Originally posted by Illyssia

WAR had the same problem. Balance in large-scale RvR or PvP is very hard to achieve.  It's why after the initial novelty of the game wares off a lot of players realise that the PvP isn't really all that much fun and the outcome predictable from the outset. WoW, of course, went the other way with small-scale PvP in their arenas, and I think that spawned the hordes of PvP nuts who seem to swing mmorpg game development these days, but even that has huge class imbalances, though not zerg imbalances.  The mmorpg genre has been really hurt by the PvP nuts, I often wish they spent more time on delivering an immersive and novel game experience, and not ganking or zergfests.

You do realize that MMOs were created by the "PvP nuts"

DarkSun Online 

Meridian 59

UO

it was only later that mainstream MMOs started to cater the "PvE Carebears" with the  EQ And Asheron Call with the idea of PvE servers.   The roots of MMOs are PvP that is why even games like WOW have so many PvP players.

Originally posted by fiontar

The only room for strategy in Aion Fortress battles is use and defense of Artifacts. Good luck finding people willing to forgo the main battle for those side efforts though.

There is no strategy at the site of the siege.  There is no need for organized sub groups. In fact, if you separate a small group from the zerg, you are just making them obvious targets for the opposing zerg.

There's no real strategy in the actual battle vs. the Fortress Lord either. 30  minutes for your zerg to bring the door down. 40-60 minutes to bring the Fortress Lord down. The most boring RvR experience I have ever had in any MMO with a similar element.

Except they will get rolled and owned every time when the other side activates an artifact. Some of them can be the very reason you win a fortress.

People coordinate zerg to beat the boss. If you don't zerg the boss you can't beat it before time runs out;) easy as that. Also alot people makes it alot easier. can have people outside to incoming zerg gank squads.

If you are one of the first to 50 doing the zerging, good times ahead.  If you are are slow to level up and you run head on into the zerg, I can see  you moving on to a new game.  There will be bands of players out there ruining your leveling, that is a guarantee.

Originally posted by rutaq

Originally posted by Illyssia

WAR had the same problem. Balance in large-scale RvR or PvP is very hard to achieve.  It's why after the initial novelty of the game wares off a lot of players realise that the PvP isn't really all that much fun and the outcome predictable from the outset. WoW, of course, went the other way with small-scale PvP in their arenas, and I think that spawned the hordes of PvP nuts who seem to swing mmorpg game development these days, but even that has huge class imbalances, though not zerg imbalances.  The mmorpg genre has been really hurt by the PvP nuts, I often wish they spent more time on delivering an immersive and novel game experience, and not ganking or zergfests.

 

You do realize that MMOs were created by the "PvP nuts"

 

DarkSun Online 

Meridian 59

UO

 

it was only later that mainstream MMOs started to cater the "PvE Carebears" with the  EQ And Asheron Call with the idea of PvE servers.   The roots of MMOs are PvP that is why even games like WOW have so many PvP players.

 

 

PvP is an afterthought in many MMO's these days.  The balancing you have to do to both PvE and PvP becomes a headache to the dev team and the players.  MMO's may have its roots in PvP, but the casual player is the cash cow now.  MMO's cater more to the casual, as you call them "PvE Carebears", because they  comprise the majority of the playerbase of MMO's.  PvP MMO's is a niche market now.

Originally posted by junzo316

Originally posted by rutaq

Originally posted by Illyssia

WAR had the same problem. Balance in large-scale RvR or PvP is very hard to achieve.  It's why after the initial novelty of the game wares off a lot of players realise that the PvP isn't really all that much fun and the outcome predictable from the outset. WoW, of course, went the other way with small-scale PvP in their arenas, and I think that spawned the hordes of PvP nuts who seem to swing mmorpg game development these days, but even that has huge class imbalances, though not zerg imbalances.  The mmorpg genre has been really hurt by the PvP nuts, I often wish they spent more time on delivering an immersive and novel game experience, and not ganking or zergfests.

 

You do realize that MMOs were created by the "PvP nuts"

 

DarkSun Online 

Meridian 59

UO

 

it was only later that mainstream MMOs started to cater the "PvE Carebears" with the  EQ And Asheron Call with the idea of PvE servers.   The roots of MMOs are PvP that is why even games like WOW have so many PvP players.

