Originally posted by Jeffery.h

...

Dispute what you want, over 20k players logged into 1 server at 1 time is impressive to say the least. What game besides eve online can boast higher single server peak time loads greater?

That would be impressive if it was true, but it's far from the case.  The server was built to handle up to 10k concurrent players.  It's highly unlikely the EU server has ever had close to that.  The largest event on records was an allegedly 2k player WAR soon after launch.  Since then, numbers have dwindled and it's unlikely there are even 2k logged in at any one time.  The best estimates for total overall membership for the EU server capped at 18k TOTAL players (not concurrent).  That estimate is based, in large part, on the figures I gathered from the in-game clan journal, which had ~15k total clan characters as of 05/23/2009.  I confirmed that the clan membership total included characters that quit the game without first leaving their clans and it included characters that were deleted without quitting their clans.  As such, the ~15k total clan membership count is a maximum value, but probably much higher than the actual live clan player count.

How did myself and others arrive at the max ~18k estimate?  Since Darkfall is so heavily clan-oriented, it's no big stretch to assume that most players, especially those who stay beyond their initial month, belong to clans.  As such, most active players are probably clan member, which means the active players out of the ~15, number quality as "most players".  Even assuming generous 25% active non-clan member count, the number is under 4k.  Add that to a conservative 14k (clan members - 1k) and you arrive at an estimated ~18k total active subscriber count for EU.  The exact formula is:

(~15k clan characters- invalid clan characters + non-clan characters) = total subscriber count (1 chat/account)

So, simply put, your 20k concurrent number is bullshit...

~Ripper

The review is pretty much spot on. Just be gratefull they were more generous this time around.

This review is pretty spot on with many things. Having played this game, only to be mislead about character slots and NA transfers, is enough to maintain this game at 2/10.  The reviewer addresses some window-dressing that was fixed, but it's all to easy to substitute what was hot-fixed with duct-tape with a few niceties that the ametuer developers have worked on; must be Tacos birthday or something . We all know DF has prolific problems, will continue to have prolific problems, and isnt worth the effort.

IMO a 4/10 is about all you can give any game that is designed around PVP.Once you design a PVP game,you lose 50% of a games over all potential,so a PERFECT PVP game[in the MMORPG setting] would only be a 5/10.

PvP works great in a FPS...UT/quake/COD/CS/HL ect ect,because it is usually about graphics and skill.

DF tried to add weather and stuff to add to the skill of PVP,it was just done poorly,even still PVP MMO's lack map design and balance.In saying Balance i do not mean everyone heals the same and hits the same,i mean EVERY class should have it's place in PVP,they should all shine at different times.

If i was designing a PVP game, i could do it far better than all these posers,these developers have been lazy and shown to be making their games quickly to get them out the door to make a buck.What the Genre needs is some TRUE gamers with a decent budget to design a PVP game ,the way it should be.We don't need anymore WOW type games that make classes over powering to entice the little kiddies to play nor do we need to hand over mounts to cater to the simplistic minds[yay i got a cool mount,i LOVE this game mentality].

I can give a very simple example into map design......Melee would need areas like structures and large rocks to hide or take cover behind from the long range players.Ramgers would perhaps be best attacking from high top areas,Thick brush would again favor melee types.Wide open areas would favor Magic users or Ranged.Magic users would have increased advantages depending on weather like rain would benefit water based spells,hot and sunny favors fire based spells ect ect.

Armour types should play a MUCH larger role in players speed,movement and doging abilities.Shileds should play a large role in combat and directional combat should also be a major factor.

When i watch a Df video of PVP game play,it looks REAL cheap,it seems to me that the majority are more excited about massive battles,even though the actual combat structure is weak and boring,just so long as there is a lot of players they are happy :(

Originally posted by firesnake77

Given the serious complaints he listed about the gameplay, I thought a 4/10 was quite generous.

That's really the biggest problem with the game.  It definitely has some very fun elements, but if you review the game based on several components, not just fun, it fails to get a good score.   The negatives weigh down the positives so much that it makes the game--according to the eurogamer scale--average, at best.

• Fun - yes, there are definitely fun aspects to it. The PvP, combat and full loot system can make for a very exciting experience  I love killing other players, going toe-to-toe, dry looting them, etc...  It's thrilling, whether I'm running somebody down or being hunted!

• Graphics - good and bad - some nice environments (definitely not all), but horrible animations.  It took months after launch to fix Dwarven beards. Considering a new player's first in-game impression is the character creation, wouldn't it have been a good idea to fix that earlier?

• Sound - sucked, but has apparently been addressed in the last month

• UI - clunky, at best.  The sheath/unsheath mechanic should be automatic, IMO, based upon whatever action you take.  Want to loot a gravestone - click it and automatically sheath your sword first.  Btw - it's not just as simple as clicking 1 or 2 to change weapons.  If, for example, you were using a staff or bow and ran out of mana or arrows, the game will automatically sheath your weapon for you (take that, those of you arguing against automatic sheathing - the game already does it in some cases!). So, when you run out of arrows, for example, and switch to melee you'll find yourself unable to attack because you've switched a sheathed weapon!  Even though you'd been fighting with an unsheathed bow, you be scrambling in the middle of combat to switch and unsheathe your melee weapon.  Don't forget about the crappy, unfamiliar commands and the HTML journals, too.  What about inconsistent design?  To rest, you need to have your rest "skill" slotted (a  skill to rest, really?), sheathe your weapon and hit the skill button. With ganking and reviving, you just need to hit a hotkey.  Shouldn't something so basic as rest be the same?  I guarantee you, there are players out there with macros that address many of these UI/control issues - that's fine, but why should they have to have them?

