Questions:

1.  Is it first-person view ONLY?  I hated that about DF.

2.  Are there penalties ("going red?") for ganking?  I like open PvP, but I like there still being rules and consequences to the ganking.

yes first person only (think of oblivion)

as of now I do not think that going red has any penalty other than being red and being able to be guard ganked, but I know they are supposedly making a stat loss for going red and getting killed as a red. who knows what will actually be put in place. They may go the route of UO And have no penalty.

Originally posted by Stratford

Questions:

 

1.  Is it first-person view ONLY?  I hated that about DF.

 

2.  Are there penalties ("going red?") for ganking?  I like open PvP, but I like there still being rules and consequences to the ganking.

 

It's FPV only, yes.  You can only see your char in paper doll and when swimming backwards for the most part :)  If you do mining/lumberjacking you can see your arms swing.  Also, if you look down...you see your feet.  It's done well imo.

There are penalties for ganking.  Attacking makes you go gray and killing x amount of people make you go red.  Then, if you keep killing carelessly you will suffer stat loss if you die and resurrect.

Could we please have a company make a worthy successor to UO and not these pvp-focused, feature-limited, half-assed attempts?  DF isn't 1/10 the game UO and Mortal Online looks like it's following in similar footsteps.  :(

Originally posted by Filterheadz

Bla Bla Bla

NDA is lifted , start posting gameplay footage , screens etc cauze i for one am sick and tired of user made reviews on mmorpg , they all stink and that's a fact.

Well, screenshots aren't doing them any good either.

As so far all the screenshots that have appeared on the net since yesterday (and that is quite a lot) gave me an instant DeJaVu with Vanguard: Saga of Heroes.

Pretty scenery shots, but all show empty zones void of any life.

Originally posted by Kordanor

Well, I bought this game (preorder) and went into beta some months ago due to that.

I can't exactly say, what this games offers right now as I am not willing to actually test it at the moment.

What I saw back then was in horrible state though.

Beginning at the patcher and starting the game, cryptic error messages which force you to investigate and install some other 3rd party programs to actually get MO running. Patching itself didn't run smoothly either. But the last time I logged into the game (and therefore loaded and patched the client) this actually went smoothly still not what I would consider "finalish".

The game itself: The Combat system itself seems fun, but when I tested it, this was basically the only thing besides of running around in an almost empty world you could do. The aiming and blocking seem simple but combined with slower movement speed this actually feels like fighting, like two guys circling around each other to find the ideal moment for a hit. I liked that, though it was not in a state which could be called beta.

Actually that goes for the whole rest: The beta I experienced in MO other game developers would have called a pre-alpha. As besides of very basic game concepts there there was basically nothing to do in the game. I have to say that I actually felt scammed a bit as I expected a game in beta status which I could actually play. But when you don't even know where to start to report bugs because basically NOTHING is there, it didn't didn't really keep my attention. Same goes for a friend of mine. We bought the game, played around for a few hours and never took a second look. Until a few weeks ago at least. But I didn't do much more then start the game, wonder that patching works better now, entering the game with a new character, wondered about how the controls and mouse movement suck (not adjustable), run into some kind of fawn, died and spawned as ghost with no idea where to go before I quit again.

What I also want to mention here is that the world seemed 100% static. Just world and NPCs. This does not really work together with the concepts but maybe this already changed (concepts or world).

The Engine actually looks quite good. Compared to darkfall though it seems like that darkfall is a game with great mechanics but a crappy engine and MO instead has a great engine but the mechanics seem to be crap or non existant when I checked.

Of course this all may have changed. I think the concepts of MO are quite good, but the developers need more time. FAR more time as far as I can say. I am really wondering why they are dropping the NDA yet.

And before you flame me about not being a real beta tester - I checked a lot of games in beta status, played bugged games as AO and Necron (both Beta) and also experienced Sandbox games and PvP games as UO, Darkfall and Shadowbane but I have never seen any game in such an early state as MO was when I actually BOUGHT it.

I am looking forward to some in depth views of players who spent more time with current builds though.