 

 

PvP is an afterthought in many MMO's these days.  The balancing you have to do to both PvE and PvP becomes a headache to the dev team and the players.  MMO's may have its roots in PvP, but the casual player is the cash cow now.  MMO's cater more to the casual, as you call them "PvE Carebears", because they  comprise the majority of the playerbase of MMO's.  PvP MMO's is a niche market now.

I think I'd also add to clarify my point above that mmorpg only really broke into mainstream gaming with WoW. The majority of players you come across in any other modern mmorpg release have originated from that game. I think you only have to look at AoC and WAR in the recent past to note that game developers did try to develop massive PvP/RvR as a major game element in modern mmo. Aion follows in this tradition imo.

But if you look at the initial rush for WAR for example, you can see demand for a good PvP MMO is there. WAR just didn't turn out to be fun/polished enough to retain people.

 Well, yes that is true WAR had a lot of interest at launch, and I played it at launch. I think WAR, and AoC massive siege, exposed for me an issue with many recent mmo PvP games, it's hard to do everything well. I think maybe if they'd not bothered with the level game and just thrown everyone in at the start into a more polished "end-game" it might have worked out better for Mythic, they could have spent more time focusing on RvR and balancing the game. I think level-based mmo work better for PvE games. Certainly WoW PvP, which puts a special stat on the equipment, makes it into a separate game almost, and you even have special class skills for that, but they developed this from very little 5 years ago beyond basic flag-based world PvP and duelling. 

Originally posted by udinthrik

Is it just me or are the fort sieges just terrible? My computer can handle them fine, but DAMN that a ton of people.

 

Every time i get involved in a siege or defense, both sides just end up being at a stand off staring in awe at a sea of names without a clue what to do. With so many people it just seems chaotic and pointless with no strategy at all.One person.. hell one group dont feel like they are apart of anything.

 

Zergs are just ruining mmorpgs....

 

 

now im bummed out and have nothing to look forward too, the only entertaining thing to do is gank people...

Join a Legion.  Get on vent.  Assign a leader(s).  Organize.  Have fun.

I suppose the game could automatically place you in groups and give you objectives... that sounds familiar.  Ultimately though one would hope people aren't so retarded that they can't manage this on their own... apparently not.

Simply put:

The best PvP ever for an mmorpg (including fast responsive controls of the avatars) is found in World of Warcraft

The pure CHOICE in having arena (highly competitive skirmish LADDER based AND on ESPN featured)), tactical balanced numbered and leveled battles (10-15 men), operational balanced battles (40 men AV and Isle of Conquest) and ... the very pitched siege massive battles of 120/120 Lake WIntergrasp.

Add the daily open world PvP quests which mostly is one on one or two on two.

And you end up with having 5 totaly different kind of forms of PvP WHICH do NOT destroy the excellent PVE content.

How FAR can you fall behind as game developpers if you don't see the obvious.

Grtz Zerging people. but Zergs have NOTHING to do with PLAYER vs PLAYER combat.

Next.

Complaints about getting zerged?  "Y'er doin' it wrong"  Watch and take notes.

http://www.aionpax.com/news

"Zerging has nothing to do with player vs player combat"   Go play a varient of streetfighter 2 or mortal kombat if you want super controlled, extrememly fair, "i got better button pushing skills" pvp.   MMORPG's are not about 1vs1 its about group vs group, which is why they break classes down into healer type, tank type, dd/cc type.  If you want a fair skill based pvp game that is an mmo, you would have to remove levels and equipments, and only allow requested duels (yawn).  mmorpg pvp is all about how well you work together as a team and ganking strategy (including what to do when your getting ganked mid pull).

Originally posted by Zorndorf

Simply put:

The best PvP ever for an mmorpg (including fast responsive controls of the avatars) is found in World of Warcraft

The pure CHOICE in having arena (highly competitive skirmish LADDER based AND on ESPN featured)), tactical balanced numbered and leveled battles (10-15 men), operational balanced battles (40 men AV and Isle of Conquest) and ... the very pitched siege massive battles of 120/120 Lake WIntergrasp.

