Originally posted by Cereo

I said "Sure you'll argue it is "possible"...", guess you missed that part. I never said it wasn't possible, but it is also not viable, a good idea, or nearly as fun that way. A game should be fun however you play it. Do I really need to pull your post history and paste the countless times people have complained about something being too hard or not an option and your answer was "get in a good clan"?

 

And I agree, I am not sure you ever played UO or AC1. If you have not, I admire your ignorance then and glad you are having fun, sadly some of us have seem much better.

I disagree. Soloing is possible and fun. You just have to man-up a bit...

Played UO, but not AC. Darkfall has better core gameplay than UO, imo. We'll see about features, in time...

Originally posted by ILOVEPVE

Im wondering about one thing here. I have many friends playing WoW right now. They just make new characters all the time. make them max level and best gear, then makes a new toon and starts all over again.

I asked them if they wanted to try DF (on my computer), but they said they didnt like the grind!

So my question is simple: How can you grind in a PvE game, but not in a PvP game? And to be honest, in DF you can do anything from day one. You can join a crew on a ship and sail around the world, you can raid citys and other races. Gank and loot others.

In PvE MMOs you cant. You need to grind first. But thats ok?  Im very pussled about this mentality.

Can someone explain?

 

 

 

Some MMO players just like the auto target whack a mole MMO with the disgusted turned based slow combat. You'll find they don't enjoy the FPS genre. Darkfall is a hybrid of old school MMO RPG and the MMOFPS Planetside. I wish Planetside had resources to fight over for control for outfit base construction and weapon construction. If you like RPG's and FPS and liked Planetside you'll like Darkfall.

WoW is turn based combat?

You should revisit what turn based means... WoW is no more turn based than Darkfall.

But of course, bashing WoW is always fun, even with ignorant comments.

i think part of it is understanding that DF plays differently. Last night I just ran around ganking people naked.  That was a fun thing to do last night and it might be fun again....but if running around ganking people is all this game has to offer then its gonna be  hard sell.

UO keeps getting referenced becaues everyone knows this game is the closest next gen we've had to UO.  Well, they obviously didnt want to clone UO but I think they've thrown the baby out with the bath water on some things.

I dont want to send the wrong message.....this game has MASSIVE promise. Right now its Quake III in mmo clothes though, imho.

DF rocks, it's quite demanding though if you take it like that but it can be played casually as well. Sounds like the game you are looking for to play 0 to 3 hours is not an mmo so it would be best to find some casual games instead of the online ones.

Originally posted by Zodan

DF rocks, it's quite demanding though if you take it like that but it can be played casually as well. Sounds like the game you are looking for to play 0 to 3 hours is not an mmo so it would be best to find some casual games instead of the online ones.

I have LESS time than the OP to play, but I love MMOs.  Been playing them since before at least some of the people on these forums were born, most likely.  I go back to Meridian 59 and have played nearly every MMO release for at least a few levels to see what it was about.

The smartest posts on this thread were those by folks pointing out that no consequence, FFA PVP = fail.  Robert seems to indicate that everything is fine with DF and there are PLENTY of consequences and everyone needs to "man up".  Im suspecting that he is full of BS and that the OP is accurate.  It's just common sense and no one "defending" DF seems to point out HOW the OP is wrong.  WHAT are these "big consequences"?  If there WERE real consequences, why would they have to "man up"? They wouldnt.

The original UO was a broken gank-fest.  I hated it.  This sounds the same.  So the UO comparo is specious.  UO was fixed later, and maybe this will be also, but by then 10 people will be left playing (at most)

I have a LOT of fun playing WoW EVERY day with no drama or emotional angst.  So there is NO reason the OP cant "play an MMO" and sould find "casual games instead of online ones" as your snide comment suggests (I notice lots of the DF defense posters are really snide a-holes - says a lot)

People moan and groan about WoW.  Well it has 10M subs.  DF will have very, very few.  So to the defenders of these weird, extreme, "cater to 1%" playstyles, enjoy the endless treadmill of game after game being over promised, underdelivered, economically not viable and utterly failing.  I guess the "real fun" (outside of naked gank fests) is in hyping and then flame warring on forums.

