I'm checking out the trial and was curious if any of you long time capsuleers could answer a question for me. When the servers go down like this, does it stop the clock on your training cue? Thanks.

Originally posted by Dalmont

Originally posted by jonrd463

Originally posted by Dalmont

I don't quite understand why people want incarna. Why leave your ship when you can do everything from there?

 

Are we going to have space stations of idiots doing dances and /train?

 

There better not be missions/pvp etc with that, I would be thoroughly disapointed, as thats what dust will do.

I can see it adding a bit of depth and making the game a bit more personal. Plans can be hatched by a group of mercs in a seedy station bar somewhere out in a backwater system. Corporations can hold board meetings in corporate offices. Stuff like that could add a whole new dimension to the game without sacrificing what makes EVE the game it's die-hards love.

Thats really roleplay stuff, and as in any mmo the amount of people that RP are low (though its easier in EVE as you don't have people running around and the game mechanics help with roleplaying.)

But....if its done badly people will complain and moan over nothing. I can see it now.

"Why can't I shoot my gun, why can't I use this vending machine, why can't I sit down" etc etc

I guess I'm happy with a game that mostly works which doesn't need something that might break it more :P

The cool thing about that is I've seen enough interviews with the lead producer of EVE (can't remember his name at the moment) and over and over he expresses a deep respect for the EVE playerbase. He says the things we seriously wish other developers would say, like they're never going to dumb down the game. I imagine the people wanting in-station pewpewpew probably lack an appreciation for the ship-based play and they'll wash out soon enough.

Although being able to sit for, say, coporation meetings and the like would be nice. I don't see any reason why they wouldn't include a sitting function, but the lack of one wouldn't be a dealbreaker for me.

Originally posted by Dalmont

I don't quite understand why people want incarna. Why leave your ship when you can do everything from there?

 

Are we going to have space stations of idiots doing dances and /train?

 

There better not be missions/pvp etc with that, I would be thoroughly disapointed, as thats what dust will do.

I can see it adding a bit of depth and making the game a bit more personal. Plans can be hatched by a group of mercs in a seedy station bar somewhere out in a backwater system. Corporations can hold board meetings in corporate offices. Stuff like that could add a whole new dimension to the game without sacrificing what makes EVE the game it's die-hards love.

I've been watching all the info released on Rift for some time and the game certainly piques my interest. Thing I'm curious about, though, is this skill tree system. I may be missing something, but as described, it sounds a lot like WoW's 3 categories per race. What is different about it? What makes it special and allows it to stand apart from WoW's system?

Originally posted by Squal'Zell

Originally posted by Qazz

They just want to copy Warcraft's money.

then they should start with some good multiplayer/single player games

then they should build a deep and coherent lore that dates ages

then they should study the market

then they should study the population

then they should invest time and money (generously)

and at that point they won't need to copy WoW and be greately successfull

the one that came close with lore may be age of conan and warhammer but thats all they had behind them...

 

btw i hate WoW thats because of my own preferences towards gaming, but i fully respect blizzard and their marketing department.

Exactly. WoW's initial success was due to a pre-established playerbase. I'm willing to bet that easily 75% of the launch population consisted of people who played the WarCraft games. While all the games incorporated some bits of lore, WarCraft 3 and it's expansion blew the doors open in terms of fleshing out a game world. WoW was instantly familiar to people from the start. The population explosion was then due to word of mouth ("Hey, you ought to check out this cool game I'm playing. We can play together!") and extremely slick and aggressive marketing. In fact, with regard to marketing, it wouldn't surprise me if Blizzard spent more on that than Ultima Online's and Everquest's actual development costs combined.

Nowadays? It means someone who has a high kill count of newbies and cries when real consequences to his actions are realized.

Originally posted by funkmastaD

Originally posted by Adelbert
+1 There is no way someone can enjoy MO. A game may have bad gameplay decisions, but they MUST work if you are selling that for 50 bucks. You may like it or you may not, but it must work. Darkfall, WoW, Everquest, Warhammer, AoC or any other MMO have their gameplay style. You can love it or hate it, but they work. There are good gameplay and mechanic concepts and decisions in MO. But none of theme work. So yeah, as MT said, it doesnt feel like a game. And yeah, "no map = fun"? Lol...

Uh, if MO doesn't work what have I been playing the last few weeks?