Add the daily open world PvP quests which mostly is one on one or two on two.

And you end up with having 5 totaly different kind of forms of PvP WHICH do NOT destroy the excellent PVE content.

How FAR can you fall behind as game developpers if you don't see the obvious.

Grtz Zerging people. but Zergs have NOTHING to do with PLAYER vs PLAYER combat.

Next.

You act as If WoW is the be all,end all pvp game. What reason does a pvper have to actually pvp other than getting gear off a vendor or attaining a title? 

You go on and on about different ways to pvp when none of that matters. The sad fact is players in WoW only care about getting pvp over with. Get in and out quick and get my reward.

WoW doesn't have mechanics like Alliances and territorial warfare its all instanced minigames and the big pvp maps like AV are even less appealing due to people either rushing to pve or turtling due to lack of skill.

The sad fact is WoWs pvp is all about item rewards and this makes it as deep as a puddle.

What does it matter if I could arena and run different size instance maps if it doesn't mean anything? You don't lose anything? 

You should play a game with real risk sometimes that focuses less on me me me me mechanics then maybe you would stop this WoW pvp praise.

Originally posted by metalhead980

Originally posted by Zorndorf

Simply put:

The best PvP ever for an mmorpg (including fast responsive controls of the avatars) is found in World of Warcraft

The pure CHOICE in having arena (highly competitive skirmish LADDER based AND on ESPN featured)), tactical balanced numbered and leveled battles (10-15 men), operational balanced battles (40 men AV and Isle of Conquest) and ... the very pitched siege massive battles of 120/120 Lake WIntergrasp.

Add the daily open world PvP quests which mostly is one on one or two on two.

And you end up with having 5 totaly different kind of forms of PvP WHICH do NOT destroy the excellent PVE content.

How FAR can you fall behind as game developpers if you don't see the obvious.

Grtz Zerging people. but Zergs have NOTHING to do with PLAYER vs PLAYER combat.

Next.

 

You act as If WoW is the be all,end all pvp game. What reason does a pvper have to actually pvp other than getting gear off a vendor or attaining a title? 

You go on and on about different ways to pvp when none of that matters. The sad fact is players in WoW only care about getting pvp over with. Get in and out quick and get my reward.

WoW doesn't have mechanics like Alliances and territorial warfare its all instanced minigames and the big pvp maps like AV are even less appealing due to people either rushing to pve or turtling due to lack of skill.

The sad fact is WoWs pvp is all about item rewards and this makes it as deep as a puddle.

What does it matter if I could arena and run different size instance maps if it doesn't mean anything? You don't lose anything? 

You should play a game with real risk sometimes that focuses less on me me me me mechanics then maybe you would stop this WoW pvp praise.

 

The real time risk when I play PvP in WOW is in the rated ladder based competition.

And the achievements of doing them (like Battle Master) which gives me status, mounts, titles and sometimes even ... real money.

By your reasoning, I would not find ANY competiton worthwhile.

I also play CHESS with the same ladder based system. I like it , I have a 1592 ELO rating. Rewards: a glass of whine.

My highest rating in WOW was a meager 1802 (not bad for a 54 year old dude). And I DO enjoy it all of the time.

Cataclsym will add a NEW (guild based and individual based) rating system for the Battlegrounds. I am curious how high I will end with my Holy Paladin and Rogue.

Nice, another new feature. My rogue took alone the HUT yesterday in AV, fought of a Shaman dude with nice tricks (just enough before the GY spawned to our site - I had to vanish against 4 attacking hordes, but killed the 2 dudes who were left behind. Just enough time - 2 minutes - before the Hut was respawned as Horde. So in the end I have masses of fun in AV with VERY different tactics and various characters.

That's PvP my friend. Not the "meaningless" zerg fests. When I want that, I always can fight in Lake Wintergrasp. 120/120 every night at primetime, but that's far more LESS challenging than the above tactical operational fights.

That's PvP to me. Meaningful rated PvP.... because I play and can do it 24/7 ... That's fun. And now comes this new BG competition. I am already looking for it to be the next challenge.