You can replace DarkFall with "Shadowbane" and the threads would be identical.   For "no holds barred open PVP" to be remotely fun, and not devolve into roaming gangs of naked morons ganking everything in sight (sound familiar?), a LOT of work and dev energy has to be put into the FRAMEWORK of the SOCIETY.  That has really NEVER been done TRULY well outside of EVE.  Given that the feature itself is one that just not all that many PAYING CUSTOMERS give a damn about (as evidenced by the fact that the biggest MMOs are really PVE), it is VERY unlikely that big dev money, brain power, effort, and polish will ever go into producing a genuinely effective PVP world.  As a result, most will continue to look (and fail) a lot like DF.

Originally posted by mlambert890

Originally posted by Zodan

DF rocks, it's quite demanding though if you take it like that but it can be played casually as well. Sounds like the game you are looking for to play 0 to 3 hours is not an mmo so it would be best to find some casual games instead of the online ones.

 

I have LESS time than the OP to play, but I love MMOs.  Been playing them since before at least some of the people on these forums were born, most likely.  I go back to Meridian 59 and have played nearly every MMO release for at least a few levels to see what it was about.

The smartest posts on this thread were those by folks pointing out that no consequence, FFA PVP = fail.  Robert seems to indicate that everything is fine with DF and there are PLENTY of consequences and everyone needs to "man up".  Im suspecting that he is full of BS and that the OP is accurate.  It's just common sense and no one "defending" DF seems to point out HOW the OP is wrong.  WHAT are these "big consequences"?  If there WERE real consequences, why would they have to "man up"? They wouldnt.

The original UO was a broken gank-fest.  I hated it.  This sounds the same.  So the UO comparo is specious.  UO was fixed later, and maybe this will be also, but by then 10 people will be left playing (at most)

I have a LOT of fun playing WoW EVERY day with no drama or emotional angst.  So there is NO reason the OP cant "play an MMO" and sould find "casual games instead of online ones" as your snide comment suggests (I notice lots of the DF defense posters are really snide a-holes - says a lot)

People moan and groan about WoW.  Well it has 10M subs.  DF will have very, very few.  So to the defenders of these weird, extreme, "cater to 1%" playstyles, enjoy the endless treadmill of game after game being over promised, underdelivered, economically not viable and utterly failing.  I guess the "real fun" (outside of naked gank fests) is in hyping and then flame warring on forums.

You can replace DarkFall with "Shadowbane" and the threads would be identical.   For "no holds barred open PVP" to be remotely fun, and not devolve into roaming gangs of naked morons ganking everything in sight (sound familiar?), a LOT of work and dev energy has to be put into the FRAMEWORK of the SOCIETY.  That has really NEVER been done TRULY well outside of EVE.  Given that the feature itself is one that just not all that many PAYING CUSTOMERS give a damn about (as evidenced by the fact that the biggest MMOs are really PVE), it is VERY unlikely that big dev money, brain power, effort, and polish will ever go into producing a genuinely effective PVP world.  As a result, most will continue to look (and fail) a lot like DF.

Interesting opinions. Absolutely no relevance to how I personally see the game, but interesting, none-the-less...

Originally posted by mlambert890

Originally posted by Zodan

DF rocks, it's quite demanding though if you take it like that but it can be played casually as well. Sounds like the game you are looking for to play 0 to 3 hours is not an mmo so it would be best to find some casual games instead of the online ones.

 

I like WoW.  I didn't like original UO.

This is why you don't like darkfall.  It's like original UO and not like WoW.  Does it surprise anyone that this guy doesn't like it?

The concequence comes when you die and all your gear is looted.  Maybe you don't get that because you like games where you can't be looted, hence no concequence pvp?

I'm not going to call you carebear or anything.  Some people just like PvE games and games with meaningless PvP.  No big deal.  Different strokes for different folks.  But saying a game sucks because it's not like some totally different game, which it was never trying to be like is really just failed logic.  It's like saying OMG this apple sux because it's not like this orange!

