 360 both offer deep online options, the MMO industry better step up their quality. Tecmo Bowl. |
|||
|
8/08/08 6:06:11 PM#24
Originally posted by JustBe
I have no idea what you're talking about. Graphics are better than just about any game right now. Except LotRO water beats it, and Age of Conan has some better scenery (except you can't actually GET to the scenery like you can in Vanguard) Here are some I took and submitted myself on medium settings over a year ago. http://vanguardvault.ign.com/fms/Image.php?id=1170 http://vanguardvault.ign.com/fms/Image.php?id=1169 http://vanguardvault.ign.com/fms/Image.php?id=1025 And this place that actually sometimes gives people headaches cause of the brightness :P http://vanguardvault.ign.com/fms/Image.php?id=1168
You just proved my point the game just looks sooo bland, generic and ugly looking. I mean look at how plastic everything is and how bad the character models are and the nasty plastic tree's too. All I see in them screenshots is a room with nothing in but a mob or a landscape with nothing in but a pre generated building, a tree and a mob.
I must agree here those screens, dont look that good. |
|||
|
8/08/08 6:08:24 PM#25
No, but I left a game for what it became... |
|||
|
8/08/08 6:36:01 PM#26
It baffles me to such a large degree that developers don't take this road: 1.) Build a virtual world, set the laws that govern, create an open environment. 2.) Complete the social aspects of said world. Give the players an economy. Create a purpose for playing online with other people, it's a MMORPG afterall. 3.) Create questing on top of the virtual world. Questing should NOT be the game, it should be something that sits on top of the game.
In the case of Age of Conan the world is so limited and restricted, so instanced that it seems absurd that it took 5 years to develop and is still missing so much that was promised. Seamless worlds should be industry norm. Questing should not be the game experience. If more developers gave everyone a purpose, more people would play and keep playing. It really doesn't make sense that games now revolve around a linear progression through instanced worlds, and offer almost no social aspect. They seem to be so limited from the start. Age of Conan is the worst offender I have seen as of yet. Tecmo Bowl. |
|||
|
tvalentine
 Apprentice Member
Joined: 4/01/06
“The things you own end up owning you.” -Tyler Durden |
8/08/08 6:52:23 PM#27
i played SWG hoping it would become something better and more polished ..... i regret it.......
Playing: EVE Online |
||
|
8/08/08 6:56:33 PM#28
i'm playing Lotro (Lifetime sub) for what it is and more so for what it will become (were only just about to enter Moria...that what...half a book into the 3 book series?). as an MMO gamer i think its a requirement that you are optimistic as things will always change in the game and the game is always evolving. buy a fps and thats exactly what you paid for. the game doesnt change at all (unless expansions or major patches are used) and it will still be the same game 5 years from now. MMO wish list: -Changeable worlds |
|||
|
Thank you for your replies, it's a comfort to know I'm not alone in the gaming world by playing games that may someday be great. Currently one of the games I play is EVE Online in the hopes that the universe will include planetside and alternate profession/career tracks. The graphics are beautiful, the interface unique, and the battles quite engaging, but I can't see myself playing for more than a year if there's nothing more to do than the current content. World of Warcraft I play...well, daily. I have for the last three years, not only because I don't feel I've explored everything in the game yet, but also because I've gotten to meet and be a part of some excellent roleplaying guilds. My hope for World of Warcraft is in a graphics upgrade, maybe player housing, more diversity, and other ways to use a character besides beating stuff up. I'll probably still play without these things, but can always dream. Voyage Century had a great concept, it's just that the interface is too cumbersome and the quests repetitive to the letter. It has potential. I don't play, but if it changes I'll be back in. RF Online is a bit unique, combining fantasy and sci-fi, but does get a bit grindy. I've heard if you can get through it, the PVP at the end is well worthwhile. I love their macro system. The rest, well, I no longer play them. My rule of thumb when it comes to hope is this: If it's free, keep a character on it. If it's not, dump it until it can deliver what I'm hoping for. Have I become too jaded?