Originally posted by metalhead980

Originally posted by Zorndorf

Simply put:

The best PvP ever for an mmorpg (including fast responsive controls of the avatars) is found in World of Warcraft

The pure CHOICE in having arena (highly competitive skirmish LADDER based AND on ESPN featured)), tactical balanced numbered and leveled battles (10-15 men), operational balanced battles (40 men AV and Isle of Conquest) and ... the very pitched siege massive battles of 120/120 Lake WIntergrasp.

Add the daily open world PvP quests which mostly is one on one or two on two.

And you end up with having 5 totaly different kind of forms of PvP WHICH do NOT destroy the excellent PVE content.

How FAR can you fall behind as game developpers if you don't see the obvious.

Grtz Zerging people. but Zergs have NOTHING to do with PLAYER vs PLAYER combat.

Next.

 

You act as If WoW is the be all,end all pvp game. What reason does a pvper have to actually pvp other than getting gear off a vendor or attaining a title? 

You go on and on about different ways to pvp when none of that matters. The sad fact is players in WoW only care about getting pvp over with. Get in and out quick and get my reward.

WoW doesn't have mechanics like Alliances and territorial warfare its all instanced minigames and the big pvp maps like AV are even less appealing due to people either rushing to pve or turtling due to lack of skill.

The sad fact is WoWs pvp is all about item rewards and this makes it as deep as a puddle.

What does it matter if I could arena and run different size instance maps if it doesn't mean anything? You don't lose anything? 

You should play a game with real risk sometimes that focuses less on me me me me mechanics then maybe you would stop this WoW pvp praise.

 

Metal Even tho i do agree of most points i can't help but ask. You totally hate linear games and yet you troll the hell outta these forums. What motivates you to keep bashing something that the majority enjoy. Really nothing wrong with people liking different things. Whats shallow to one is the same for another. People say eves pvp is very deep. This is very far from the truth is all about killing someone who thinks your their "friend" thats not deep at all. I'm sorry its just people on these forums are complete idiots sometimes who can't stand not being the only one who is right. And yes wow has always been about me me me but society as a whole is the same. Get used to it.

Originally posted by Zorndorf

Originally posted by metalhead980

Originally posted by Zorndorf

Simply put:

The best PvP ever for an mmorpg (including fast responsive controls of the avatars) is found in World of Warcraft

The pure CHOICE in having arena (highly competitive skirmish LADDER based AND on ESPN featured)), tactical balanced numbered and leveled battles (10-15 men), operational balanced battles (40 men AV and Isle of Conquest) and ... the very pitched siege massive battles of 120/120 Lake WIntergrasp.

Add the daily open world PvP quests which mostly is one on one or two on two.

And you end up with having 5 totaly different kind of forms of PvP WHICH do NOT destroy the excellent PVE content.

How FAR can you fall behind as game developpers if you don't see the obvious.

Grtz Zerging people. but Zergs have NOTHING to do with PLAYER vs PLAYER combat.

Next.

 

You act as If WoW is the be all,end all pvp game. What reason does a pvper have to actually pvp other than getting gear off a vendor or attaining a title? 

You go on and on about different ways to pvp when none of that matters. The sad fact is players in WoW only care about getting pvp over with. Get in and out quick and get my reward.

WoW doesn't have mechanics like Alliances and territorial warfare its all instanced minigames and the big pvp maps like AV are even less appealing due to people either rushing to pve or turtling due to lack of skill.

The sad fact is WoWs pvp is all about item rewards and this makes it as deep as a puddle.

What does it matter if I could arena and run different size instance maps if it doesn't mean anything? You don't lose anything? 

You should play a game with real risk sometimes that focuses less on me me me me mechanics then maybe you would stop this WoW pvp praise.

 

 

The real time risk when I play PvP in WOW is in the rated ladder based competition.

And the achievements of doing them (like Battle Master) which gives me status, mounts, titles and sometimes even ... real money.

By your reasoning, I would not find ANY competiton worthwhile.

I also play CHESS with the same ladder based system. I like it , I have a 1592 ELO rating. Rewards: a glass of whine.

My highest rating in WOW was a meager 1802 (not bad for a 54 year old dude). And I DO enjoy it all of the time.

Cataclsym will add a NEW (guild based and individual based) rating system for the Battlegrounds. I am curious how high I will end with my Holy Paladin and Rogue.