Originally posted by nethervoid

Originally posted by mlambert890

Originally posted by Zodan

DF rocks, it's quite demanding though if you take it like that but it can be played casually as well. Sounds like the game you are looking for to play 0 to 3 hours is not an mmo so it would be best to find some casual games instead of the online ones.

 

I like WoW.  I didn't like original UO.

 

This is why you don't like darkfall.  It's like original UO and not like WoW.  Does it surprise anyone that this guy doesn't like it?

The concequence comes when you die and all your gear is looted.  Maybe you don't get that because you like games where you can't be looted, hence no concequence pvp?

I'm not going to call you carebear or anything.  Some people just like PvE games and games with meaningless PvP.  No big deal.  Different strokes for different folks.  But saying a game sucks because it's not like some totally different game, which it was never trying to be like is really just failed logic.  It's like saying OMG this apple sux because it's not like this orange!

When you quote a person's post, please don't edit it in order to support your attempt to discredit them.  Trying reading mlambert890's post again, all of it.  Thank you, mlambert890, excellent post, but I'm afraid few will actually understand it unless they open their eyes.

Originally posted by indiramourn

Originally posted by nethervoid

Originally posted by mlambert890

Originally posted by Zodan

DF rocks, it's quite demanding though if you take it like that but it can be played casually as well. Sounds like the game you are looking for to play 0 to 3 hours is not an mmo so it would be best to find some casual games instead of the online ones.

 

I like WoW.  I didn't like original UO.

 

This is why you don't like darkfall.  It's like original UO and not like WoW.  Does it surprise anyone that this guy doesn't like it?

The concequence comes when you die and all your gear is looted.  Maybe you don't get that because you like games where you can't be looted, hence no concequence pvp?

I'm not going to call you carebear or anything.  Some people just like PvE games and games with meaningless PvP.  No big deal.  Different strokes for different folks.  But saying a game sucks because it's not like some totally different game, which it was never trying to be like is really just failed logic.  It's like saying OMG this apple sux because it's not like this orange!

 

When you quote a person's post, please don't edit it in order to support your attempt to discredit them.  Trying reading mlambert890's post again, all of it.  Thank you, mlambert890, excellent post, but I'm afraid few will actually understand it unless they open their eyes.

I edited it to avoid a wall of text.  If people want to re-read his post, they can scroll up or hit the last page, etc.

The point is, the guy likes WoW and dislikes original UO, because of the ganking.  My point still stands.  Not quoting his wall of text does not change or invalidate my point.

Originally posted by nethervoid

i don't like darkfall.  I like WoW. 

See what happens when people just leave out words and letters in what you said?

Originally posted by Cereo

Originally posted by nethervoid

i don't like darkfall.  I like WoW. 

 

See what happens when people just leave out words and letters in what you said?

LOL  Are you serious?  There's a difference between paraphrasing and taking words out of context.  The guy said he liked wow and did not like original UO.  Are you arguing that he did NOT say those things?

My god, debate the topic.  Trying to wear someone down via semantics is weak.

Originally posted by nethervoid

Originally posted by mlambert890

Originally posted by Zodan

DF rocks, it's quite demanding though if you take it like that but it can be played casually as well. Sounds like the game you are looking for to play 0 to 3 hours is not an mmo so it would be best to find some casual games instead of the online ones.

 

I like WoW.  I didn't like original UO.

 

This is why you don't like darkfall.  It's like original UO and not like WoW.  Does it surprise anyone that this guy doesn't like it?

The concequence comes when you die and all your gear is looted.  Maybe you don't get that because you like games where you can't be looted, hence no concequence pvp?

I'm not going to call you carebear or anything.  Some people just like PvE games and games with meaningless PvP.  No big deal.  Different strokes for different folks.  But saying a game sucks because it's not like some totally different game, which it was never trying to be like is really just failed logic.  It's like saying OMG this apple sux because it's not like this orange!

Oddly enough, it's that same failed logic that players from just about every other MMO, including DF players, use to bash and denigrate the players of other games.

