Originally posted by strangerdang

Originally posted by BlondeBabii

Originally posted by drumchannell

 

The usual bad player response. "I didn't win because someone rooted me in place, pvp isn't balanced, Wahhh!"

 

 

Its so obvious you Play Rift on a PVE server. If you play it at all that is.

The PVP in Rift is a very bad joke. its not even funny. Its the worse PVP i seen in a MMO in a long time.

Rift PVP is all about CC. Whoever CC's first and most wins. There is no Skill whatsoever in Rift PVP, just CC.

Rogues and Warriors are the god mode classes. Super OP and super CC.

Also in Rift there are no CC immunitys. you can be chain CCed until dead, and you will be if you do PVP in it on open world PVP server.

So get your facts stright Boy.

 Nothing is worse than being a mage in pvp.  In warfronts mages can do great if no one activly seeks to kill them, however the higher DPS warrior and rogue (they do serious DPS compared to what a mage can do) can easily CC lock a mage, more CC's than a mage has breaks, and the mages in Rfit keep their standard low survivability/ quick death qualities.

I grew up on the belief that CC was to be a cloth wearers "temporary armor", a counter to being so quick to die.  Rift not only gives warriors the DPS that once was reserved for squishies, but also gave them far more CC than the squishy mage, as well as an entire soul devoted to destroying casters, which offers huge magic resists (on top of their armor and high HP) and increased damage that builds when attacking casters or when being attacked with magic.

Not only this, but rogues, who do their typical great DPS, can CC lock as well, they can even CC while still in stealth, and pop in and out of stealth in combat. They also have great range souls, and even a tank or healing/buff soul. Rogues also benefit from a slower global cooldown than the rest.

Clerics have great versatility, however are restricted in mana use, dont seem to have nearly enough CC or counters, and while they can do great DPS lack the pvp utility as anything much more than a support/healer class.

Mages get the sht end of the stick in this game.  Not only can they be easily out DPS'ed by all three classes (they have slow cast times and long global cooldowns), they keep their usual low survivability.  Only now they dont have nearly as much CC, and their big nukes are really proc dependant, as the cast times for them will get you killed quickly.  In fact, endgame pve role for mages is either a secondary healer, or a buffer, thats right 2 spots for mages, no DPS.  How can a class that cant compete in DPS compete in pvp when they are also the class that dies the quickest and has the least amount of HP...if they are not the only class with CC's as an advantage at least.

 

Quite possibly the worst balanced game ive played.  Instead of a rockrogue>cleric>mage balancing tequnique.

Again this isnt saying a great player can be competative as a mage or cleric, just that two equally skilled players fighting, the outcome will be based on the totem pole class balance, if they are warrior they win.

I just have to reply to this, because it seems you are under some sort of delusion when it comes to pvp.

DPS != PVP

See? A dps cleric is useless. A mage doesn't have to do damage to be useful, i believe theres an entire soul based on control? It's not the ammount of kills you get that decides if you are useful or not. It's a multiplayer game.

If you are not helping your group, then you are useless, even if you have the most kills or done the most damage.

Originally posted by Wraithone

Originally posted by Qazz

I don't use XFire nor does anyone I know.  I'm not sure what those numbers really show anymore.

Same here. I don't bother with it.  I also do not know anyone who does these days.  One wonders what the motivation of some of these posters is.

As has been said in this thread (and others) is that while xfire is terrible at measuring absolute numbers, its pretty good at measuring trends. If they game is declining on xfire you can be pretty certain the game is declining over all.

Nice to see the B3 motherboards, can finally recommend getting a sandy bridge system again

Im having something of the opposite problem of the OP, invasions and rifts are destroyed too fast, which means i will have to go back to questing or warfronts to gain XP. Solo questing is one of the most boring things I know in MMOs, Im paying to play with people...

Also on the post above: Hes right, you sometimes have to motivate other people to do stuff, and its usually not alot thats needed. I've noticed that especially in warfronts, basicly one person saying "Ok, lets do this" and a couple of "nice healing" "good work" is sometimes all it takes to win. Same thing goes for rifts and invasions.