Nice, another new feature. My rogue took alone the HUT yesterday in AV, fought of a Shaman dude with nice tricks (just enough before the GY spawned to our site - I had to vanish against 4 attacking hordes, but killed the 2 dudes who were left behind. Just enough time - 2 minutes - before the Hut was respawned as Horde. So in the end I have masses of fun in AV with VERY different tactics and various characters.

That's PvP my friend. Not the "meaningless" zerg fests. When I want that, I always can fight in Lake Wintergrasp. 120/120 every night at primetime, but that's far more LESS challenging than the above tactical operational fights.

That's PvP to me. Meaningful rated PvP.... because I play and can do it 24/7 ... That's fun. And now comes this new BG competition. I am already looking for it to be the next challenge.

 

 

Thats nice and while im glad you can find enjoyment in that. Please understand that some of us find that extremely limited.

You complain about a Zerg, I complain about lack of depth, risk and meaning. WoW doesn't offer everything you seem to gloss over this in your posts.

Originally posted by Frostbite05

Originally posted by metalhead980

Originally posted by Zorndorf

Simply put:

The best PvP ever for an mmorpg (including fast responsive controls of the avatars) is found in World of Warcraft

The pure CHOICE in having arena (highly competitive skirmish LADDER based AND on ESPN featured)), tactical balanced numbered and leveled battles (10-15 men), operational balanced battles (40 men AV and Isle of Conquest) and ... the very pitched siege massive battles of 120/120 Lake WIntergrasp.

Add the daily open world PvP quests which mostly is one on one or two on two.

And you end up with having 5 totaly different kind of forms of PvP WHICH do NOT destroy the excellent PVE content.

How FAR can you fall behind as game developpers if you don't see the obvious.

Grtz Zerging people. but Zergs have NOTHING to do with PLAYER vs PLAYER combat.

Next.

 

You act as If WoW is the be all,end all pvp game. What reason does a pvper have to actually pvp other than getting gear off a vendor or attaining a title? 

You go on and on about different ways to pvp when none of that matters. The sad fact is players in WoW only care about getting pvp over with. Get in and out quick and get my reward.

WoW doesn't have mechanics like Alliances and territorial warfare its all instanced minigames and the big pvp maps like AV are even less appealing due to people either rushing to pve or turtling due to lack of skill.

The sad fact is WoWs pvp is all about item rewards and this makes it as deep as a puddle.

What does it matter if I could arena and run different size instance maps if it doesn't mean anything? You don't lose anything? 

You should play a game with real risk sometimes that focuses less on me me me me mechanics then maybe you would stop this WoW pvp praise.

 

Metal Even tho i do agree of most points i can't help but ask. You totally hate linear games and yet you troll the hell outta these forums. What motivates you to keep bashing something that the majority enjoy. Really nothing wrong with people liking different things. Whats shallow to one is the same for another. People say eves pvp is very deep. This is very far from the truth is all about killing someone who thinks your their "friend" thats not deep at all. I'm sorry its just people on these forums are complete idiots sometimes who can't stand not being the only one who is right. And yes wow has always been about me me me but society as a whole is the same. Get used to it.

Sometimes I troll, Sometimes I have an actual discussion.

My post you quoted was not a troll post. It's a Fact that WoW doesn't offer everything yet our buddy loves to post how its mmorpg players gift from god.

As a pvp player myself I find WoWs pvp extremely limited, Since I did play WoW (for its pve) for a while I feel that I am atleast somewhat qualified to give an opinion.

WoW has glaring issues that people here seem to totally ignore like our friend Zorn.

As for your comment on EvE you talk of betrayal and meta game as its the only way to experience pvp in EvE. So  as you seem to have no idea what your talking about or atleast just seem to be commenting on what you've read I wont bother to post a write up on how truely complex and deep eve is.

As for the me me me aspect of human nature. These are video games that give us access to thousands of players on one server yet the only thing players in WoW care about is themselves. Guilds are a way to quickly farm items an Arena team or premade are ways to cheaply get quick ratings or honor for gear.

It's pretty sad actually, WoW is so popular because its as far as one could get to a mmo. Its a single player game with Co-op options this is proven by the popularity of that player base to things like Arena and 10 man raids that are incredibly small scale for a mmo.