100 % signed!

When I actually "bought" the game I was shocked about the state of the game. Graphics looks quite nice, yeah, except for trees, but there was hardly anything to do! I didn't bother to check out the last few patches, so maybe now - with taming, housing, etc. - integrated - there some content worth to play. But about 2 months ago I really thougt: Well, so much for my 50 bucks. And btw: I promised myself to never buy a game in "Beta" (which really was much more lika Alpha) again.

And honestly, I have no confidence in the Devs to balance the whole shit out. I mean, in my opinion, the game would need YEARS of hard work to even get to release state. When I read that they wanted to release it by the end of the year I could not believe it! I would have some confidence if there was a large dev team working on the game, but that does not seem to be the fact.

I appreciate that finally someone (along with DFO) thought about the fact that you may get better results by copying good MMOs like UO then jump on the WoW-train. But MO is NOT UO and it does not feel like UO. It feels like a copy of UO, without ever reaching the perfection of UO.

But as I said, thats what I experienced two months ago. Maybe I should take another look now, but I prefer to wait if it ever reaches release state before I put any effort in it.

Game currently sucks.  I asked for my money back and was ignored multiple times.  As others have said, the combat just isn't cutting it.  This is kind of an understatement.  For a game that focuses on combat, it's going to need a lot more than polish to survive.  I'm sorry, but it's kind of ridiculous.  The beta excuse just isn't valid anymore.  Too many games that I've beta tested have had the same problems upon release.  I'm afraid this game will be the same.  There's no way that this game is coming out any time soon and if it does, it will fail big time.  That is why I want my money back and that is why I'm discouraging others from wasting theirs.

I'm seeing alot of "Rabble Rabble Rabble Rabble"...

Being in betas of Vanguard, WAR, Darkfall, LotRO, and playing games like WoW, EVE, and Ultima Online... Mortal Online doesn't seem bad at all...

Some of these users are right... MO does need work.
Alot of our MMOs need work lately...

Star Trek Online, Jumpgate, and even SWToR will likely be in the same boat. That is what the industry is facing today... but if you look at where Mortal Online is at right now... You can't say it's due to Lazy Developers, or even a quick grab for your cash.

The NDA drop was about presenting their work up to this point as it is. No hidden surprises or sudden twists... just open honesty with the MMO community.

Which, if you think about it... is a VERY risky thing to do. Over the last decade we've seen the "standard" of release MMOs keep getting raised to points so high, that the only thing a company can do is hold their NDA up till the very last second in order to obtain as many sales and pre-orders as possible. Many in the MMO community have even accepted this as standard procedure!!! These companies KNOW they will lose a great number of customers, and are trying to find any way possible to recoup costs in order to carry on with whatever pool remains.

The companies don't NEED millions of subscribers to keep going... but they need Millions of dollars to produce a product that meets the "standard" the MMO community finds acceptable... yet which the majority won't play or possibly even look at. The "Millions of subscribers/sales" = SUCCESS mentality is fading...

We are all seeing that... it's no longer something we can trust in. It probably never was...

So what's left? This is our hobby, our method of relaxation, and for many... something we love to do. We've gone from game to game over the years trying to find something that works... that we can settle into for the longterm... and we are getting tired.

We are tired of rollercoasters and bumper cars. We are tired of walking that long road of development and having the curtains pulled back... only to show something completely different than what we expected or were told to expect.

I look at Mortal Online and I don't feel like i've been lied to... I don't feel like the curtains are being held till the last second... and I don't feel like the development team is just trying to take my money and run for the hills.

It doesn't have millions of subscribers across 20+ servers, and it doesn't have thousands of features and locations that I will never visit, use, or even look at.

But it has all the basic things that I want and think should be in an MMO. I can run, jump, explore, swim, drown, fight, trade, craft, tame a pet, and build a house... and probably many more things I just have not gotten to see just yet.

Most importantly: it has a development team that wants to continue to work on it and make it better.

I can continue to wait... keep looking for a game that meets that standard, has all the things that I want, and where the developers won't keep it hidden till the last minute...  I can keep taking my chances...