• Chat - horrible chat interface, especially for a game that revolves around clan warfare.  If you didn't have a third-party voice chat system, you'd never be able to effectively communicate or coordinate sieges

• Skill leveling - it's taken them months after launch, patch-after-patch, to address some of the major skill leveling issues, especially in regards to macros.  Even then, it's still possible to get max skill gain by sparring with your clan mates. IMO, that shouldn't happen - I can see gaining skill up to a minimum cap (like 25), but no skill gains after that, forcing players to actually go out and fight in order to level (which is, ultimately, the intent of the designer, I believe)

• PvE - sucked until the expansion - it's a little better now.  I'm excited about players being able to use a house with a window as a brick-and-mortar store - I think that'd be really cool!  Problem?  The server can allegedly hold up to 10k concurrent users, but how many house lots are there?  Not that many.  Crafting, in general, has undergone a number of changes, too, due to it SUCKING. Mob difficulty and and AI has been tweaked in almost every patch post-launch, including in the "expansion".  So much so that it lends credence (along with the many skill tweaks and crafting changes) to the "paid beta" theory.

• Environment - crazy things like running up near vertical faces, falling insane distances for relatively trivial damage (far less damage than in some other, less "hardcore" games), mobs not spawning for a minute or so after you've entered a location (no, they're not "ambushes"), mobs that warp all over the place if there's a siege or two going on (even with only a few thousand players logged in, at most, nowhere near the concurrent player cap), etc... Let's not forget the huge, open world that's almost completely devoid of life (including a high number of players, except those huddled in their own cities, sparring each other to level up their skills).

There are so many problems with the game's design and implementation that they far outweigh the fun factor unless you're so starved for a game like this that you're willing to put up with the many, many flaws. That's why the game got a 4/10.  There's just not enough good to outweigh the bad.

~Ripper

Originally posted by rhinok

Originally posted by Jeffery.h

...

Dispute what you want, over 20k players logged into 1 server at 1 time is impressive to say the least. What game besides eve online can boast higher single server peak time loads greater?

 

That would be impressive if it was true, but it's far from the case.  The server was built to handle up to 10k concurrent players.  It's highly unlikely the EU server has ever had close to that.  The largest event on records was an allegedly 2k player WAR soon after launch.  Since then, numbers have dwindled and it's unlikely there are even 2k logged in at any one time.  The best estimates for total overall membership for the EU server capped at 18k TOTAL players (not concurrent).  That estimate is based, in large part, on the figures I gathered from the in-game clan journal, which had ~15k total clan characters as of 05/23/2009.  I confirmed that the clan membership total included characters that quit the game without first leaving their clans and it included characters that were deleted without quitting their clans.  As such, the ~15k total clan membership count is a maximum value, but probably much higher than the actual live clan player count.

How did myself and others arrive at the max ~18k estimate?  Since Darkfall is so heavily clan-oriented, it's no big stretch to assume that most players, especially those who stay beyond their initial month, belong to clans.  As such, most active players are probably clan member, which means the active players out of the ~15, number quality as "most players".  Even assuming generous 25% active non-clan member count, the number is under 4k.  Add that to a conservative 14k (clan members - 1k) and you arrive at an estimated ~18k total active subscriber count for EU.  The exact formula is:

(~15k clan characters- invalid clan characters + non-clan characters) = total subscriber count (1 chat/account)

So, simply put, your 20k concurrent number is bullshit...

~Ripper

Based on clan creation numbers in first 5 days of NA-1. Assuming 75% of players are not in a guild yet. if you run around a city on NA-1 or anywhere, you will notice most players are NOT in a guild yet.

Oh an I HIGHLY doubt all those players joined clans and quit in the first 5 days of the game. 

:-) feel stupid now?
 

Originally posted by Jeffery.h

Originally posted by rhinok

Originally posted by Jeffery.h

...

Dispute what you want, over 20k players logged into 1 server at 1 time is impressive to say the least. What game besides eve online can boast higher single server peak time loads greater?

 

That would be impressive if it was true, but it's far from the case.  The server was built to handle up to 10k concurrent players.  It's highly unlikely the EU server has ever had close to that.  The largest event on records was an allegedly 2k player WAR soon after launch.  Since then, numbers have dwindled and it's unlikely there are even 2k logged in at any one time.  The best estimates for total overall membership for the EU server capped at 18k TOTAL players (not concurrent).  That estimate is based, in large part, on the figures I gathered from the in-game clan journal, which had ~15k total clan characters as of 05/23/2009.  I confirmed that the clan membership total included characters that quit the game without first leaving their clans and it included characters that were deleted without quitting their clans.  As such, the ~15k total clan membership count is a maximum value, but probably much higher than the actual live clan player count.

How did myself and others arrive at the max ~18k estimate?  Since Darkfall is so heavily clan-oriented, it's no big stretch to assume that most players, especially those who stay beyond their initial month, belong to clans.  As such, most active players are probably clan member, which means the active players out of the ~15, number quality as "most players".  Even assuming generous 25% active non-clan member count, the number is under 4k.  Add that to a conservative 14k (clan members - 1k) and you arrive at an estimated ~18k total active subscriber count for EU.  The exact formula is:

(~15k clan characters- invalid clan characters + non-clan characters) = total subscriber count (1 chat/account)

So, simply put, your 20k concurrent number is bullshit...

~Ripper

Based on clan creation numbers in first 5 days of NA-1. Assuming 75% of players are not in a guild yet. if you run around a city on NA-1 or anywhere, you will notice most players are NOT in a guild yet.
 

look at the date of the survey before you answer next time

I am a little worked up that Euro-gamer gave such a low review, based mostly on bugs, or game mechanics that do not exist as of the last expansion. I also bealive that euro-gamer made too much of player running around naked fighting. In Darkfall I can say from experience 1 player wearing armor, using crafted weapons is more then a match for 4-5 naked players. I will demonstrate this in the video. With a naked zerg on 1 player wearing high end gear. I am assuming he was a 10hr old character in some basic armor who got killed by a naked 3 month old toon. yea...... level 1 vs level 80 basicly there.