Anyway I'm done, I could rip WoW apart head to toe before someone goes the fail route and brings up subscription numbers and that's no fun. Because we all know how much popularity equals quality * Suddenly flashbacks to a Backstreet boys Sales figure*

Thanks for reading.

Edit: Sorry about the off topic, to answer the "Zerg" issue with the OP It's simple bring more friends.

Originally posted by metalhead980

Anyway I'm done, I could rip WoW apart head to toe before someone goes the fail route and brings up subscription numbers and that's no fun. Because we all know how much popularity equals quality

Just to make a point...  the "fail route" would be to bring up subscription numbers to debunk your opinion.  Because popularity doesn't equate to quality.

Yet one can just as easily say the "fail route" is to mention popularity versus quality to claim your opinion is correct.

MMO developers care about one thing.. profit.  They don't care if you like their game or not, they are there to make money.  Which is why popularity is all that matters... why?  Simply because... guess who is making the most profit?

Is it WoW.. or DAoC or EvE... or any other example you want to bring in here.  That is developer point of view versus player point of view.  Which is why we see the same game being made over and over and over (basicly).

I don't play WoW... never liked any Blizzard game (personal opinion).  However, this logic path you chose to apply here... just seems a tad off.

Originally posted by Antarious

Originally posted by metalhead980

Anyway I'm done, I could rip WoW apart head to toe before someone goes the fail route and brings up subscription numbers and that's no fun. Because we all know how much popularity equals quality

 

 

Just to make a point...  the "fail route" would be to bring up subscription numbers to debunk your opinion.  Because popularity doesn't equate to quality.

 

Yet one can just as easily say the "fail route" is to mention popularity versus quality to claim your opinion is correct.

 

MMO developers care about one thing.. profit.  They don't care if you like their game or not, they are there to make money.  Which is why popularity is all that matters... why?  Simply because... guess who is making the most profit?

 

Is it WoW.. or DAoC or EvE... or any other example you want to bring in here.  That is developer point of view versus player point of view.  Which is why we see the same game being made over and over and over (basicly).

 

I don't play WoW... never liked any Blizzard game (personal opinion).  However, this logic path you chose to apply here... just seems a tad off.

 

 

I think it's also important to point out that popularity doesnt' mean lack of quality either.

If we can use the McDonlalds comparison that is so often used when talking about mmo's, McDonalds wouldn't be one of the top fast food chains if the food didn't taste good on some level. It's not a high class restaurant by far but if it tasted like sewage or socks most people wouldn't eat it.

I oftentimes think that seeing a small group of people argue that what a large group of people likes is garbage seems a bit odd. if one distills it down a bit it would be like one person saying that what 10,00 people like is garbage and they don't know what they are talking about. Well, great, if the one person thinks that ,fine. But there are 10,000 people staring at him and his lone opinion and just shaking their head.

Furthermore, I think it's a bit ironic that people pick on the popular choices and call them bad or in the case of games simplistic, dumbed down, pick the adjetive when those same people most likely enjoy some sort of popular media that might also be looked at as simplistic and dumbed down by a group of more knowing individuals.

I'm sure there are people who look at the movies that many people enjoy and just roll their eyes. And though I use the music example quite a lot it really is apt.

Go through any of the music libraries of people on this site, maybe even the same people who are decrying the more popular games and I am fairly certain we well find music with the same key signatures, time signatures tempi and just same old same old that has been done to death. Same modulations (if they even have any) same obvious phrasing that lead to the same cadences with the obious slavery to the downbeat. When looked at in the eyes of what music has actually done it's beyond boring and same old same old. And has been done for hundreds of years in some cases, not the few years that video games have been out.

But people still like it.

That's why it seems to me that when talking about what any popular media has done right, they can't be compared to something that has more depth or complexity due to the simple fact that they are actually trying to accomplish different things.

McDonalds is not trying to be an exclusive restaurant with their own unique chef who creates different menus each week. They are tryng to create a restaurant that has food that tastes good to the pallet but that is inexpensive and fast. I have a friend who in some ways is a snob right down to his teeth and yet if he is in a hurry he might go to McDonalds to quickly grab lunch.