Or I can jump into a community of one server and about 10000 players.... and participate in the development of a world I like.

Originally posted by LiquidWolf

I'm seeing alot of "Rabble Rabble Rabble Rabble"...

Being in betas of Vanguard, WAR, Darkfall, LotRO, and playing games like WoW, EVE, and Ultima Online... Mortal Online doesn't seem bad at all...

Some of these users are right... MO does need work.
Alot of our MMOs need work lately...

Star Trek Online, Jumpgate, and even SWToR will likely be in the same boat. That is what the industry is facing today... but if you look at where Mortal Online is at right now... You can't say it's due to Lazy Developers, or even a quick grab for your cash.

The NDA drop was about presenting their work up to this point as it is. No hidden surprises or sudden twists... just open honesty with the MMO community.

Which, if you think about it... is a VERY risky thing to do. Over the last decade we've seen the "standard" of release MMOs keep getting raised to points so high, that the only thing a company can do is hold their NDA up till the very last second in order to obtain as many sales and pre-orders as possible. Many in the MMO community have even accepted this as standard procedure!!! These companies KNOW they will lose a great number of customers, and are trying to find any way possible to recoup costs in order to carry on with whatever pool remains.

The companies don't NEED millions of subscribers to keep going... but they need Millions of dollars to produce a product that meets the "standard" the MMO community finds acceptable... yet which the majority won't play or possibly even look at. The "Millions of subscribers/sales" = SUCCESS mentality is fading...

We are all seeing that... it's no longer something we can trust in. It probably never was...

So what's left? This is our hobby, our method of relaxation, and for many... something we love to do. We've gone from game to game over the years trying to find something that works... that we can settle into for the longterm... and we are getting tired.

We are tired of rollercoasters and bumper cars. We are tired of walking that long road of development and having the curtains pulled back... only to show something completely different than what we expected or were told to expect.

I look at Mortal Online and I don't feel like i've been lied to... I don't feel like the curtains are being held till the last second... and I don't feel like the development team is just trying to take my money and run for the hills.

It doesn't have millions of subscribers across 20+ servers, and it doesn't have thousands of features and locations that I will never visit, use, or even look at.

But it has all the basic things that I want and think should be in an MMO. I can run, jump, explore, swim, drown, fight, trade, craft, tame a pet, and build a house... and probably many more things I just have not gotten to see just yet.

Most importantly: it has a development team that wants to continue to work on it and make it better.

I can continue to wait... keep looking for a game that meets that standard, has all the things that I want, and where the developers won't keep it hidden till the last minute...  I can keep taking my chances...

Or I can jump into a community of one server and about 10000 players.... and participate in the development of a world I like.

^^this

/signed

Originally posted by laephis

Could we please have a company make a worthy successor to UO and not these pvp-focused, feature-limited, half-assed attempts?  DF isn't 1/10 the game UO and Mortal Online looks like it's following in similar footsteps.  :(

MO is closer to UO than any other game since 1997, next patch they are are also adding stealing!

Originally posted by LiquidWolf

I'm seeing alot of "Rabble Rabble Rabble Rabble"...

Being in betas of Vanguard, WAR, Darkfall, LotRO, and playing games like WoW, EVE, and Ultima Online... Mortal Online doesn't seem bad at all...

Some of these users are right... MO does need work.
Alot of our MMOs need work lately...

Star Trek Online, Jumpgate, and even SWToR will likely be in the same boat. That is what the industry is facing today... but if you look at where Mortal Online is at right now... You can't say it's due to Lazy Developers, or even a quick grab for your cash.

The NDA drop was about presenting their work up to this point as it is. No hidden surprises or sudden twists... just open honesty with the MMO community.

Which, if you think about it... is a VERY risky thing to do. Over the last decade we've seen the "standard" of release MMOs keep getting raised to points so high, that the only thing a company can do is hold their NDA up till the very last second in order to obtain as many sales and pre-orders as possible. Many in the MMO community have even accepted this as standard procedure!!! These companies KNOW they will lose a great number of customers, and are trying to find any way possible to recoup costs in order to carry on with whatever pool remains.