The fact that the review blatently got so many game mechanics WRONG really frustrates me. The review claims dowtime in the start of the game is excessive, and that goblins are hard. I would like to show in a video 1 brand new character going out minutes after logging into the game and killing a dozen goblins before ever resting. I would also like to show the duration of resting, less then 1 minute of downtime for 5-10 minutes of constant battle. In wow you must rest for 20-30 seconds between every pull, fighting for 10 minutes before resting for 1 minute in my mind is not bad at all. Surpising this person didn't eat food either, he mentioned wow enough. In wow if you rest and don't eat it takes in some cases several minutes to regen fully. In darkfall its less without food, and even less with food. Had he used even the most basic short duration food he would never have to rest longer then 1 minute ever.

I do not bealive a proper review was done. The fact is the reviewer sounds like he was just bad at the game. If a player can not go out and kill a dozen goblins right after logging into the game before ever resting he is just plane bad. It is a twitch and player skill based MMO game after all. Goblins are like Wolves in WoW starting area, they drop so fast you can practicly kill them in your sleep, especialy since expansion.



Kieron Gillan says .....


Darkfall's just launched in the US and its expansion has gone live, after all. But as a game, it's just not there yet, its rewards too distant and the road there too barren to recommend to fellow travellers.

Yet he admits here he has not played the game in over a month. "But the actual playtime was actually a month or so back, and I've been trying to work out exactly the right angle on it since..."


This guy didn't even play the expansion. Or any of the patches in the last month. Over 90% of all bug fixes and content added to the game since launch happend in the last month. That is not oppinion it is fact. His article is filled with incorrect information. Before this review ever came out, rest duration was changed. Skilling up was changed. Players take EXTRA damage if they are naked making it suicide. All mobs where adjusted in difficulty so they have less HP making it easier.

Over 60hrs of straight questing was added, more then doubling content already in the game with the Title System.

Also he played on Euro server as a 1 day old character. Meaning he knows nothing. Of course players killed him all the time, imagine a level 1 mage attacking a level 80 mage in World of Warcraft.
Of course the mobs where hard, he has played for 1 day. How hard are the mobs you kill in WoW, EQ, WAR, on day 1 in your first 10 hours.

If they wanted to do a real re-review they would have waited for NA-1 and reviewed with the expansion, on a fresh server, where the reviewer had half a chance.


The reviewer talks extensively about how reviewers are paid by word count. Making it all too obvious why he goes off on tangents and over 50% of his article is MMO theory rather the actualy based on the game. He does not lay out criteria, scoring guidelines, point system. He just ends with a 4/10 after 4 pages of bitching how the game is too hard and "unlike wow".

He stresses that the controls are hard for over 1 page. Going into detail many times how the game is not like wow. Actualy players can auto switch weapons, cast a spell, and switch back to previous weapon with 1 key press by setting up keybindings to fit their needs. But rather then research how to do that, he says it is just hard.

I am just in shock of his review. It added a lot of fancy words, but it was filled with " unlike WoW " refrences. The reviewer did not refence any other game besides lineage 2, in passing saying it was only game he hated more then Darkfall.

He also complains extensively about running up mountains. Funny how no one mentions that much in WAR or AOC, two games given high reviews that ultimatly didn't live up to the hype. Like in AOC and WAR some mountains you can run up, and some you can't. Why a common occurance in even big budget MMO games, like terrain climbing would even mentioned is beyond me. WoW was one of the first popular MMO games to actualy place full restritions on mountains making them 100% impassible as a barrier to seperate zones. SWG, EQ, Ultima, AO..... many others. It is a very common feature. One most players actually never think much about.

Also while on subject of environment. Since he didn't play expansion he has not seen the weather system. A huge environment upgrade IMO. He makes no mention of terrain being used to hide, or wearing brown armor to blend into trees.  No mention of true 3d sound, a critical element of sneaking up on enemies, or finding targets.

Graphicly, the game looks better then WAR lets be honest, It actualy looks better then war and has a farther view distance for characters  then WAR and AOC two newer MMO games.

Overall, this is one pathetic review. It is written more like a forum " I am rage quiting x game because" post on a forum.

Originally posted by Jeffery.h

Originally posted by rhinok

Originally posted by Jeffery.h

...

Dispute what you want, over 20k players logged into 1 server at 1 time is impressive to say the least. What game besides eve online can boast higher single server peak time loads greater?

 

That would be impressive if it was true, but it's far from the case.  The server was built to handle up to 10k concurrent players.  It's highly unlikely the EU server has ever had close to that.  The largest event on records was an allegedly 2k player WAR soon after launch.  Since then, numbers have dwindled and it's unlikely there are even 2k logged in at any one time.  The best estimates for total overall membership for the EU server capped at 18k TOTAL players (not concurrent).  That estimate is based, in large part, on the figures I gathered from the in-game clan journal, which had ~15k total clan characters as of 05/23/2009.  I confirmed that the clan membership total included characters that quit the game without first leaving their clans and it included characters that were deleted without quitting their clans.  As such, the ~15k total clan membership count is a maximum value, but probably much higher than the actual live clan player count.

How did myself and others arrive at the max ~18k estimate?  Since Darkfall is so heavily clan-oriented, it's no big stretch to assume that most players, especially those who stay beyond their initial month, belong to clans.  As such, most active players are probably clan member, which means the active players out of the ~15, number quality as "most players".  Even assuming generous 25% active non-clan member count, the number is under 4k.  Add that to a conservative 14k (clan members - 1k) and you arrive at an estimated ~18k total active subscriber count for EU.  The exact formula is:

(~15k clan characters- invalid clan characters + non-clan characters) = total subscriber count (1 chat/account)

So, simply put, your 20k concurrent number is bullshit...

~Ripper

Based on clan creation numbers in first 5 days of NA-1. Assuming 75% of players are not in a guild yet. if you run around a city on NA-1 or anywhere, you will notice most players are NOT in a guild yet.

 

Oh an I HIGHLY doubt all those players joined clans and quit in the first 5 days of the game. 