http://www.allaboutgod.com/ |
|||
|
8/12/08 3:45:53 PM#30
Nope. I don't pay for potential. If its not fun immediately, its not worth the time. Although I did play AO for a few months. But then again, I thought it would get better, but it only got worse. I was stupid=) |
|||
|
8/12/08 3:53:47 PM#31
I have, and I wouldn't recommend it. |
|||
|
8/12/08 4:39:46 PM#32
The fallacy in playing something for what it might become, is why not play something fun while you wait? If what you see potential in will become fun someday, you might as well wait until then to play it :) Now if you think you can help it get there, that's different. Beta testing and the like, where you actually have a lot of say in what happens (well, at least you should have a lot of say) is where you can help shape the game into that potential you think you see. Playing a live mmo, sometimes you feel like you can help it get there also. Also, if something is fun enough, even if the potential is the main draw, why not keep playing, eh? But if something is just trash, and you see potential, but it is not very likely to reach it, and there's nothing you can do to help it get there, then you are just punishing yourself for no reason. |
|||
|
It is a tough line to draw. In order for a game to get better, it need subscribers to front the development cost. On the other hand, if those developments do not happen...then it's the gamer's loss if they're riding on that hope. I think there's a 'doom to eventually fail' scenario with any and all games. Many games historically broke record number of sales because of the 'newness' factor. After it gets old, it tends to get tossed into the pile. There could be an absolutely phenomenal game that can die solely on the lack of changes over time. I don't know if there will ever come a day where an MMO can provide the constant, rapid changes us gamers demand...but I'm sure we'll find out soon.
http://www.allaboutgod.com/ |
|||
|
gillvane1
Novice Member
Joined: 3/15/05
Google "MMORPGMaker" if you want to make your own MMORPG. |
8/13/08 10:43:17 AM#34
Originally posted by DeserttFoxx
Not everyone. I plan on playing WAR, but if it isnt' fun right out of the box, they won't get my 14.95 after the free first month. |
||
|
shae
 Novice Member
Joined: 5/06/05
"Don''t take life seriously because you can''t come out of it alive." - Warren Miller |
8/13/08 10:51:12 AM#35
Oh Absolutely!!! SWG: This is probably the king of potential ruined when it comes to what I hoped it would become. We went from a really rocky start, to being on the right road, to being tragically derailed, to being back on track and to finally having it killed by a giant cow-prod. Saga of Ryzom: While the game had tons going for it, it really never lived up to what it could have been. Still, I loved and believed in this games potential to such a degree that I paid my subscription for well over a year without actually playing the game. Matrix Online: Talk about an IP that was purpose built for the MMO genre but was so grossely handled, so poorly developed, so incompetently put together that it was tragically to the button of the "could-have-been" pit. Everquest 2: Played steady for about a year and came back on and off for expansions here and there; almost the entire time I was more or less bored. Players and friends kept me in and I always hoped that they would bring the world to life, offer content that was dynamic and really get people involved. Instead, at least for me, it continued to be a snore fest. Moh well! |
||
Originally posted by shae
Wow, that sounds colourfully painful! Come to think of it, if ever there were a game where you could kill things with a giant cow-prod, I'd definately give it a try. Stars Wars Galaxies is the record for me as far as most money spend in a single moment and shortest played. I bought two copies (one for me and sig. other) and as soon as I had to use radial menus to attack and learned that the only way for me to level as an entertainer was to stand in bars spamming "look at me!", into the trash it went. Grand total...2 hours. My friend liked it, but I wasn't going to be joining him. Everquest 2 had some interesting customization as far as options, but kept 'forgetting' my keymapping and window changes. The blobby armor sets (even on ramped up graphics) didn't excite me, auctionhouse was a headache, and experience debt gave me nightmares of Everquest 1. Once I learned how small the world was without doing the Everexpansion moneychase, I ditched that one. Two friends like it and still play, more power to them. I've learned not to pay if I don't play. I won't get caught into subbing for something I play less than 4 hours a month. Perhaps I'm cheap, but want some value for my buck. http://www.allaboutgod.com/ |
|||
|
8/13/08 1:57:09 PM#37
No, no, it was managed by greedy Toydarian asshats. Star Trek Online will be managed by greedy Ferengi asshats. |
|||
|
Wizardry
 Advanced Member
Joined: 8/27/04
Remove quests,bosses and trigger them back in is called Dynamic events now?lol..i think not. |
8/13/08 2:07:02 PM#38
I don't know if i could argue that it's a common trait among gamers , but i wouldn't ever do it and consider it a foolish endeavor. http://www.youtube.com/user/Napolianboo#p/u/15/rCYLLQCNc1w |
||
|
I'm curious to see who is at fault for failing expectations. Is it overmarketing from the game maker? If they say, "This is the game you've been waiting for!", then that's a pretty tall order to fill. Could they possibly deliver on such a promise? Or is it us when we're looking at the development/beta/new release shouting, "This iz the best game evar!!!1111" ? Maybe both? That probably feeds the thinking of, "well, it missed the mark, but maybe it'll get better..." http://www.allaboutgod.com/ |
|||
|
8/13/08 2:18:53 PM#40
I thinking about getting Lotro in hope of what it will become and huge epic adventure! But then the combat kinda sucks only 4 races for the rest of the game. |
|||
