Originally posted by heckz0r

IS not a free to play is a unlimited Trial  they liee people :(

 

Hmm do u have to pay to play Mortal ? mmmm no dont think so.

Is it free then ? Yes, why yes it is, it is free to play when u dont have to pay to play the game until the day u die ;D

I hope ur glad that I helped u understand the word FREE to play ;D 

Originally posted by ThaBadMan

Originally posted by heckz0r

IS not a free to play is a unlimited Trial  they liee people :(

 

Hmm do u have to pay to play Mortal ? mmmm no dont think so.

Is it free then ? Yes, why yes it is, it is free to play when u dont have to pay to play the game until the day u die ;D

 

I hope ur glad that I helped u understand the word FREE to play ;D 

How exactly would the current system differ from an "unlimited trial"?  Sure it is "free" to start, but to be effective in ANYTHING you have to pay.

Originally posted by Slapshot1188

Originally posted by ThaBadMan

Originally posted by heckz0r



IS not a free to play is a unlimited Trial  they liee people :(

 

Hmm do u have to pay to play Mortal ? mmmm no dont think so.

Is it free then ? Yes, why yes it is, it is free to play when u dont have to pay to play the game until the day u die ;D

 

I hope ur glad that I helped u understand the word FREE to play ;D 

How exactly would the current system differ from an "unlimited trial"?  Sure it is "free" to start, but to be effective in ANYTHING you have to pay.

 

 

If u want to be best u mean yes, if u want to play and have fun then u can play for free.

Its only the mind that stops what u can do in a sandbox, would have been true though if MO was a themepark but it aint.

Originally posted by Doomtec

Originally posted by GrayGhost79

Originally posted by Doomtec

However, the truth is that even with the bugs, MO is still the best damn sandbox MMORPG since SWG.

 

Should always add "in my opinion" with a statement like that in regards to games like MO because most would disagree. 

 

This is MMORPG.com, where "most" wouldn't know a good game if it hit them in the face.

Amen to that, people here bash every game on the market this forum is for people to troll and hate on every game, its funny how alot of Devs refuse to come here because of this forum.... They allow people to trolls and ban people  who defend games, this happens alot here, the mods love to defend game when they get paid soon as that stops they join in on the bashing.  We see this... Sad  really how people get off on ruining others dreams , hopes, its because they do not have any... and are jealous of those that do have dreams.

Originally posted by ThaBadMan

Originally posted by Slapshot1188

How exactly would the current system differ from an "unlimited trial"?  Sure it is "free" to start, but to be effective in ANYTHING you have to pay.

 

If u want to be best u mean yes, if u want to play and have fun then u can play for free.

Its only the mind that stops what u can do in a sandbox, would have been true though if MO was a themepark but it aint.

I didn't say anything about being  "the best".  I said "effective".  With skills stuck at 60 you cannot be effective in the game.  So again, please explain how exactly this system would differ from an unlimited trial?

But you know what?  It's all arguing over minutia.  The FACT is that most people who tried the game do not continue playing.  Even that "big rush" that popped in when it went "F2P" has dramatically diminished.   The review was pretty much spot-on, and was even confirmed by one of the few developers left on the game as being accurate with the exception of his thinking one subscore might be low.  So a 6.2 = 62/100 = low D score.  Hardly what most would call "The best sandbox".  There was another sandbox that announced they had a 2800 player battle this week. Mortal players talk about epic 4 on 6 battles...

1.  Still no response on this this differs from an unlimited trial

2. If what you say is true and 60 skills to 100 skills are meaningless then why have skill ratings at all?  No, actually what you try and claim is blatantly false.  People with low skills hit for less damage, cannot wear good armor (and thus take more damage) and move slower.  There is a reason why everyone gets their skills to 100.

3.  Again, review is 100% spot on.  Even the developer agreed with it with the minor exception of one sub-score.

Originally posted by Slapshot1188

1.  Still no response on this this differs from an unlimited trial

2. If what you say is true and 60 skills to 100 skills are meaningless then why have skill ratings at all?  No, actually what you try and claim is blatantly false.  People with low skills hit for less damage, cannot wear good armor (and thus take more damage) and move slower.  There is a reason why everyone gets their skills to 100.

3.  Again, review is 100% spot on.  Even the developer agreed with it with the minor exception of one sub-score.

1. Late response, but old trial were limited to 600 skill points if I remeber correctly. Now you can use all 1100 skill points. Meaning you can test alot of areas, and be good at most, but not the best. and the trial was only 14 days. Now you can play as long as you like. So differs ALOT from the old trial they had.