The companies don't NEED millions of subscribers to keep going... but they need Millions of dollars to produce a product that meets the "standard" the MMO community finds acceptable... yet which the majority won't play or possibly even look at. The "Millions of subscribers/sales" = SUCCESS mentality is fading...

We are all seeing that... it's no longer something we can trust in. It probably never was...

So what's left? This is our hobby, our method of relaxation, and for many... something we love to do. We've gone from game to game over the years trying to find something that works... that we can settle into for the longterm... and we are getting tired.

We are tired of rollercoasters and bumper cars. We are tired of walking that long road of development and having the curtains pulled back... only to show something completely different than what we expected or were told to expect.

I look at Mortal Online and I don't feel like i've been lied to... I don't feel like the curtains are being held till the last second... and I don't feel like the development team is just trying to take my money and run for the hills.

It doesn't have millions of subscribers across 20+ servers, and it doesn't have thousands of features and locations that I will never visit, use, or even look at.

But it has all the basic things that I want and think should be in an MMO. I can run, jump, explore, swim, drown, fight, trade, craft, tame a pet, and build a house... and probably many more things I just have not gotten to see just yet.

Most importantly: it has a development team that wants to continue to work on it and make it better.

I can continue to wait... keep looking for a game that meets that standard, has all the things that I want, and where the developers won't keep it hidden till the last minute...  I can keep taking my chances...

Or I can jump into a community of one server and about 10000 players.... and participate in the development of a world I like.

Completely in agreement. Starvault has always let everyone know exactly where the game stood. They don't over exaggerate the state of the game and are completely honest in letting people know they have a tough (but worthwhile) road ahead. I wish them and the game the best.

As an old-school retired UO'er, this game does have potential.

However, the first-person ONLY view will keep me away from MO.  Why on earth can't the devs simply adds a choice in this regard to make everyone happy?  Ugh.

Originally posted by Stratford

As an old-school retired UO'er, this game does have potential.

 

However, the first-person ONLY view will keep me away from MO.  Why on earth can't the devs simply adds a choice in this regard to make everyone happy?  Ugh.

I would assume that majority of the games on the market are third person view based and they're going for something a little more unique.  Not to mention, third person completely destroys any semblance of tactics/strategy in terms of PvP.  Think about playing Counterstrike (or Halo or any other popular FPS, simply filling a void for a name) in third person while everyone else is playing in first person.  You'd have a severe advantage for seeing around walls and corners, instituting ambushes and preventing opposing one's much easier.

I really don't understand why people are so turned off by first person view.  I'm a huge stickler for looking at my character and tweaking the looks be it armor etc, but this means zero if the first person element is pulled off correctly in combat and immersion.

To answer your question, having both views would be pointless as third person would provide the tactical advantages and people would more than likely never use first person anyway.

Originally posted by Angorim

Originally posted by Stratford

As an old-school retired UO'er, this game does have potential.

 

However, the first-person ONLY view will keep me away from MO.  Why on earth can't the devs simply adds a choice in this regard to make everyone happy?  Ugh.

To answer your question, having both views would be pointless as third person would provide the tactical advantages and people would more than likely never use first person anyway.

So the answer is that if people want to play this game they are forced into using a view, that if there were an option they wouldn't use in the first place.....?  Sounds like it speaks volumes for why 3rd person should be the focus of the game, and not vice versa.... I'll be honest though, I'm chiming in for no reason. I'm not going to buy the game, have no interest in a game with no story, quests, content etc. Game might be feature rich when all is said and done, but for me having to create my own fun and reason for playing is...just not fun.

Originally posted by Emeraq

Originally posted by Angorim

Originally posted by Stratford

As an old-school retired UO'er, this game does have potential.

 

However, the first-person ONLY view will keep me away from MO.  Why on earth can't the devs simply adds a choice in this regard to make everyone happy?  Ugh.