In your post above, you can't even help yourself from being pejorative.  You feign holding back the carebear name-calling, and yet, it's there (imagine if I'd opened this message with "I'm not going to call you a completely useless, clueless, idiotic fanboi or anything.").  Similarly, define "games with meaningless PvP".  Meaningless to who?

It's interesting that you point out bias, yet still show your own.

Originally posted by Rohn

Originally posted by nethervoid

Originally posted by mlambert890

Originally posted by Zodan

DF rocks, it's quite demanding though if you take it like that but it can be played casually as well. Sounds like the game you are looking for to play 0 to 3 hours is not an mmo so it would be best to find some casual games instead of the online ones.

 

I like WoW.  I didn't like original UO.

 

This is why you don't like darkfall.  It's like original UO and not like WoW.  Does it surprise anyone that this guy doesn't like it?

The concequence comes when you die and all your gear is looted.  Maybe you don't get that because you like games where you can't be looted, hence no concequence pvp?

I'm not going to call you carebear or anything.  Some people just like PvE games and games with meaningless PvP.  No big deal.  Different strokes for different folks.  But saying a game sucks because it's not like some totally different game, which it was never trying to be like is really just failed logic.  It's like saying OMG this apple sux because it's not like this orange!

Oddly enough, it's that same failed logic that players from just about every other MMO, including DF players, use to bash and denigrate the players of other games.

In your post above, you can't even help yourself from being pejorative.  You feign holding back the carebear name-calling, and yet, it's there (imagine if I'd opened this message with "I'm not going to call you a completely useless, clueless, idiotic fanboi or anything.").  Similarly, define "games with meaningless PvP".  Meaningless to who?

It's interesting that you point out bias, yet still show your own.

I think you fail to see what I'm saying.  Some people like PvE games.  I'm fine with that.  I like PvE games too.  Calling someone a carebear is just a derogatory way of saying 'you like PvE games'.

I'm not biased.  If you read my sig, I've played and liked all of those games, with exception to HZ, which I played for all of 2 weeks.  The game just didn't have anything to do.

Meaningless PvP is PvP in which no matter if you win or lose there is no effect on the overall game.  WoW PvP fits this.  EQ PvP fits this.  EvE does not.  DF does not.  UO does not...well UO is more of a fense rider on this one since you can't destroy player structures.  Meaningless PvP serves no greater purpose other than just the PvP itself.

Originally posted by nethervoid

I think you fail to see what I'm saying.  Some people like PvE games.  I'm fine with that.  I like PvE games too.  Calling someone a carebear is just a derogatory way of saying 'you like PvE games'.

I'm not biased.  If you read my sig, I've played and liked all of those games, with exception to HZ, which I played for all of 2 weeks.  The game just didn't have anything to do.

Meaningless PvP is PvP in which no matter if you win or lose there is no effect on the overall game.  WoW PvP fits this.  EQ PvP fits this.  EvE does not.  DF does not.  UO does not...well UO is more of a fense rider on this one since you can't destroy player structures.  Meaningless PvP serves no greater purpose other than just the PvP itself.

Contrary to what you may think you totally described your beloved DnF in what is highlighted above, and that is why DarknFail will do just that, fail. There is no reason to play other then gank and PvP.  Tthere are oriental games with much better game engines that offer PVP and ganking for free.

I have been playing computer games since the original Adventure game was on a teletype and the only game I have ever played where PVP matters is Eve.

Originally posted by phrank

Originally posted by nethervoid

I think you fail to see what I'm saying.  Some people like PvE games.  I'm fine with that.  I like PvE games too.  Calling someone a carebear is just a derogatory way of saying 'you like PvE games'.

I'm not biased.  If you read my sig, I've played and liked all of those games, with exception to HZ, which I played for all of 2 weeks.  The game just didn't have anything to do.

Meaningless PvP is PvP in which no matter if you win or lose there is no effect on the overall game.  WoW PvP fits this.  EQ PvP fits this.  EvE does not.  DF does not.  UO does not...well UO is more of a fense rider on this one since you can't destroy player structures.  Meaningless PvP serves no greater purpose other than just the PvP itself.