:-) feel stupid now?
 

No, why would he feel stupid? The servers weren't built to house 20k players online at one time yet... So, him calling you a liar for saying one server had 20k people online at one time ( concurrent users ), is exactly as he called it. Bullshit.

Originally posted by Varking

Originally posted by Jeffery.h

Originally posted by rhinok

Originally posted by Jeffery.h

...

Dispute what you want, over 20k players logged into 1 server at 1 time is impressive to say the least. What game besides eve online can boast higher single server peak time loads greater?

 

That would be impressive if it was true, but it's far from the case.  The server was built to handle up to 10k concurrent players.  It's highly unlikely the EU server has ever had close to that.  The largest event on records was an allegedly 2k player WAR soon after launch.  Since then, numbers have dwindled and it's unlikely there are even 2k logged in at any one time.  The best estimates for total overall membership for the EU server capped at 18k TOTAL players (not concurrent).  That estimate is based, in large part, on the figures I gathered from the in-game clan journal, which had ~15k total clan characters as of 05/23/2009.  I confirmed that the clan membership total included characters that quit the game without first leaving their clans and it included characters that were deleted without quitting their clans.  As such, the ~15k total clan membership count is a maximum value, but probably much higher than the actual live clan player count.

How did myself and others arrive at the max ~18k estimate?  Since Darkfall is so heavily clan-oriented, it's no big stretch to assume that most players, especially those who stay beyond their initial month, belong to clans.  As such, most active players are probably clan member, which means the active players out of the ~15, number quality as "most players".  Even assuming generous 25% active non-clan member count, the number is under 4k.  Add that to a conservative 14k (clan members - 1k) and you arrive at an estimated ~18k total active subscriber count for EU.  The exact formula is:

(~15k clan characters- invalid clan characters + non-clan characters) = total subscriber count (1 chat/account)

So, simply put, your 20k concurrent number is bullshit...

~Ripper

Based on clan creation numbers in first 5 days of NA-1. Assuming 75% of players are not in a guild yet. if you run around a city on NA-1 or anywhere, you will notice most players are NOT in a guild yet.

 

Oh an I HIGHLY doubt all those players joined clans and quit in the first 5 days of the game. 

:-) feel stupid now?
 

No, why would he feel stupid? The servers weren't built to house 20k players online at one time yet... So, him calling you a liar for saying one server had 20k people online at one time ( concurrent users ), is exactly as he called it. Bullshit.

Yeah, I was going to refute the 20k concurrent players comment as well, but Rhinok did a fine job of it.

However, couldn't help but notice how perfectly Jeffrey has fallen into the rabid DF fan way of "debate". Rhinok specifically calls him out on the 20k concurrent users statement, and then provides information to prove why it's BS, such as how the servers were only set up to support up to 10k players - per AV themselves (whatever that's worth).

As only a rabid DF fan can, Jeffrey completely ignores that and focuses instead on the percentage of clanned players on NA-1. That, of course has nothing to do with what rhinok posted, nor why he posted it (which was in support of refuting the 20k concurrent players statement). 

Still, I'm certain Tasos, Darth and javac will be proud to have another member in their little Propaganda Brigade.






 

Originally posted by Jeffery.h

I am a little worked up that Euro-gamer gave such a low review, based mostly on bugs, or game mechanics that do not exist as of the last expansion. I also bealive that euro-gamer made too much of player running around naked fighting. In Darkfall I can say from experience 1 player wearing armor, using crafted weapons is more then a match for 4-5 naked players. I will demonstrate this in the video. With a naked zerg on 1 player wearing high end gear. I am assuming he was a 10hr old character in some basic armor who got killed by a naked 3 month old toon. yea...... level 1 vs level 80 basicly there.

The fact that the review blatently got so many game mechanics WRONG really frustrates me. The review claims dowtime in the start of the game is excessive, and that goblins are hard. I would like to show in a video 1 brand new character going out minutes after logging into the game and killing a dozen goblins before ever resting. I would also like to show the duration of resting, less then 1 minute of downtime for 5-10 minutes of constant battle. In wow you must rest for 20-30 seconds between every pull, fighting for 10 minutes before resting for 1 minute in my mind is not bad at all. Surpising this person didn't eat food either, he mentioned wow enough. In wow if you rest and don't eat it takes in some cases several minutes to regen fully. In darkfall its less without food, and even less with food. Had he used even the most basic short duration food he would never have to rest longer then 1 minute ever.

I do not bealive a proper review was done. The fact is the reviewer sounds like he was just bad at the game. If a player can not go out and kill a dozen goblins right after logging into the game before ever resting he is just plane bad. It is a twitch and player skill based MMO game after all. Goblins are like Wolves in WoW starting area, they drop so fast you can practicly kill them in your sleep, especialy since expansion.



Kieron Gillan says .....


Darkfall's just launched in the US and its expansion has gone live, after all. But as a game, it's just not there yet, its rewards too distant and the road there too barren to recommend to fellow travellers.

Yet he admits here he has not played the game in over a month. "But the actual playtime was actually a month or so back, and I've been trying to work out exactly the right angle on it since..."


This guy didn't even play the expansion. Or any of the patches in the last month. Over 90% of all bug fixes and content added to the game since launch happend in the last month. That is not oppinion it is fact. His article is filled with incorrect information. Before this review ever came out, rest duration was changed. Skilling up was changed. Players take EXTRA damage if they are naked making it suicide. All mobs where adjusted in difficulty so they have less HP making it easier.

Over 60hrs of straight questing was added, more then doubling content already in the game with the Title System.

Also he played on Euro server as a 1 day old character. Meaning he knows nothing. Of course players killed him all the time, imagine a level 1 mage attacking a level 80 mage in World of Warcraft.
Of course the mobs where hard, he has played for 1 day. How hard are the mobs you kill in WoW, EQ, WAR, on day 1 in your first 10 hours.