I'm honestly curious, so please don't take this as an attempt to be a troll or anything. Could you describe a typical gameplay session for us? Because for me, it goes something like this:

1. Log in.

2. Look around a little bit.

3. Kill a couple of weasels.

4. Head to nearest city to sell off bones and fur.

5. CTD before reaching said city due to an error caused by the game looking for textures on a developer's computer instead of mine*

*For those having rendering exceptions or OOM errors, look at the error message. It's looking for files at C:\users\ByggareBob\...etc. Unless that just so happens to be your Windows login too, it's not going to find anything there. That's sloppy coding. Period. All file references should be to the local installation of the game, and this should have been passed through some sort of Quality Assurance before the game was launched.

Gonna have to agree here. I know all about the design intentions, and on paper they look great. Grief-preventing PK system that seperates true hardcore players from the whaaaa-baby newbie killers? Sounds good. Crafting system capable of churning out millions of different items? Niiiice. Unreal 3 engine? Good graphics potential.

But that's all it is-- intention and potential. The execution is clunky, sloppy, frustrating, and extremely off-putting. If Star Vault is able to wrestle a playable game out of this mess in a year's time, I may give it a second look. As of now, it's a no-go. I do take one exception and that's the graphical comparison with Darkfall. MO's graphics, while imperfect in their own right are imho better than Darkfall's. Of course, this means nothing when the game is simply unplayable.

I'd love to see MMOs do something Morrowind did in 2002. Those of you who played probably remember the VAST amounts of in-game books. I remember going to the Imperial Library in Vivec and just reading the piles and piles of books in there. With some of the books, if you read between the lines, you'd see clues to interesting places, artifacts, etc. that weren't tied to any particular quest. You'd get just enough information to go out into the world and seek out that cave or tomb mentioned in a book, and quite often, you were rewarded with gold or loot.  It was a great way to learn about the game world and culture without having to follow the strict directions of a specific quest. MMOs could definitely use such a curiosity-rewarding feature.

Yeah, yeah, Blizzard copied GW, we get that. I think the comparisons to WoW are more graphical style, color palette, etc. It LOOKS WoWish not due to the subject matter, but due to the presentation. In this respect, I wholeheartedly agree-- it looks like a WoW clone at first glance.

Cue more butthurtedly obtuse gainsaying.

Oh, and if there is a space-based component to the game, featuing those amazingly awesome Battlefleet Gothic ships, I just might be a guaranteed sub.

Originally posted by Gevauden

Two negative trolls instantly after my post..too cliche for me.

 

And again the people spouting hatred towards it clearly state they don't like this type of game style they like something completly differint and on top of all that their cruddy computer can't even handle the game and they blame the game for that? LOL true pathetics on these haters/

 

Looks you ungrateful trolls I came here to help you and show you the light which is APB, if its not your cup of tea then move along tho it's shows what boring taste in games you prefer.   Just stick to single player games your probably home schooled and socially retarded meaning your not equipped to handle social acitvity in an MMO that uses the best MIC recognition in a video game.

 

Everyone can talk and communicate it's simple the best,

 

 

If your going to hate on this game please go away none og you haters have made a good enough statement to put this game down when I know for a fact you liked it and are definatly going o get the game I can see through troll lies easliy.

 

APB = So good your not worthy

LOL! That has to be the biggest load of BS I've ever read on these forums. I'm starting to wonder if it's an elaborate troll, it's so ridiculous.

Does anyone know how much being a marketing plant pays? I was thinking about finding something on the side to make some extra dough...

Originally posted by Daywolf

You know my first flight sim is much like my current one? How come those are not instanced? Why are they not dumbed down?? Why are they not noob friendly? You guys are missing out, you should be at flight sim forums trying to change their games!! Telling them they have no clue what they are doing or what they want. Pfff…

This made me crack up, as I'm a sim-head too. I can only imagine the shitstorms that would happen if someone complained that Level-D or PMDG products were too hard and should be simplified. :D

Excellent thread. I'm afraid my take on it is more, for lack of a better term, misanthropic. No, I don't hate all people, but I have no patience for the mainstream, pop-culture soaked, low attention span, and shallow types that make up a majority of the buying public. Instant gratification and entitlement seems to be the primary goal and philosophy of this segment of society. This is all fine and dandy, except they've been creeping into what I used to consider a safe haven of the geeky intellectual- RPGs.