So with games like WoW, they aren't trying to add layers and layers of depth and complexity but are trying to create a game that is fun for people who have a few hours to kill and just want to enjoy themselves. The whole raiding endgame is most likely their answer to players who want to play wow but who put in far more than the average person. The average person does NOT have hours and hours to dedicate to a raiding guild.

WoW is trying to accomplish something different and it does it well. Just like McDonalds is trying to accomplish something that is different from other types of restaurants. There is little comparision because if people are comparing games or restaurants or whatever, they need to look at what the end goal is, what they are trying to accomplish.

Otherwise you get that one lone person talking to the 10,000 saying "you dont' know what you are talking about" and the 10,000 just nodding and smiling and saying "ok, thank you for your opinion, we'll take that under advisement."

It's not that somethign that is popular lacks quality just because it doesn't share the depth of it's brothers and sisters in the same genre but that it has quality in the few things it's actually trying to do.

Originally posted by Antarious

Originally posted by metalhead980

Anyway I'm done, I could rip WoW apart head to toe before someone goes the fail route and brings up subscription numbers and that's no fun. Because we all know how much popularity equals quality

 

 

Just to make a point...  the "fail route" would be to bring up subscription numbers to debunk your opinion.  Because popularity doesn't equate to quality.

 

Yet one can just as easily say the "fail route" is to mention popularity versus quality to claim your opinion is correct.

 

MMO developers care about one thing.. profit.  They don't care if you like their game or not, they are there to make money.  Which is why popularity is all that matters... why?  Simply because... guess who is making the most profit?

 

Is it WoW.. or DAoC or EvE... or any other example you want to bring in here.  That is developer point of view versus player point of view.  Which is why we see the same game being made over and over and over (basicly).

 

I don't play WoW... never liked any Blizzard game (personal opinion).  However, this logic path you chose to apply here... just seems a tad off.

 

 

Not Really I can go feature for feature and prove how average WoW is (I may one day if I feel like being banned) and not one person could fight me on it with the exception of saying something about its sub numbers.

WoW is a jack of all trades game with average features, it appeals to many people which is why it has the subs it has but to a player like myself that wants more from his MMO those Average feautures drive me insane.

Think about it, If your a hardcore PvEer WoW isn't for you due to its nerfing of raid difficulty and bastardation of pve Crowd control and roles, If your a crafter WoW isn't for you because anyone thats been maxx level for a week doesn't need your shit anymore unless you make consumables and if your a hardcore pvper with no World pvp, no alliance mechanics, no territory control and no risk at all WoW isn't for you.

So who is WoW for? I know... the people that don't play MMOs and this is why WoW has the numbers it has.

Want proof? Ask around your server if anyone likes mmorpgs, you will mostly get two answers. "Whats a Mmorpg?" "No I play WoW".

MMORPG

MASSIVE is the key operating word here.

If you want 4 v4 , 8 v 8 or 16 v 16 play a shooter or Guild Wars.

Zergs are Armies. You need an army to fight an army. That means you need to actually TALK and get involved with the community. It's really not that hard to grasp. If 1v1 is your thing, play Street fighter because MMO's are not designed to do that. A true MMO is going to let you assemble a massive army and let you lay waste to anything until an equal or better force opposes you. People need to stop trying inject every MMO with these f*cking shooter maps. The game is enough like WoW without adding in more of the same.

That's the whole point of it. MASSIVE not mini

Originally posted by Torak

MMORPG

MASSIVE is the key operating word here.

If you want 4 v4 , 8 v 8 or 16 v 16 play a shooter or Guild Wars.

Zergs are Armies. You need an army to fight an army. That means you need to actually TALK and get involved with the community. It's really not that hard to grasp. If 1v1 is your thing, play Street fighter because MMO's are not designed to do that. A true MMO is going to let you assemble a massive army and let you lay waste to anything until an equal or better force opposes you. People need to stop trying inject every MMO with these f*cking shooter maps. The game is enough like WoW without adding in more of the same.

That's the whole point of it. MASSIVE not mini

 

LOL! I agree with this.

Bring on the big 500+ player battles, Bring back that massive community feeling, bring back that hatred for the other faction or player alliance, Bring back the Massive war!!!