If they wanted to do a real re-review they would have waited for NA-1 and reviewed with the expansion, on a fresh server, where the reviewer had half a chance.


The reviewer talks extensively about how reviewers are paid by word count. Making it all too obvious why he goes off on tangents and over 50% of his article is MMO theory rather the actualy based on the game. He does not lay out criteria, scoring guidelines, point system. He just ends with a 4/10 after 4 pages of bitching how the game is too hard and "unlike wow".

He stresses that the controls are hard for over 1 page. Going into detail many times how the game is not like wow. Actualy players can auto switch weapons, cast a spell, and switch back to previous weapon with 1 key press by setting up keybindings to fit their needs. But rather then research how to do that, he says it is just hard.

I am just in shock of his review. It added a lot of fancy words, but it was filled with " unlike WoW " refrences. The reviewer did not refence any other game besides lineage 2, in passing saying it was only game he hated more then Darkfall.

He also complains extensively about running up mountains. Funny how no one mentions that much in WAR or AOC, two games given high reviews that ultimatly didn't live up to the hype. Like in AOC and WAR some mountains you can run up, and some you can't. Why a common occurance in even big budget MMO games, like terrain climbing would even mentioned is beyond me. WoW was one of the first popular MMO games to actualy place full restritions on mountains making them 100% impassible as a barrier to seperate zones. SWG, EQ, Ultima, AO..... many others. It is a very common feature. One most players actually never think much about.

Also while on subject of environment. Since he didn't play expansion he has not seen the weather system. A huge environment upgrade IMO. He makes no mention of terrain being used to hide, or wearing brown armor to blend into trees.  No mention of true 3d sound, a critical element of sneaking up on enemies, or finding targets.

Graphicly, the game looks better then WAR lets be honest, It actualy looks better then war and has a farther view distance for characters  then WAR and AOC two newer MMO games.

Overall, this is one pathetic review. It is written more like a forum " I am rage quiting x game because" post on a forum.

• He wrote the review prior to the expansion going live - the review is accurate for when it was written.  He mentioned that there has been an expansion, which is pretty much where his responsibility ends.  A review is obviously specific to a point in time.  When he played, the game was pretty much still in paid beta state.
• To the best of my knowledge, low level mobs weren't changed substantially in the expansion - mid to high level difficulty mobs were.  Skills were changed to level up more quickly, which can make fighting mobs easier faster.
• Running up the mountains is a single, but obvious example of how the game is flawed, as I mentioned in my previous post.  It's just one of many flaws.
• Here's an excerpt of my own experiences as a new character (May, 2009):

 Originally posted by kishe

there are easy monsters near every city...i suggest moving away from the starter areas, i did so and ive only got pked twice this week

You can see where your guildies are by the green G's moving around the map

Every brand new player is supposed to instinctively know that, right? Aventurine needs to do something to dramatically improve the new player experience. As an example, I created a brand new character last night. Since I'm not going to re-sub, I have no vested interest in the character I've been playing the last few weeks, so it was easy to just delete him and start over. I got my starter quests and headed to the nearest goblin spawn:

• There were hardly any players in my entire region and none hunting goblins, which meant I was on my own, with a leafblade, against 4 goblins. Since I've been playing a few weeks, I know that their individual and ancillary aggro ranges are huge, so I did my best to split the spawn, otherwise I'd have been toast. A truly new player won't necesarily know this and will probably get killed pretty quickly, unless there are other players around to draw aggro. Minus those other players, just doing the first newbie quest can be pretty frustrating.

•  After taking 2 down solo with my leafblade, I was PKed (while looting) by a red (same race, btw) who was camping the goblins. I rested up and went back, this time looking for him. I figured if nobody took him out, he'd keep doing it. I couldn't find him, so I killed a couple more goblins. Like I said in the bullet above, there wasn't anybody else killing goblins, so I had to split the pulls as best I could. I used trees to hide behind and draw them Just as I was about to start looting, boom! Headshot with a mana missile. Since I actually had some health still, I locked on my assailant (same guy, btw) and started strafing back and forth towards him, trying to avoid his missiles so I could attack him. I was able to actually get up to him, but I was flailing away with my leafblade (I'd yet to be able to loot a single mob and I had 0 skill, since I'd only ever had my starter blade equipped), whereas my opponent had obviously higher skill, decent armor and basically nuked me to death once I got in melee range (having no other options).

So, within my first 1/2 hour on my new character, I got PKed twice, wasn't able to gain any skill points and wasn't able to loot anything. Only the fact that I had any experience with the game (knew to look for goblins near town, knew they had huge aggro range and that I'd have to be careful since no other players were around to draw aggro) at all made it even slightly enjoyable, otherwise, I would have been even more frustrated with it than I already was. All-in-all, as a new player experience, it sucked.

After healing up, I decided to leave town in a different direction and find another spawn. I did, and it was close to town, but it was a much harder spawn due to their being goblin fighters and shamans, not just scouts. Once again, there weren't any other players there (at first), so I had to pull, hide, etc.., painstakingly slow, one at a time, run back, rest to heal, run out to loot, etc... It was doable, but tedious. Another player did come in after a while, but he tried to crouch inside my melee range while I was swinging at goblins, so I just let him get killed. I'd completed one of my two starter missions, but still had yet to see a single goblin axe for my second. It wasn't until a couple of hours later (yes, hours) that other players came and I was able to fight more openly, loot a staff, start training mana missile and heal self before I finally found my four axes and could complete both quests.

Eventually, I was able to loot some gear, get about 100 gold coins, level up some skills and complete my two quests, but it took several hours, total, two PKs and reliance upon other players being in the area to draw aggro in order to do so. I'm ok with FFA Loot, PvP, and PK'ing, but should the new player experience be this hard, even for an experienced player? New players should be encouraged to play further, not repelled.