To answer your question, having both views would be pointless as third person would provide the tactical advantages and people would more than likely never use first person anyway.

 

So the answer is that if people want to play this game they are forced into using a view, that if there were an option they wouldn't use in the first place.....?  Sounds like it speaks volumes for why 3rd person should be the focus of the game, and not vice versa.... I'll be honest though, I'm chiming in for no reason. I'm not going to buy the game, have no interest in a game with no story, quests, content etc. Game might be feature rich when all is said and done, but for me having to create my own fun and reason for playing is...just not fun.

That's like complaining that any of those games I mentioned aren't as good as other shooters that use third person, it's merely preference and utility.  Also if you're not interested in the game, and you're chiming in on a subject about the game you've admitted you won't buy, why are you even here?  There are dozens of hand-holding and theme park style mmo's you could be involved in instead of wasting your time and ours.

Originally posted by Angorim

Originally posted by Emeraq

Originally posted by Angorim

Originally posted by Stratford

As an old-school retired UO'er, this game does have potential.

 

However, the first-person ONLY view will keep me away from MO.  Why on earth can't the devs simply adds a choice in this regard to make everyone happy?  Ugh.

To answer your question, having both views would be pointless as third person would provide the tactical advantages and people would more than likely never use first person anyway.

 

So the answer is that if people want to play this game they are forced into using a view, that if there were an option they wouldn't use in the first place.....?  Sounds like it speaks volumes for why 3rd person should be the focus of the game, and not vice versa.... I'll be honest though, I'm chiming in for no reason. I'm not going to buy the game, have no interest in a game with no story, quests, content etc. Game might be feature rich when all is said and done, but for me having to create my own fun and reason for playing is...just not fun.

 

 Also if you're not interested in the game, and you're chiming in on a subject about the game you've admitted you won't buy, why are you even here?  There are dozens of hand-holding and theme park style mmo's you could be involved in instead of wasting your time and ours.

I love that response, I see it all the time here on these forums and find it interesting that people seem to think that you must have an interest in a product in order to have an opinion. And to set the record straight, the lack of 3rd person view is the main reason for what caused me to steer clear away from this game well that and the ridculous price tag are a toss up for the main reason and the lack of content is a very close 2nd.

If I see a subject header on the main page that piques my curiosity then I read it, whether I like/intend to purchase the game or not. And sometimes I respond.

Now in my opinion using the FPS argument doesn't work, because it's a different Genre entirely. A majority of FPS do not fit with the theme of "RPG" that is also found in MMORPG. And with the exception of a few games out there, IE games like Oblivion, a majority of RPG's are 3rd person view, and I believe MO will find that most RPG players prefer 3rd person when they vote with their dollars to play elsewhere. (Which is why I believe is one of the reasons they have such a ridiculous price tag on the game, they need to charge so much more for the title, because it's a niche game and will not draw as many players as other titles out there.. and again this is my opinion, they are running out of funds to finish their product)

I don't think it's necessary to disparage posters as "trolls" who express specific opinions on different features. I'm a little leery of FPV as well (although I know I could adapt), and I would find a complete lack of PvE content in a MMORPG disturbing myself. If indeed that's how things work out.

So why don't you just call this guy closed minded for being so final about a game that is still in beta - and obviously one that does have promise - and then wait and see yourselves how things look on release. Because I've seen the shout'em down fanboys be wrong plenty of times too.

Originally posted by hail2dathief

Originally posted by Emeraq

Originally posted by Angorim

Originally posted by Emeraq

Originally posted by Angorim

Originally posted by Stratford

As an old-school retired UO'er, this game does have potential.

 

However, the first-person ONLY view will keep me away from MO.  Why on earth can't the devs simply adds a choice in this regard to make everyone happy?  Ugh.

To answer your question, having both views would be pointless as third person would provide the tactical advantages and people would more than likely never use first person anyway.