The fact is, I'm pretty sure the vast majority of MMO players now would never have given games like the Ultimas, M&M, or Wizardry series an iota of thought when they came out. A game where you had to keep your own notes or plot out the maps on graph paper? Pffssh, forget it! Sure, sometimes having to do those things was a pain in the ass, but how much more immersive can you get than consulting your own handwritten journal and maps to try to figure something out?

When Ultima Online came out, I was giddy. Here was the chance to hook up with like-minded people and participate in what could be seen at the time as an evolution of the Pen & Paper scene into the computer age. What has happened, now that MMOs have gone more mainstream, is that this safe haven has been invaded by the same people who used to avoid these types of games. Imagine (for those of you who play or used to play Pen & Paper games) that you've got your geeky friends over for a night of D20 and all of the sudden, a group of dumb jocks storm in going "YEEEEAHHH!!! FOOTBALL, BABY!", knocking over your DM's board, shoving you out of your chairs, and taking over your game by playing with your gamepieces like they were those little green Army men.

That's kind of how I see the evolution of RPGs, both online and singleplayer. Since the dumb jocks are now the majority of the player base, and they aren't the brightest bulbs in the fixture, you've got to make concessions to get them to continue to pay. Unfortunately, anyone who appreciates a more cerebral challenge is faced with either "getting with the times" or finding a new hobby, and for some odd reason, it's this group that's labelled the bad guys.

Originally posted by gnomexxx

I think it's the current bit of PvP that has killed everything for the old timers.  I like to play against other players, but not in games that promote ganking or not working together.  DAoC was the perfect element of PvP that kept my interest.  And it built a community along with the social aspect.

I tried AoC too.  Even got the expansion.  But I got bored as well.  When I played I played on the RPPvP server.  It seems that the current PvP games have brought in a selfish nasty group of players.  Not the type I would want to socialize with, much less play a game alongside.

I'm going to stick to the PvE games from now on.  About the closest I'll get to PvP is either going back to Camelot or resubbing on WAR.

I never have understood what the kick is in being just plain gross in chat channels.

I used to like PvP when it was just a feature among features in a game. It may be nostalgia or rose tinted glasses, but it seems like the gankers were more of a minority in "the good ol' days". Sure, they were there, but I seem to remember there being a sort of unwritten code that there should be a reason to kill the other guy besides for the lulz. Deathmatch-style PvP where the goal is simply killing another toon reduces PvP to the most base level. Sure, there's magic, different types of armor and weapons, and different classes, but it seems nowadays that PvP is nothing more than a glorified Quake 3: Arena with the ultimate goal being a frag count. What's worse is that sort of gameplay attracts the worst kind of players like spilled sugar attracts ants.

I know there are still PvPers out there who play with a bit more respect to the setting and context of the game, but just as the mindless, senseless gankers were a minority in the way-back-when, decent and honorable PvPers are the minority now.

Originally posted by Tarka

Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by Khalathwyr

And the only way to prove that is for the to make the game so that we can go to it. Any other "proof" that is put forward is just dismissed sum total as evidence the continued cry for "proof" from folks on this forum. *shrug*

Feel free to put up millions of dollars of your own money and years of your own time to make it then if you feel so confident.  Otherwise, when you're talking about other people's money and other people's time, the only way any rational company is going to give it a shot is if you PROVE there is a market first.

Can you do that?  Didn't think so.

 Precisely.  Its all very well a small minority of players being convinced that a certain MMO design would be successful without actually conducting surveys to backup such claims, but in the end these companies design their games around a model that has research to PROVE that there is a probability it will be successful.  Although some actually miscalculate or ultimately fail to actually capture the parameters of their research within the design of their product and thus produce a product that is not accurately built from their research.

This minority need to face reality that even though THEY think their design could be popular, the MMO industry doesn't necessarily agree

Research shows that Farmville's playerbase trumps WoW's by almost a factor of 10. If all MMOs adopted a Farmville style because of its popularity, would you still be promoting the idea that following market research is the way to go? I'm not dismissing the value of it, of course. MR is definitely necessary, but think about it... People playing Farmville now are not the same type of people who got into Ultima Online or Everquest back in the day. You're really comfortable with pop-culture dictating the trends in gaming?

I think the problem with these arguments stems from the attitude that all games should have the same features. It's an entitlement thing. It used to be that a genre catered to a certain type of player. You want action and pewpewpew? The FPS department is this way. You want an RPG? They're over that-a-way. Like sports? See our latest Madden and NBA games over here, and so on.