2. True, but it's like this with most f2p games. Don't see why this would be any different with MO. They need to make money somehow, and if you play the game and enjoy it, then you'll probably pay. What's the problem here?

3. Review is nowhere near 100% spot on. He didn't even leave Tindrem, and didn't even try 1/10 of all the features the game have. It's what some might experience in their first few days of MO, before you rly get into the game, and join a clan, clan warfare, harvest, craft, fish, butcher, tame, join events etc . I would be OK if it was a review of the tutorial of the game. But if your a journalist that is going to review a game, you need to dig deeper. It's like reviewing Super Mario World after playing through the first world only. It just doesn't add up.

Dat necro.

Suppose I should post my video I impulse recorded of it of how horrifically bug ridden the game was.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7fax-lgmTs

Most of these issues haven't been fixed to my knowledge.

Still wishing I could play the game, but.. the bugs. I can't fathom how this game has active players.  Hell, I can't fathom how the game even played 2-3ish years ago (I beta'd it for like 15 minutes and never went back because my PC couldn't run it well back then, so I never got a good feel of it.)

Originally posted by Lahuzer

Originally posted by Slapshot1188

1.  Still no response on this this differs from an unlimited trial

2. If what you say is true and 60 skills to 100 skills are meaningless then why have skill ratings at all?  No, actually what you try and claim is blatantly false.  People with low skills hit for less damage, cannot wear good armor (and thus take more damage) and move slower.  There is a reason why everyone gets their skills to 100.

3.  Again, review is 100% spot on.  Even the developer agreed with it with the minor exception of one sub-score.

1. Late response, but old trial were limited to 600 skill points if I remeber correctly. Now you can use all 1100 skill points. Meaning you can test alot of areas, and be good at most, but not the best. and the trial was only 14 days. Now you can play as long as you like. So differs ALOT from the old trial they had.

2. True, but it's like this with most f2p games. Don't see why this would be any different with MO. They need to make money somehow, and if you play the game and enjoy it, then you'll probably pay. What's the problem here?

3. Review is nowhere near 100% spot on. He didn't even leave Tindrem, and didn't even try 1/10 of all the features the game have. It's what some might experience in their first few days of MO, before you rly get into the game, and join a clan, clan warfare, harvest, craft, fish, butcher, tame, join events etc . I would be OK if it was a review of the tutorial of the game. But if your a journalist that is going to review a game, you need to dig deeper. It's like reviewing Super Mario World after playing through the first world only. It just doesn't add up.

1.  My question was "how does this differ from an unlimited trial.  Your response was how it differs from the old Mortal Online Trial.  That of course was not the question.

2. Again, not answering the question.  My question was in response to someone saying that it wasn't a big deal to lock the skills and that the difference between 60 and 100 was "meaningless".  So the question was:If it's true and the skills are "meaningless" then why have them?

3. You are allowed to have your opinion, even it it is  4 months late.  Probably spurred by the nice review that Darkfall:UW got.  I personally think BOTH REVIEWS WERE SPOT ON.

Originally posted by Slapshot1188

Originally posted by Lahuzer

Originally posted by Slapshot1188

1.  Still no response on this this differs from an unlimited trial

2. If what you say is true and 60 skills to 100 skills are meaningless then why have skill ratings at all?  No, actually what you try and claim is blatantly false.  People with low skills hit for less damage, cannot wear good armor (and thus take more damage) and move slower.  There is a reason why everyone gets their skills to 100.

3.  Again, review is 100% spot on.  Even the developer agreed with it with the minor exception of one sub-score.

1. Late response, but old trial were limited to 600 skill points if I remeber correctly. Now you can use all 1100 skill points. Meaning you can test alot of areas, and be good at most, but not the best. and the trial was only 14 days. Now you can play as long as you like. So differs ALOT from the old trial they had.

2. True, but it's like this with most f2p games. Don't see why this would be any different with MO. They need to make money somehow, and if you play the game and enjoy it, then you'll probably pay. What's the problem here?

3. Review is nowhere near 100% spot on. He didn't even leave Tindrem, and didn't even try 1/10 of all the features the game have. It's what some might experience in their first few days of MO, before you rly get into the game, and join a clan, clan warfare, harvest, craft, fish, butcher, tame, join events etc . I would be OK if it was a review of the tutorial of the game. But if your a journalist that is going to review a game, you need to dig deeper. It's like reviewing Super Mario World after playing through the first world only. It just doesn't add up.

1.  My question was "how does this differ from an unlimited trial.  Your response was how it differs from the old Mortal Online Trial.  That of course was not the question.