 

So the answer is that if people want to play this game they are forced into using a view, that if there were an option they wouldn't use in the first place.....?  Sounds like it speaks volumes for why 3rd person should be the focus of the game, and not vice versa.... I'll be honest though, I'm chiming in for no reason. I'm not going to buy the game, have no interest in a game with no story, quests, content etc. Game might be feature rich when all is said and done, but for me having to create my own fun and reason for playing is...just not fun.

 

 Also if you're not interested in the game, and you're chiming in on a subject about the game you've admitted you won't buy, why are you even here?  There are dozens of hand-holding and theme park style mmo's you could be involved in instead of wasting your time and ours.

 

I love that response, I see it all the time here on these forums and find it interesting that people seem to think that you must have an interest in a product in order to have an opinion. And to set the record straight, the lack of 3rd person view is the main reason for what caused me to steer clear away from this game well that and the ridculous price tag are a toss up for the main reason and the lack of content is a very close 2nd.

 

 

1. I love that response, I see it all the time here on these forums and find it interesting that people seem to think that you must have an interest in a product in order to have an opinion.

I love this response even more, clarifying the fact that you have absolutely nothing better to do than troll a forum about a game you have no interest in....can someone say pathetic loser...LOL.

 

2. well that and the ridculous price tag

Wow, because the 50$ Digital Download is just waaaaaay over priced...seriously dude, you're a just a pathetic excuse for a human and a troll.

Nice! It's great that you have such insight to my life based on typed dialogue on forums, bravo.

Originally posted by Pynda

I don't think it's necessary to disparage posters as "trolls" who express specific opinions on different features. I'm a little leery of FPV as well (although I know I could adapt), and I would find a complete lack of PvE content in a MMORPG disturbing myself. If indeed that's how things work out.

So why don't you just call this guy closed minded for being so final about a game that is still in beta - and obviously one that does have promise - and then wait and see yourselves how things look on release. Because I've seen the shout'em down fanboys be wrong plenty of times too.

 

 

Thank you for 'defending' me. It's just the way of these forums to label anyone a troll that has a different opinion about a subject than fanboy of a particular product.... I really didn't feel I was trolling either and felt my opinion on first person was valid.

Feel free to call me closed minded as well, I really can't see myself even trying this game. I get completely lost and turned around in FP view, alwasy have and likely always will I guess my 'coordination' just isn't good enough to play in those type of games.

Originally posted by Emeraq

Originally posted by Angorim

Originally posted by Stratford

As an old-school retired UO'er, this game does have potential.

 

However, the first-person ONLY view will keep me away from MO.  Why on earth can't the devs simply adds a choice in this regard to make everyone happy?  Ugh.

To answer your question, having both views would be pointless as third person would provide the tactical advantages and people would more than likely never use first person anyway.

 

So the answer is that if people want to play this game they are forced into using a view, that if there were an option they wouldn't use in the first place.....?  Sounds like it speaks volumes for why 3rd person should be the focus of the game, and not vice versa.... I'll be honest though, I'm chiming in for no reason. I'm not going to buy the game, have no interest in a game with no story, quests, content etc. Game might be feature rich when all is said and done, but for me having to create my own fun and reason for playing is...just not fun.

Well said - for those who would prefer theme-park games.   From what I understand this game is not designed to be one and those who like only theme-park games won't like it.  There are plenty of those - I hope this game succeeds so that the sandbox game niche gets a little deeper. I'm still not sure if I will try this - it looks good, and I do enjoy sandbox games, such as EVE.  I am not sure if I want to go through all the frustrations inherit in starting  at the beginning of a sandbox game though.  I am a older player - almost 58 and I think I might let the younger crowd advance the feel of the game before I try it.  I did that with EVE and it worked well.  I hope that MO becomes a good solid game for those of us who can create our own fun = not knocking those who prefer not to but not every game should be just for them.  As far as whether or not this is a replacement for or a successor to UO - who cares, why not let it be just itself?  I am tired of hearing about WoW and UO as if they are the only standards for games.  Each game should be judged on itself and not on other games.  No 1 game is going to kill Wow, and no 1 game is going to replace UO in the hearts of those who played it.    Here's hoping that MO has success in it's own regard.