Blending genres isn't a bad thing, per se, but I draw the line at design intent versus a feature that doesn't fit in with that intent. I've brought this up a couple times recently, but it's valid. If a game is designed from the ground up to be a first person game, for example, it's not going to have third person view and no amount of "BUT I WAAAANNNNT IT!!!" crying should change the developer's mind.

If a game doesn't fit your play style, don't play it and find one that does. You are not entitled to have every game cater to you. Period.

Originally posted by Averros

Originally posted by Garvon3

Originally posted by negentropy

Originally posted by Cephus404

No, it's not over for most MMO vets, it's only over for those MMO vets who refuse to move on.  

You hit the nail right on the head.

I've been playing MMOs since the beginning and I certainly have moved on. Times change and you either change with them or go find another hobby.

Besides, the evolution of MMOs in the past 10 years is neither good or bad, just different. Adjust.

Ah I see. So you see nothing wrong with your condecending posts telling people to go bugger off or change their tastes to "get with the times"? 

Many people who were interested in MMORPGs haven't "evolved", they've left. I've seen little to no advancement in the last 6 years of MMORPGs. Probably the biggest innovation was public quests, and that's pathetic. Everything else has been getting simpler and simpler and simpler. That's not evolution by any stretch of the definition. In fact that's the opposite of evolution. 

 

How would you like it if someone took your favorite genre/hobby, totally changed it, and when you expressed that you were upset, everyone laughed at you and said "man, get with the times or find something else to do". 

Some of you really need to stop being so selfish and closed minded. 

This isn't about change, this isn't about being young or old.... it is about values of the players and the designs of the game. I agree that soloing has aided in killing the genre, I also agree that these days time is a valued commodity and that soloing is a must. I guess I am just trying to point out that It isn't just the game styles I miss...... it's forming memories, friendships.. but now, it just doesn't happen much.

Well enough of my early morning rant..... take it or leave it, just my 2 cents. (If you can make sense of it.)

Averros

I see soloing as both contributing to the decline of MMOs and being a result of the decline. While having limited time to play is a valid reason to want to solo, there are others that have to do with the people you group with-- people who tend to make up the majority of the game's population it seems. I like to read quest text. I like to slow it down, plan out what I'm going to do, and try out different ways of approaching a problem. Seems like every time I group it's like GOGOGO! STEAMROLL THE BITCH! DOOD, GET ON VENT, I CAN'T READ LOL!

So we have a chicken and the egg situation here. Do people who solo do it because the game itself encourages it, or is it because the community is such a pile of shit that the game is best enjoyed without it?

Well, avatars in EVE is a bit of a different animal IMO, but I realize it's subjective from person to person. My opinion is that if it doesn't take away from the core gameplay,  while adding another dimension to the game, it's a good form of change. Not all change is bad, like others have said. In fact, from a roleplaying perspective, this seems like it would be good for the game, as long as it doesn't create a slippery slope. Heck, it might even get me to try it. Besides, from what I've read, as long as you're in your ship, nothing has changed in the way the game operates.

On the other hand, if adding Walking in Stations directly affected the ship-based gameplay, I could see how it would be a problem.

Originally posted by Hyanmen

The kind of people that just EXPECT that every single MMO must cater to Them and if they don't, that should be changed asap.

Reminds me of a thread I posted in in the Mortal Online forum here. Some guy basically said "Give me a third person perspective and I'll try your game." Such is the "move on" attitude. They insist that a game should "move on" to their style of playing without considering just for a moment that perhaps there are games out there that don't fit everyone's tastes. However, they fit SOME people's tastes, and those people are the target audience.

I'm so glad games like Darkfall and EVE, for example,  exist, because they represent an attitude that I appreciate. I'm not into FFA PVP or the type of gameplay EVE offers, but by God, SOME people like it and they deserve a game that fits their tastes as much as anyone else. How dare anyone arrogantly insist that Aventurine make Darkfall a PVP optional, non-FFA game? Don't like that sort of game? Well, princess, perhaps you should wipe your pu##y and find a game more suited to your tastes. That's all we want. We're not asking for existing games to change. We're waiting for the developer who's brave enough to cater to a style of playing that's long since gone by the wayside. Sure, it may not be a blockbuster like WoW, but as long as it has a fair amount of polish and solid gameplay, we'll be there.