Im hyped now thanks! :)

Its not the zergs that are the problem, its the retards playing the game. They need hand holding for everything, im starting to think we should put these people in a real life instance so we can be done with them.

Originally posted by metalhead980

Originally posted by Antarious

Originally posted by metalhead980

Anyway I'm done, I could rip WoW apart head to toe before someone goes the fail route and brings up subscription numbers and that's no fun. Because we all know how much popularity equals quality

 

 

Just to make a point...  the "fail route" would be to bring up subscription numbers to debunk your opinion.  Because popularity doesn't equate to quality.

 

Yet one can just as easily say the "fail route" is to mention popularity versus quality to claim your opinion is correct.

 

MMO developers care about one thing.. profit.  They don't care if you like their game or not, they are there to make money.  Which is why popularity is all that matters... why?  Simply because... guess who is making the most profit?

 

Is it WoW.. or DAoC or EvE... or any other example you want to bring in here.  That is developer point of view versus player point of view.  Which is why we see the same game being made over and over and over (basicly).

 

I don't play WoW... never liked any Blizzard game (personal opinion).  However, this logic path you chose to apply here... just seems a tad off.

 

 

 

Not Really I can go feature for feature and prove how average WoW is (I may one day if I feel like being banned) and not one person could fight me on it with the exception of saying something about its sub numbers.

WoW is a jack of all trades game with average features, it appeals to many people which is why it has the subs it has but to a player like myself that wants more from his MMO those Average feautures drive me insane.

Think about it, If your a hardcore PvEer WoW isn't for you due to its nerfing of raid difficulty and bastardation of pve Crowd control and roles, If your a crafter WoW isn't for you because anyone thats been maxx level for a week doesn't need your shit anymore unless you make consumables and if your a hardcore pvper with no World pvp, no alliance mechanics, no territory control and no risk at all WoW isn't for you.

So who is WoW for? I know... the people that don't play MMOs and this is why WoW has the numbers it has.

Want proof? Ask around your server if anyone likes mmorpgs, you will mostly get two answers. "Whats a Mmorpg?" "No I play WoW".

 

 

Exactly wow is played by people who dont play mmo's. They're not mmorpg fans, they're wow fans.

Originally posted by Torak

MMORPG

MASSIVE is the key operating word here.

If you want 4 v4 , 8 v 8 or 16 v 16 play a shooter or Guild Wars.

Zergs are Armies. You need an army to fight an army. That means you need to actually TALK and get involved with the community. It's really not that hard to grasp. If 1v1 is your thing, play Street fighter because MMO's are not designed to do that. A true MMO is going to let you assemble a massive army and let you lay waste to anything until an equal or better force opposes you. People need to stop trying inject every MMO with these f*cking shooter maps. The game is enough like WoW without adding in more of the same.

That's the whole point of it. MASSIVE not mini

 

lol! exactly.

Dude, you ever come to Boston I'm taking you and your wife to dinner.

Originally posted by metalhead980

LOL! I agree with this.

Bring on the big 500+ player battles, Bring back that massive community feeling, bring back that hatred for the other faction or player alliance, Bring back the Massive war!!!

Im hyped now thanks! :)

 

 

So it's a question of perception. I like the (ladder) based competition with well defined boundaries and rules (and of course the afore mentioned options - from skirmish to grand tactical and operational (5, 15, 40) and above in a controlled setting.

BTW. I think that in a video game ... once you get the battles with over 100+/100+ the maximum is reached to have a coherent working force (without the always present lag). Once you reach that point there is absolutely very little "overview" in such a video game ...and it is Zerg all the way. In Wow it's called Lake Wintergrasp, an option of 120/120 siege, great but I think the tradtionel BG's are better for "pure" PvP combat overviews.

The only way to battle this would be a military structure and hierarchy in the gaming tools and playing options, which lacks in every fantasy game based up until now.

People can always dream of course, but it is clear PvP played in a competitve way can be equal as challenging as a football season or chess tournament and certainly is a very valid way to play.

BTW: PvP "as such" can certainly have a game destroying element that could mean HUGE consequences on game balance, faction balance, PVE content and general enjoyment of a game.