So, back when I played the game (May,2009, the third month of release), the mobs weren't particularly easy and downtime was plentiful if there weren't enough other players around to mitigate aggro.  My rest skill DID go up quite a bit until I was able to get better weapons, skill up, etc...  When there are other players around, all killing goblins, it's pretty easy to snag a spare goblin and kill him, but not so easy when you're on your own and being hit by 3 or 4 of them.  On top  of that, until you can loot a non-starter weapon, you can't skill up.

~Ripper

Originally posted by WSIMike

Originally posted by Varking

Originally posted by Jeffery.h

Originally posted by rhinok

Originally posted by Jeffery.h

...

Dispute what you want, over 20k players logged into 1 server at 1 time is impressive to say the least. What game besides eve online can boast higher single server peak time loads greater?

 

That would be impressive if it was true, but it's far from the case.  The server was built to handle up to 10k concurrent players.  It's highly unlikely the EU server has ever had close to that.  The largest event on records was an allegedly 2k player WAR soon after launch.  Since then, numbers have dwindled and it's unlikely there are even 2k logged in at any one time.  The best estimates for total overall membership for the EU server capped at 18k TOTAL players (not concurrent).  That estimate is based, in large part, on the figures I gathered from the in-game clan journal, which had ~15k total clan characters as of 05/23/2009.  I confirmed that the clan membership total included characters that quit the game without first leaving their clans and it included characters that were deleted without quitting their clans.  As such, the ~15k total clan membership count is a maximum value, but probably much higher than the actual live clan player count.

How did myself and others arrive at the max ~18k estimate?  Since Darkfall is so heavily clan-oriented, it's no big stretch to assume that most players, especially those who stay beyond their initial month, belong to clans.  As such, most active players are probably clan member, which means the active players out of the ~15, number quality as "most players".  Even assuming generous 25% active non-clan member count, the number is under 4k.  Add that to a conservative 14k (clan members - 1k) and you arrive at an estimated ~18k total active subscriber count for EU.  The exact formula is:

(~15k clan characters- invalid clan characters + non-clan characters) = total subscriber count (1 chat/account)

So, simply put, your 20k concurrent number is bullshit...

~Ripper

Based on clan creation numbers in first 5 days of NA-1. Assuming 75% of players are not in a guild yet. if you run around a city on NA-1 or anywhere, you will notice most players are NOT in a guild yet.

 

Oh an I HIGHLY doubt all those players joined clans and quit in the first 5 days of the game. 

:-) feel stupid now?

No, why would he feel stupid? The servers weren't built to house 20k players online at one time yet... So, him calling you a liar for saying one server had 20k people online at one time ( concurrent users ), is exactly as he called it. Bullshit.

Yeah, I was going to refute the 20k concurrent players comment as well, but Rhinok did a fine job of it.

However, couldn't help but notice how perfectly Jeffrey has fallen into the rabid DF fan way of "debate". Rhinok specifically calls him out on the 20k concurrent users statement, and then provides information to prove why it's BS, such as how the servers were only set up to support up to 10k players - per AV themselves (whatever that's worth).

As only a rabid DF fan can, Jeffrey completely ignores that and focuses instead on the percentage of clanned players on NA-1. That, of course has nothing to do with what rhinok posted, nor why he posted it (which was in support of refuting the 20k concurrent players statement). 

Still, I'm certain Tasos, Darth and javac will be proud to have another member in their little Propaganda Brigade.

For somebody so incensed about the "facts" in the review, Jeffrey.h isn't particularly concerned with his own unsupportable figures.  Even Javac agreed with me on many points in the "An objective look into Darkfall" thread. He also backed down from his 40k player estimate to 20k, based primarily on my groundwork, and then even lower to 18k when he referenced a post from the official boards.

• My figures were from May (clearly stated in my reply), obviously against the EU server population
• The 10k concurrent reference is from Tasos, himself
• I have figures and logic to back up my numbers - Jeffrey.h only has whatever he pulled out of his nether regions...

~Ripper

 

~Ripper

All i got to ask you ripper........  why do you care so much about putting down a game you don't play?

I understand you had a bad expeirane, ok I get it.  But the game is way better then EU-1 launch now.

Yes they did fix some low level mobs. IE goblins.

Maybe my estimates are overly optimistic, but yours are surely the other end of the spectrum. Lets be honest since NA launched, several thousand new players have started the game. To bealive 18k or even 28k, is a little under-rated. It is simply not possible, with the level of activity on NA-1 server. Population wise NA-1 is way more populated then I ever saw the EU server.

As for the review, it was written before perhaps, but it was posted 14 days after an expansion came out. Who posts a re-review of a game 14days after and expansion and major changes to a game without playing it. That is just crazy.

Obviosly if it scored a 4 before the expansion even a simple minded person like the reviewer for euro-gamer would have had to give a higher score if he played on NA-1 for a NA launch, with the new expansion. It is a different play experience starting new on a server then piddling around with a newb character on a server fulll of advanced characters.

But the quistion remains. Why are you so concerned with defending euro gamer and this review?

One last thing ripper, NA server has so many people at goblins now its pretty insane. Plus the goblins HP reduced. So yes the main gribe with your play experience is fixed, you can kill goblins and loot them now.  So no one really has any problems killing them.

I am not a fanboy of DF persay, but I do like the game. I do not troll DF forums because it is filled with trolls who do not even have accounts. I play AOC and WAR casualy, I also play a few free to play MMO games. Darkfall is the most fun for me right now. I intend to play SWTOR when it comes out, and try aion.

Bottom line you had a shitty new player experience so you are turning people away from what is a great game. I read comments like yours for 2.5 months before trying Darkfall. I tried it and loved it. Yes playing on EU, high ping, hard goblins, being ganked and all. I still liked it regardless.

Darkfall provides something other MMO's in the genre do not. If you don't like it fine, don't play it. But why turn people away from it when you, yourself never actualy gave the game a chance.

Originally posted by Jeffery.h

 

~Ripper

 

All i got to ask you ripper........  why do you care so much about putting down a game you don't play?