 

2. Again, not answering the question.  My question was in response to someone saying that it wasn't a big deal to lock the skills and that the difference between 60 and 100 was "meaningless".  So the question was:If it's true and the skills are "meaningless" then why have them?

 

3. You are allowed to have your opinion, even it it is  4 months late.  Probably spurred by the nice review that Darkfall:UW got.  I personally think BOTH REVIEWS WERE SPOT ON.

 

 

1. It differs in you being able to use all of the 1100 skill points. Not limited to 600 skill points.

2. Well, whomever that was is wrong ofc. That doesn't mean that your useless with a skill cap of 60. You could still beat a guy with maxed skills, if you rock in PVP and know your shiiiit. Ofc the odds are against you, but your not useless. The odds are just lower on the other guy winning.

3. Ohh, I haven't even read it. Need to do that and get back to ya. Or respond there. I sure hope he did more then MOs reviewer. I was afraid early on when he had gotten 2k prowess or something from playing the game 20 hours. So need to get back on DFUW review.

But I would never call this a review of Mortal Online. And you agreeing to it being "spot on" ain't a chocker to any1 that knows how you dispise everything with MO and SV. But if one just looks at the job that he did as a journalist objectivly. Reviewing a game. He barely scratched the surface of what MO is about. You call it "spot on". I call it bad journalism.

Originally posted by Lahuzer

1. It differs in you being able to use all of the 1100 skill points. Not limited to 600 skill points.

2. Well, whomever that was is wrong ofc. That doesn't mean that your useless with a skill cap of 60. You could still beat a guy with maxed skills, if you rock in PVP and know your shiiiit. Ofc the odds are against you, but your not useless. The odds are just lower on the other guy winning.

3. Ohh, I haven't even read it. Need to do that and get back to ya. Or respond there. I sure hope he did more then MOs reviewer. I was afraid early on when he had gotten 2k prowess or something from playing the game 20 hours. So need to get back on DFUW review.

But I would never call this a review of Mortal Online. And you agreeing to it being "spot on" ain't a chocker to any1 that knows how you dispise everything with MO and SV. But if one just looks at the job that he did as a journalist objectivly. Reviewing a game. He barely scratched the surface of what MO is about. You call it "spot on". I call it bad journalism.

How in the world is it bad journalism.  No reviewer has the time to get the in depth gameplay like you propose.  This is the real world, not some fantasy world where a reviewer has unlimited time to try out a game.  You should give some thought to what you say before proposing things that just highly unreasonable.

Originally posted by Ozmodan

Originally posted by Lahuzer

1. It differs in you being able to use all of the 1100 skill points. Not limited to 600 skill points.

2. Well, whomever that was is wrong ofc. That doesn't mean that your useless with a skill cap of 60. You could still beat a guy with maxed skills, if you rock in PVP and know your shiiiit. Ofc the odds are against you, but your not useless. The odds are just lower on the other guy winning.

3. Ohh, I haven't even read it. Need to do that and get back to ya. Or respond there. I sure hope he did more then MOs reviewer. I was afraid early on when he had gotten 2k prowess or something from playing the game 20 hours. So need to get back on DFUW review.

But I would never call this a review of Mortal Online. And you agreeing to it being "spot on" ain't a chocker to any1 that knows how you dispise everything with MO and SV. But if one just looks at the job that he did as a journalist objectivly. Reviewing a game. He barely scratched the surface of what MO is about. You call it "spot on". I call it bad journalism.

How in the world is it bad journalism.  No reviewer has the time to get the in depth gameplay like you propose.  This is the real world, not some fantasy world where a reviewer has unlimited time to try out a game.  You should give some thought to what you say before proposing things that just highly unreasonable.

Well it's the same guy that reviewed DFUW. ANd guess what. In DFUW somehow he actually tried being in a clan. And even better. He was in the same clan as this sites own employee RipperX. Who clearly loves the game, and promotes it all over the place. I'm guessing he was "alittle" affected by them. But that's not the point. DFUW shines in clan warfare when you don't crash etc. Just as much as MO shines in clan warfare when the prediction system etc don't fuck things up. But he never even tried getting into a clan in MO, even though peeps reached out to him to help him out, and show him the ropes. He went solo, all alone in Tindrem, never even venturing out into the world. If he clearly had time for all that jazz in DFUW, why not in MO? I think he gave DFUW a rather fair score, but I think he did a rly poor job on MO.