Originally posted by Zolgar

Originally posted by Quizzical

Yes, you can have both an SSD and a hard drive in the same system.  As for copying games, it depends on the game.  With Guild Wars, I installed the game and then copied the gw.dat file over and it worked.  That took several minutes, and the real bottleneck was my 100 Mbps router (as I was copying from one computer to another).  With Champions Online, just copying the entire folder without installing the game worked.

OH that is friggin' awesome. So I'm looking at faster loading/install/uninstall/copynpasting times with an SSD?

Yes, and your whole system will feel 'snappier', things like opening folders/web browser and other stuff will be faster. not to mention boot times will be faster too :)

Im gonna get an SSD after i upgrade my GFX card myself. My system looks fairly similar to yours, except im using an 8800gts (lol) :P

edit: maybe i shouldn't wait so long between opening a new tab and actually reply to the thread

Playing Rift with a little bit of Eve on the side.

Originally posted by thexrated

You really think the 5 minutes of fun this adds to the game was well spent development time, for a game that we are meant to play for years?

I get the feeling that BW are underestimating the MMO crowd, or how hardcore and picky we are when it comes to the games we play.

Minority is hardcore and picky. Majority of players are fairly casual.

Honestly, I do not even expect to be bale to keep my attention to any single MMO for as long as I did with WoW or EVE. I would be content if this amuses me for few months and after that I can always come back and check out the latest content updates. Remember that majority of players are very casual and secondly you can never please the hardest of the hardcore, they will always run out of content way before anyone else. This happend to me in classic WoW for example and I took few months off before the raiding in the game begun, as had nothing left to achieve, but perhaps play an alt.

I meant more how hardcore the avarage MMO gamer is to the avarage single player gamer. Ofcourse within the MMO crowd the majority of players are fairly casual, yet even those are probably more hardcore then non-mmo players.

Originally posted by gaou

 

Q&A with Daniel Erickson, Hall hood, and Jessica Sliwinski Part 2

At the begining of this D.E. says there is no content you have to do single-player

Um, so what about the space combat then? In that video they said space combat was singleplayer :/

Originally posted by artemisentr4

Originally posted by ukforze

Originally posted by fivoroth

Originally posted by orangeboom

Originally posted by fivoroth

@all the sandbox fans, we get that you don't like games that are not a sandbox. So please can you do us all a favour and go play a sandbox game. They never claime their game will be a sandbox. They are going for a themepark. Is this concept so hard to grasp. Why are you still whining that it's not a sandbox?

An arcade rail shooter is too basic a feature to even be part of the themepark/sandbox debate.

Says you. Arcade shooters can be extremely fun and some of them take a lot of skill. You can't say how difficult this will be because you have no info on level of this mission etc etc.

The fact that you are using my favourite word "rail(s)" means you are a sandbox fan. So if you are not interested in themeparks don't read up on them.

 

 

lmfao this is preset path roller coaster ride with no control of your ship other than holding

down on the LMB to fire... YEH GREAT SKILL

 

I must say i am shocked with bioware, a company that has a great track record, but im

more shocked by a handful of ppl actually praising this crap, this sort of lameness

belongs on the wii for 3 yrs olds, not mature & skilled mmo players

 Those are very debateable don't you think? It seems to me that there are way more immature and unskilled mmo players than the other way around. But depends on the game I guess.

I understand that the level of freedom for a MMO in this type of space game is lacking. No one can deny that. But on the other hand. This was and is meant as a "side game" from the featured MMO. Other than the optional guest leading you to your first space combat experience in game. It has nothing to do with the overall story or TOR. It is a distraction only.

As a distraction, I may have some fun with this arcade style game play. It looks fun for what it is, a mini-game. I don't see what the big deal is to the whiners. It has no baring on how the MMO features will be fleshed out. Has nothing to do with flashpoints, riads, warzones, open world quests, crafting and AH and all the other features of a MMO.

A side game is just a side game. It has nothing to do with developement of the main game. Deal with it or don't. It will be in the game as a distraction and nothing more. The rest of the game will stand on it's own. That is what mature players will gage their interest or disinterest by in TOR.

You really think the 5 minutes of fun this adds to the game was well spent development time, for a game that we are meant to play for years?

I get the feeling that BW are underestimating the MMO crowd, or how hardcore and picky we are when it comes to the games we play.

Actually looking at http://www.trionworlds.com/en/about/investors.php you see NBC Universal.