I understand you had a bad expeirane, ok I get it.  But the game is way better then EU-1 launch now.

Yes they did fix some low level mobs. IE goblins.

Maybe my estimates are overly optimistic, but yours are surely the other end of the spectrum. Lets be honest since NA launched, several thousand new players have started the game. To bealive 18k or even 28k, is a little under-rated. It is simply not possible, with the level of activity on NA-1 server. Population wise NA-1 is way more populated then I ever saw the EU server.

As for the review, it was written before perhaps, but it was posted 14 days after an expansion came out. Who posts a re-review of a game 14days after and expansion and major changes to a game without playing it. That is just crazy.

Obviosly if it scored a 4 before the expansion even a simple minded person like the reviewer for euro-gamer would have had to give a higher score if he played on NA-1 for a NA launch, with the new expansion. It is a different play experience starting new on a server then piddling around with a newb character on a server fulll of advanced characters.

But the quistion remains. Why are you so concerned with defending euro gamer and this review?

Again... he isn't talking about total population, but the amount of people logged in at one time on a single server is nowhere near 20k. Why do you keep ignoring this? You tried to pitch the idea to people in this thread that there were 20k concurrent users, which would mean people logged into the same server at the same time. DarkFall Developers told us that the servers are aimed to handle 10k at once so you tried to spin the total number of players for a server and make that out to be the amount of people logged in playing the game at the same time. Then when you get proven wrong you just ignore that and start going on about other things. And no, we can't just throw out the rereview. The game could have been a 4/10 before the expansion to them and still been a 4/10 after. If you have played most MMORPGs during expansions you would understand that while some things get fixed, at the same time other things get broken.

Originally posted by Varking

Originally posted by Jeffery.h

 

~Ripper

 

All i got to ask you ripper........  why do you care so much about putting down a game you don't play?

I understand you had a bad expeirane, ok I get it.  But the game is way better then EU-1 launch now.

Yes they did fix some low level mobs. IE goblins.

Maybe my estimates are overly optimistic, but yours are surely the other end of the spectrum. Lets be honest since NA launched, several thousand new players have started the game. To bealive 18k or even 28k, is a little under-rated. It is simply not possible, with the level of activity on NA-1 server. Population wise NA-1 is way more populated then I ever saw the EU server.

As for the review, it was written before perhaps, but it was posted 14 days after an expansion came out. Who posts a re-review of a game 14days after and expansion and major changes to a game without playing it. That is just crazy.

Obviosly if it scored a 4 before the expansion even a simple minded person like the reviewer for euro-gamer would have had to give a higher score if he played on NA-1 for a NA launch, with the new expansion. It is a different play experience starting new on a server then piddling around with a newb character on a server fulll of advanced characters.

But the quistion remains. Why are you so concerned with defending euro gamer and this review?

Again... he isn't talking about total population, but the amount of people logged in at one time on a single server is nowhere near 20k. Why do you keep ignoring this? You tried to pitch the idea to people in this thread that there were 20k concurrent users, which would mean people logged into the same server at the same time. DarkFall Developers told us that the servers are aimed to handle 10k at once so you tried to spin the total number of players for a server and make that out to be the amount of people logged in playing the game at the same time. Then when you get proven wrong you just ignore that and start going on about other things. And no, we can't just throw out the rereview. The game could have been a 4/10 before the expansion to them and still been a 4/10 after. If you have played most MMORPGs during expansions you would understand that while some things get fixed, at the same time other things get broken.

I concede the point. Will you read the rest of my comments. Second the 10k is on the EU server. To bealive NA is not over 10k or that EU was not upgraded is silly. But fine. You win. Now read the rest of my comments and respond to them.

Why come back to a single point over and over said in error? If your biggest defense of attacking  darkfall is a mis-interpretation on my part then thats pretty sad.

Originally posted by Wizardry

IMO a 4/10 is about all you can give any game that is designed around PVP.Once you design a PVP game,you lose 50% of a games over all potential,so a PERFECT PVP game[in the MMORPG setting] would only be a 5/10.

so EVE is a complete failure that shouild be getting under 5/10 reviews?

Originally posted by jusomdude

I didn't read the review since I've played the game myself and don't really care to, but I will say that's it's pretty unprofessional for Eurogamer to go ahead and review the game when AV told them to forget about it. Not that AV hasn't been unprofessional themselves, but two wrongs don't make a right.

What world do you live in? Do you think every movie given a shit rating by Siskel & Ebert ( may they both R.I.P. ) was reviewed at the request pf the movie's directors/producers/studios?

Do you thinkomost of the games out there, both singleplayer, multiplayer, or mmo that were given shit ratings were reviewed at the request of the devs or publishers?

The answer is no, usually because the makers knew they were shit and how the reviews would turn out.

It is not a "professional requirement" to need a developers blessing or permission before you review their game.

And since we're on the topic of reviews, when the hell is mmorpg.com going to finally do a review of this POS? Are you guys waiting for Tasos to "pre-approve" you as well?

Originally posted by Jeffery.h
 

All i got to ask you ripper........  why do you care so much about putting down a game you don't play?

I understand you had a bad expeirane, ok I get it.  But the game is way better then EU-1 launch now.

Yes they did fix some low level mobs. IE goblins.

Maybe my estimates are overly optimistic, but yours are surely the other end of the spectrum. Lets be honest since NA launched, several thousand new players have started the game. To bealive 18k or even 28k, is a little under-rated. It is simply not possible, with the level of activity on NA-1 server. Population wise NA-1 is way more populated then I ever saw the EU server.

As for the review, it was written before perhaps, but it was posted 14 days after an expansion came out. Who posts a re-review of a game 14days after and expansion and major changes to a game without playing it. That is just crazy.

Obviosly if it scored a 4 before the expansion even a simple minded person like the reviewer for euro-gamer would have had to give a higher score if he played on NA-1 for a NA launch, with the new expansion. It is a different play experience starting new on a server then piddling around with a newb character on a server fulll of advanced characters.