 

Contrary to what you may think you totally described your beloved DnF in what is highlighted above, and that is why DarknFail will do just that, fail. There is no reason to play other then gank and PvP.  Tthere are oriental games with much better game engines that offer PVP and ganking for free.

I have been playing computer games since the original Adventure game was on a teletype and the only game I have ever played where PVP matters is Eve.

I'd have to disagree a bit, PVP mattered a bunch in Shadowbane, Lineage 2 just to name a couple more.

Originally posted by phrank

Originally posted by nethervoid

I think you fail to see what I'm saying.  Some people like PvE games.  I'm fine with that.  I like PvE games too.  Calling someone a carebear is just a derogatory way of saying 'you like PvE games'.

I'm not biased.  If you read my sig, I've played and liked all of those games, with exception to HZ, which I played for all of 2 weeks.  The game just didn't have anything to do.

Meaningless PvP is PvP in which no matter if you win or lose there is no effect on the overall game.  WoW PvP fits this.  EQ PvP fits this.  EvE does not.  DF does not.  UO does not...well UO is more of a fense rider on this one since you can't destroy player structures.  Meaningless PvP serves no greater purpose other than just the PvP itself.

 

Contrary to what you may think you totally described your beloved DnF in what is highlighted above, and that is why DarknFail will do just that, fail. There is no reason to play other then gank and PvP.  Tthere are oriental games with much better game engines that offer PVP and ganking for free.

I have been playing computer games since the original Adventure game was on a teletype and the only game I have ever played where PVP matters is Eve.

There is no such thing as city building and destruction in DF?  Damn.  What a hoax DF is!

Shadowbane didn't have city building and destruction?  Damn.  I must have been in some weird LSD induced dream for a year.

Look man, I've played EVE a lot too.  There are many similarities to EVE, SB, and DF on a general level.  I will give props to EVE though for expanding on its core delivery from 2003.  In 2003 EVE had NONE of it's current player built structures or conquerable stations, etc.  Hell they didn't even have battleships in game.  0.0 was a wasteland.  There was nothing to do out there besides mine and blow up random mob spawns in the mining belts.  You couldn't take over stations or build your own.  The only thing the players built were ships and modules.  So in effect EVE launched with no 'city warfare' although they do have it now.

You can't compare a 6 year old game to a brand new game, unless you compare each of them on release.  If you do that with EVE, I think you would find EVE was a pretty craptastic game back then.  It's awesome now, no doubt - I just quit playing it again, but there's just no comparison.  Most indie games start out crappy.  It's a craps shoot whether they continue to develop into something really awesome, or die out like SB did, choking on its own spagetti code and bugs.

I hope the DF team pulls off an 'EVE' with DF.  It's really not very likely, since CCP is more of a hail mary that worked out (and I'm glad it did).  We'll just have to play and wait...or just wait if you aren't going to play.

the empty 50000 acres of land was intended and if you don't like running around for hours without seeing another lifeform you are a) a carebear b) not hardcore or skilled enough c) this game is not for you.

Originally posted by nethervoid

Originally posted by Rohn

Originally posted by nethervoid

Originally posted by mlambert890

Originally posted by Zodan

DF rocks, it's quite demanding though if you take it like that but it can be played casually as well. Sounds like the game you are looking for to play 0 to 3 hours is not an mmo so it would be best to find some casual games instead of the online ones.

 

I like WoW.  I didn't like original UO.

 

This is why you don't like darkfall.  It's like original UO and not like WoW.  Does it surprise anyone that this guy doesn't like it?

The concequence comes when you die and all your gear is looted.  Maybe you don't get that because you like games where you can't be looted, hence no concequence pvp?

I'm not going to call you carebear or anything.  Some people just like PvE games and games with meaningless PvP.  No big deal.  Different strokes for different folks.  But saying a game sucks because it's not like some totally different game, which it was never trying to be like is really just failed logic.  It's like saying OMG this apple sux because it's not like this orange!

Oddly enough, it's that same failed logic that players from just about every other MMO, including DF players, use to bash and denigrate the players of other games.