And by looking at NBC Universals Wikipedia page you find "NBC Universal was formed in May 2004 by the merger of General Electric's NBC with Vivendi's Vivendi Universal Entertainment."

Vivendi owns 54% of Activision Blizzard :)

edit: oh wait the wiki page also says "GE and US cable TV operator Comcast announced a buyout agreement for the company on December 3, 2009. Following regulatory approvals, the transaction completed on January 28, 2011. Comcast now owns 51% of NBC Universal while GE owns 49%."

so now im unsure

Originally posted by MMO.Maverick

Originally posted by Lille7

Why oh why do they keep making SINGLE PLAYER features for a MASSIVELY multiplayer game :/

Could you maybe elaborate?

Besides the space combat minigame, so far I've seen crafting, Warzones (battlegrounds), Flashpoints (dungeons), Story quests (questing revamp), AH, wide open worlds and raids that they've talked about, all features seen in Massively Multiplayer Online Roleplaying Games.

 

Originally posted by Dahlifyr

I really dont like that Bioware intrudes in the mmo buisness, not at all! They should stick with theire Clische singleplayer games and leave the rest alone.

I think you've made it abundantly clear that you dislike BW/SWTOR to the bone and that any news regarding SWTOR you'll see as onesidedly negative as possible.

Okey maybe I exagerated a bit :P

But as far as I know alot of the questing will be instanced singleplayer quests, where grouping is optional. And because it's instanced you won't be seeing random strangers in there.

It seems to me like they are trying to take the MM away from MMORPG.

Why oh why do they keep making SINGLE PLAYER features for a MASSIVELY multiplayer game :/

Is this even necessary? Are they really improving the game by adding an 80s arcade shooter to it?

Whining about lag in eve is stupid. There will always be lag unless they start with instancing or sharding, which is even worse.

Due to the nature of fights in eve, if CCP made it possible to have 5000 ships in a battle with no lag, the large coalitions would just bring 10000 people to the fights, and thus we lag again. They have the man power to do that, right now it's mostly what the system can handle that makes it unneccesary to bring more.

Might not be what you're looking for but I love my Fractal Design Define XL :)

Originally posted by Rednecksith

I hope the list of characters is given to CCP, and every single one of those accounts is permabanned. At least, if CCP is competent in the least, that's what will happen. But that's probably asking too much.

How can they even know this information is legit? They would need to verify that first, before they ban anyone.

Originally posted by AquaKira

Originally posted by Amjoco

I'm playing Rift fine on my M11X laptop at Ultra settings with the I5 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 335M. I don't understand whta the big deal is everyone talking about such High demand off this game is. If you can play WoW you can play Rift. There are parts that do get choppy when there are about 50 to 75 players fighting one mob but that is just latency from the server.

 So basicly I don't even need some kind of bad ass computer to run Rift on Ultra settings?

Well, not really no. But from the way you worded your opening post I thought you wanted to play other new games too :). And system requirements are always increasing.

Originally posted by AquaKira

Originally posted by Lille7

If you downgrade the CPU from the i7 2600 to the i5 2500 you can spend that money on a graphics card, and gain alot of gaming performance.

 If I change it, will I lose gaming performance that way? And will it re-gain the gap between i7 2600 to i7 2500 by buying for example, the 580?

There is almost no difference in game performance between the 2600 and the 2500. The 2600 is marginally better, but it's such a small difference, and the difference in graphics performance will be very noticable. I would definatly prefer a 2500 + 580 than a 2600 + 2x 440.

If you downgrade the CPU from the i7 2600 to the i5 2500 you can spend that money on a graphics card, and gain alot of gaming performance.

So of the two choices here: 1. Not opening lots of servers will lead to long queues and people who have bought the game will not be able to play. Option 2. Open more servers, now they will possibly have to merge some servers in 3 months, gives bad press.

What do you think is worse from a marketing perspective? The bad press gained from merging servers or the bad press gained from all the people not actually being able to play the game and use  the service they have paid for?

The 955 is a very good and fairly cheap CPU, overclocks very well. Im not using the stock cooler, but im running mine at 4.2Ghz, and its very easy to overclock. Ofcourse you wont be able to run it at that speed on the stock cooler, but it should be able to handle it at the 965s clock speed just fine.