But the quistion remains. Why are you so concerned with defending euro gamer and this review?

 

One last thing ripper, NA server has so many people at goblins now its pretty insane. Plus the goblins HP reduced. So yes the main gribe with your play experience is fixed, you can kill goblins and loot them now.  So no one really has any problems killing them.

I am not a fanboy of DF persay, but I do like the game. I do not troll DF forums because it is filled with trolls who do not even have accounts. I play AOC and WAR casualy, I also play a few free to play MMO games. Darkfall is the most fun for me right now. I intend to play SWTOR when it comes out, and try aion.

Bottom line you had a shitty new player experience so you are turning people away from what is a great game. I read comments like yours for 2.5 months before trying Darkfall. I tried it and loved it. Yes playing on EU, high ping, hard goblins, being ganked and all. I still liked it regardless.

Darkfall provides something other MMO's in the genre do not. If you don't like it fine, don't play it. But why turn people away from it when you, yourself never actualy gave the game a chance.

• What you don't get is that I'm not "putting down" Darkfall.  I'm not bashing it.  I'm not attempting to turn people away from it.  I'm critiquing it and in a more "professional" manner and with more detail than the reviewer did, which is--allegedly--what many of you want. Many of you asked why the score was so low.  I answered the question. Personally, I want to see Darkfall succeed, but that doesn't blind me to the fact that it's had and continues to have problems  My initial comments were a direct response to players villifying the reviewer for giving a low score, but without providing enough detail.  My comments demonstrate the number of issues that the game has, or had at the point in time I played and the point in time in which the reviewer played, which is--ultimately--qualifiies why it deseerved such a  low score.  Should he come back and review the game again, now that the "expansion" has been implemented?  Maybe - I was considering it, myself.

• Regarding the expansion, some things do seem to have changed for the bettter, but there's still a lot of work to be done.  Some skill grind has been alleviated, but not all (which is why I gave the example of players sparring their clan mates to achieve max skill leveling).  Some mob behavior has been changed, but is it enough?  The UI, chat and controls are still overly cumbersome.  The animations are still painful.  There are still non-sensical things like running up vertical faces and falling from relatively extreme heights without killing yourself.  These still undermine what Darkfall could be.

• Why am I concerned about defending the reviewer?  Because I can look at all apects of a game relatively objectively.  I don't have blinders on. I can look at various aspects of a game based upon it's own merits and detriments, without having to relate it to another game or genre. You're so upset with the review that you're unable to see truth in it.

• My "shitty new player experience" didn't turn me away from Darkfall.  Frankly, I think experiences like mine are why Aventurine has made the changes they have - it's called constructive criticism and player feedback.   Goblins have fewer HP and more loot now?  That means AVenturine is listening to it's players.

• Regarding the NA population - so what?  It just launched in the US. When it launched in Europe, it was flooded with characters, too.  There were queues and the newbie zones were overflowing, making it hard to actually complete any quests.  4 months later it became a ghost town.  The figures I gathered were 3 months AFTER launch and they were pretty dismal.  Let's wait a few months and see what the numbers for each server look like, before you can be justified in bragging about how populated the server is.  My figures are specific to the EU region, which I stated.  They're as accurate as they can be. Estimating low?  I doubt it, at least in regards to Europe.  I can't speak to the NA server and, honestly, neither can you until the dust settles.

~Ripper

The worst part about MMO reviews is that reviewers treat all MMOs as being part of the same genre - but the simple fact is, they aren't ; there are many different genres within the MMO genre that cater towards different players and different playstyles, similar to how there are many different games within the category of Sports Games, and not all are equally appealing.

The fact of the matter is, you can't accurately review a sandbox MMO, or a PVP MMO from the perspective of someone who doesn't enjoy sandbox MMOs or PVP mmos.

Originally posted by Tenebrion

The worst part about MMO reviews is that reviewers treat all MMOs as being part of the same genre - but the simple fact is, they aren't ; there are many different genres within the MMO genre that cater towards different players and different playstyles, similar to how there are many different games within the category of Sports Games, and not all are equally appealing.

The fact of the matter is, you can't accurately review a sandbox MMO, or a PVP MMO from the perspective of someone who doesn't enjoy sandbox MMOs or PVP mmos.

While I think there's some truth to that , how is it relevant, since the reviewer seems to revel in the PvP within Darkfall?  Not only does he like it, but he wants it even deadlier, as he puts it.

~Ripper

Originally posted by tvalentine

Originally posted by Wizardry

IMO a 4/10 is about all you can give any game that is designed around PVP.Once you design a PVP game,you lose 50% of a games over all potential,so a PERFECT PVP game[in the MMORPG setting] would only be a 5/10.

 

so EVE is a complete failure that shouild be getting under 5/10 reviews?

Eve is a a bit different in the sense that it should be reviewed in two parts:
 

Eve: 9/10

Eve Players: 2/10

Originally posted by cfurlin

Originally posted by tvalentine

Originally posted by Wizardry

IMO a 4/10 is about all you can give any game that is designed around PVP.Once you design a PVP game,you lose 50% of a games over all potential,so a PERFECT PVP game[in the MMORPG setting] would only be a 5/10.

 

so EVE is a complete failure that shouild be getting under 5/10 reviews?

Eve is a a bit different in the sense that it should be reviewed in two parts:
 

Eve: 9/10

Eve Players: 2/10

lol couldn't agree more, EvE is a great game, but its community fails.  Most of the players are out to scam you.  #1 rule of EvE online don't trust anyone!

I thought the review was well-written.  Better than the first, and MUCH better than that laughable nowgamer review.

Its a fair review.

i always thought 2/10 was slightly unfair . i ve never played darkfall . but for a game to only be given 20 percent i would suggest it would have to be almost totally unplayable . i would say at 40 percent a game proberbly has something to offer but is nt a paticulary good game . i think darkfalls destined to be a free to play microtransaction game .