In your post above, you can't even help yourself from being pejorative.  You feign holding back the carebear name-calling, and yet, it's there (imagine if I'd opened this message with "I'm not going to call you a completely useless, clueless, idiotic fanboi or anything.").  Similarly, define "games with meaningless PvP".  Meaningless to who?

It's interesting that you point out bias, yet still show your own.

I think you fail to see what I'm saying.  Some people like PvE games.  I'm fine with that.  I like PvE games too.  Calling someone a carebear is just a derogatory way of saying 'you like PvE games'.

I'm not biased.  If you read my sig, I've played and liked all of those games, with exception to HZ, which I played for all of 2 weeks.  The game just didn't have anything to do.

Meaningless PvP is PvP in which no matter if you win or lose there is no effect on the overall game.  WoW PvP fits this.  EQ PvP fits this.  EvE does not.  DF does not.  UO does not...well UO is more of a fense rider on this one since you can't destroy player structures.  Meaningless PvP serves no greater purpose other than just the PvP itself.

Regarding PvP, I think each player derives meaning within the context of the game they choose to play.  To say that PvP only has meaning if it allows "full loot", involves player-built structures, or has a temporary or permanent effect on other players or the game world, is a rather narrow definition.

To be sure, to a player that adheres to the above principle solely, then games like WoW, EQ2, and VG would be "meaningless".

But is that the only way every player finds meaning in PvP?

Using WoW as an example, some players find meaning in the simple act of PvP - whether that be in an Arena, battleground, or in the world.  They have fun with PvP in the game, and fun is the point of any game in the first place.  That could be defined as meaningful to that player.

WoW is a gear driven game.  PvP allows access to or the purchase of a number of high quality items, which is certainly meaningful to the individual player within the context of the game.

Blizzard added several "World PvP" structures to the game with TBC.  While the importance or effectiveness of these systems is certainly arguable, these systems do indeed have at least a minor impact on the game world and other players.

Finally, there is the addition of Wintergrasp, which does provide players the opportunity to fight over and impact the game world.

So, again, I believe the question is "meaningful to who"?  In my opinion, that's more for the individual player to decide, instead of being narrowly defined by the opinions of a patronizing, self-appointed few.

Originally posted by nethervoid

Originally posted by indiramourn

Originally posted by nethervoid

Originally posted by mlambert890

Originally posted by Zodan

DF rocks, it's quite demanding though if you take it like that but it can be played casually as well. Sounds like the game you are looking for to play 0 to 3 hours is not an mmo so it would be best to find some casual games instead of the online ones.

 

I like WoW.  I didn't like original UO.

 

This is why you don't like darkfall.  It's like original UO and not like WoW.  Does it surprise anyone that this guy doesn't like it?

The concequence comes when you die and all your gear is looted.  Maybe you don't get that because you like games where you can't be looted, hence no concequence pvp?

I'm not going to call you carebear or anything.  Some people just like PvE games and games with meaningless PvP.  No big deal.  Different strokes for different folks.  But saying a game sucks because it's not like some totally different game, which it was never trying to be like is really just failed logic.  It's like saying OMG this apple sux because it's not like this orange!

 

When you quote a person's post, please don't edit it in order to support your attempt to discredit them.  Trying reading mlambert890's post again, all of it.  Thank you, mlambert890, excellent post, but I'm afraid few will actually understand it unless they open their eyes.

I edited it to avoid a wall of text.  If people want to re-read his post, they can scroll up or hit the last page, etc.

The point is, the guy likes WoW and dislikes original UO, because of the ganking.  My point still stands.  Not quoting his wall of text does not change or invalidate my point.

If you edited it to avoid a wall of text, state it clearly that it is your edited version.  From the way I read it, you basically changed  mlambert890's entire well written explanation into a one-line unsubstantiated and subpar statement.  In a way you appear to be trying to discredit mlambert890.

Second, if you want to summarize mlambert890's long text into a statement, you do not need to quote the argument, just start your own text with a line stating that based on your understanding, mlambert's text amount to saying this "...." (and you are wrong, mlambert is saying much more).

You have used the signature of mlambert (the quote) on a statement you wrote and pass on as if it is an original quote from mlambert,  This is almost the same as forgery.