Originally posted by Lahuzer

 

Well it's the same guy that reviewed DFUW. ANd guess what. In DFUW somehow he actually tried being in a clan. And even better. He was in the same clan as this sites own employee RipperX. Who clearly loves the game, and promotes it all over the place. I'm guessing he was "alittle" affected by them. But that's not the point. DFUW shines in clan warfare when you don't crash etc. Just as much as MO shines in clan warfare when the prediction system etc don't fuck things up. But he never even tried getting into a clan in MO, even though peeps reached out to him to help him out, and show him the ropes. He went solo, all alone in Tindrem, never even venturing out into the world. If he clearly had time for all that jazz in DFUW, why not in MO? I think he gave DFUW a rather fair score, but I think he did a rly poor job on MO.

 

Pretty sure that EVERY review (excluding the one written by the guy who posted in the "What can you do to help Mortal Online" thread was very similar.  I am sure they are all wrong.

Originally posted by Lahuzer

Originally posted by Slapshot1188

Originally posted by Lahuzer

Originally posted by Slapshot1188

1.  Still no response on this this differs from an unlimited trial

2. If what you say is true and 60 skills to 100 skills are meaningless then why have skill ratings at all?  No, actually what you try and claim is blatantly false.  People with low skills hit for less damage, cannot wear good armor (and thus take more damage) and move slower.  There is a reason why everyone gets their skills to 100.

3.  Again, review is 100% spot on.  Even the developer agreed with it with the minor exception of one sub-score.

1. Late response, but old trial were limited to 600 skill points if I remeber correctly. Now you can use all 1100 skill points. Meaning you can test alot of areas, and be good at most, but not the best. and the trial was only 14 days. Now you can play as long as you like. So differs ALOT from the old trial they had.

2. True, but it's like this with most f2p games. Don't see why this would be any different with MO. They need to make money somehow, and if you play the game and enjoy it, then you'll probably pay. What's the problem here?

3. Review is nowhere near 100% spot on. He didn't even leave Tindrem, and didn't even try 1/10 of all the features the game have. It's what some might experience in their first few days of MO, before you rly get into the game, and join a clan, clan warfare, harvest, craft, fish, butcher, tame, join events etc . I would be OK if it was a review of the tutorial of the game. But if your a journalist that is going to review a game, you need to dig deeper. It's like reviewing Super Mario World after playing through the first world only. It just doesn't add up.

1.  My question was "how does this differ from an unlimited trial.  Your response was how it differs from the old Mortal Online Trial.  That of course was not the question.

 

2. Again, not answering the question.  My question was in response to someone saying that it wasn't a big deal to lock the skills and that the difference between 60 and 100 was "meaningless".  So the question was:If it's true and the skills are "meaningless" then why have them?

 

3. You are allowed to have your opinion, even it it is  4 months late.  Probably spurred by the nice review that Darkfall:UW got.  I personally think BOTH REVIEWS WERE SPOT ON.

 

 

1. It differs in you being able to use all of the 1100 skill points. Not limited to 600 skill points.

2. Well, whomever that was is wrong ofc. That doesn't mean that your useless with a skill cap of 60. You could still beat a guy with maxed skills, if you rock in PVP and know your shiiiit. Ofc the odds are against you, but your not useless. The odds are just lower on the other guy winning.

3. Ohh, I haven't even read it. Need to do that and get back to ya. Or respond there. I sure hope he did more then MOs reviewer. I was afraid early on when he had gotten 2k prowess or something from playing the game 20 hours. So need to get back on DFUW review.

But I would never call this a review of Mortal Online. And you agreeing to it being "spot on" ain't a chocker to any1 that knows how you dispise everything with MO and SV. But if one just looks at the job that he did as a journalist objectivly. Reviewing a game. He barely scratched the surface of what MO is about. You call it "spot on". I call it bad journalism.

1. Again.. how does that differ from an unlimited trial?  You still have no answered this question.

2. I agree he was wrong, that is why I responded as I did.

As for your last point.  Every review except the one written by the guy who posted in the "What Can You Do To Support MO" thread was similar (over the past nearly 3 years...).  If it was one oddity you might have a case,  but the overwhelming majority of reviews, re-reviews, re-re-reviews and reviews after 2.5 years of release.. have been similar.  So they COULD all be wrong of course and you could be the only sane person... but I think that's unlikely.  Again though, it's certainly subjective but your opinion is very much outside the norm.

Originally posted by Slapshot1188

Originally posted by Lahuzer

Originally posted by Slapshot118

Originally posted by Lahuzer

Originally posted by Slapshot118

1.  Still no response on this this differs from an unlimited trial.


2. If what you say is true and 60 skills to 100 skills are meaningless then why have skill ratings at all?  No, actually what you try and claim is blatantly false.  People with low skills hit for less damage, cannot wear good armor (and thus take more damage) and move slower.  There is a reason why everyone gets their skills to 100.

3.  Again, review is 100% spot on.  Even the developer agreed with it with the minor exception of one sub-score

1. Late response, but old trial were limited to 600 skill points if I remeber correctly. Now you can use all 1100 skill points. Meaning you can test alot of areas, and be good at most, but not the best. and the trial was only 14 days. Now you can play as long as you like. So differs ALOT from the old trial they had.

2. True, but it's like this with most f2p games. Don't see why this would be any different with MO. They need to make money somehow, and if you play the game and enjoy it, then you'll probably pay. What's the problem here?

3. Review is nowhere near 100% spot on. He didn't even leave Tindrem, and didn't even try 1/10 of all the features the game have. It's what some might experience in their first few days of MO, before you rly get into the game, and join a clan, clan warfare, harvest, craft, fish, butcher, tame, join events etc . I would be OK if it was a review of the tutorial of the game. But if your a journalist that is going to review a game, you need to dig deeper. It's like reviewing Super Mario World after playing through the first world only. It just doesn't add up.

1.  My question was "how does this differ from an unlimited trial.  Your response was how it differs from the old Mortal Online Trial.  That of course was not the question.

2. Again, not answering the question.  My question was in response to someone saying that it wasn't a big deal to lock the skills and that the difference between 60 and 100 was "meaningless".  So the question was:If it's true and the skills are "meaningless" then why have them?

3. You are allowed to have your opinion, even it it is  4 months late.  Probably spurred by the nice review that Darkfall:UW got.  I personally think BOTH REVIEWS WERE SPOT ON.

 

1. It differs in you being able to use all of the 1100 skill points. Not limited to 600 skill points.

2. Well, whomever that was is wrong ofc. That doesn't mean that your useless with a skill cap of 60. You could still beat a guy with maxed skills, if you rock in PVP and know your shiiiit. Ofc the odds are against you, but your not useless. The odds are just lower on the other guy winning.

3. Ohh, I haven't even read it. Need to do that and get back to ya. Or respond there. I sure hope he did more then MOs reviewer. I was afraid early on when he had gotten 2k prowess or something from playing the game 20 hours. So need to get back on DFUW review.

But I would never call this a review of Mortal Online. And you agreeing to it being "spot on" ain't a chocker to any1 that knows how you dispise everything with MO and SV. But if one just looks at the job that he did as a journalist objectivly. Reviewing a game. He barely scratched the surface of what MO is about. You call it "spot on". I call it bad journalism.

1. Again.. how does that differ from an unlimited trial?  You still have no answered this question.

2. I agree he was wrong, that is why I responded as I did.

As for your last point.  Every review except the one written by the guy who posted in the "What Can You Do To Support MO" thread was similar (over the past nearly 3 years...).  If it was one oddity you might have a case,  but the overwhelming majority of reviews, re-reviews, re-re-reviews and reviews after 2.5 years of release.. have been similar.  So they COULD all be wrong of course and you could be the only sane person... but I think that's unlikely.  Again though, it's certainly subjective but your opinion is very much outside the norm.
 

1. Hmm, it differs in that you can have more skills to make use of with the extra 500 skill points?

2. I just said that you can make yourself usefull even at a limit of 60 in a skill.

I haven't read any other re-reviews of MO then this one. Please point me to all the others re-reviews out there, and I tell you if I think they are fair. My point is. If your suppose to test a game like MO or DFUW, you need to test the core aspects of the game. In both these games it's exploring, being in a clan, crafting etc. NOT stay in beginner city and do nothing. He did NONE of those things I mentioned in MO, but he went with his MMORPG buddy RipperX, that loves DFUW more then most, and tested that in DFUW. Why not in MO? When several people offered him the same help. Maybe if RipperX had played MO we could have gotten a more fair score. :P Or if he had played with one of MOs big fanbois like Diph. I'm pretty damn sure he would have gotten into the game more with him showing him the ropes of the game. My problem is him not testing these aspects of the game at all. With or without RipperX or Diph. That's where I think THIS review fails. Had he tested how it was in a clan, crafted and explored and then still don't like it. I would have accepted it, cause then he at least would have tried the games most important parts.
 

Edit. Your saying that the only positive review was made by the guy that wrote "What Can You Do To Support MO". This guy, the same guy that made DFUW review, got most of his ingame experience by playing with RipperX, that promotes DFUW more then any1 else I've seen. I don't see how DFUW positive review should count, if you think the positive review for MO was biased... I don't see much difference between those two reviews now.