Originally posted by smh_alot

Originally posted by Uhwop

I'd now like to draw your attention to Mythic, WAR, and the exodus of developers after the release of WAR.  Yeah, it's perfectly normal for a bunch of developers who made an MMO that underachieved to leave after the project is done.  When you work for a studio purchased by EA, that didn't live up to expectation.   

 

Of course the lack of big success of SWTOR and leaving of the Doctors has an impact, and an effect on others leaving. It isn't as if it's never happened before with other companies, game related or otherwise. Also, it isn't as if a couple of key figures leaving has only 1 outcome. In the period of 2003-2005, a majority of the key figures that were behind Diablo's success, Battle.net, Starcraft and WC3 left Blizzard bc of differences of opinion and vision among others. 30-40 of them. They went to found Flagship, Arena Net, went to NC Soft and ended up making games like Hellgate London, Guild Wars and Torchlight. Yet Blizzard continued up till now, even if it didn't had that top quality of games it had in the 1998-2004 era anymore.

 

The most important loss is the 2 Doctors. I compare it with Steve Jobs leaving Apple the first time. Even if Apple continued and kept existing, it was less than it was under Steve Jobs. Something that became apparent when he returned and they achieved mega success again. The others, well, not everyone's equally important to the success or high quality of a game, some are easier replaceable than others. Sort of like how in a major league football team some players are more key to the success of a team than others who're easier to find replacements for.

 That's the point I was making. 

40 developers didn't leave Blizzard because they were done on a project, they left because of internal issues with the company. 

What's happening at Bioware isn't normal, in-so-far as people have finished a project and it's time to move on.  These are Bioware employees, not contracted workers.  It isn't normal for a large group of employees to just up and leave because they finished the immediate job they were working on, unless something is wrong. 

They're either unhappy, or in my opinion being asked to leave. 

I do not believe for one second that EA, who will soon own the most expensive F2P mmo on the market, isn't cleaning house of everyone they feel is responsible.  Right down to the doctores themselves, who were likely informed that there would be some drastic restructuring in Bioware. 

If I was the doctors, I know I wouldn't want to stick around to watch my company get dismantled and people I hired and worked with for several years let go.  I'd sign an NDA and simply retire. 

Originally posted by Betaguy
The point of this is that a company I have known and bought from for over 10+ years went down the tubes because of a corporate money monger.

 When did Bioware become this grand company with the ability to think outside the box and create new and unique gameplay mechanics? 

I must be the only person on the planet that sees a studio that created an MMO using pretty much all the gameplay and story elements they've used in the past.  ToR is basically Dragon age meats Nights of the Old Republic.  Bioware is no different from any other studio, most of them have a development philosophy that dictates the way in which they'll make games.  Bioware developed ToR using the same kind of development philosophy that they use when making all their singleplayer games. 

ToR is exactly what you would expect of a bioware game.   Anyone not living undera  rock, who has played Bioware games in the past, should be able to sit down and play ToR without knowing Bioware made it and know that Bioware made it. 

It plays like a bioware game.

It has the same elements as other bioware games.

It delivers story just like other bioware games. 

How is EA to blame for Bioware being Bioware and making a typical Bioware game.  They aren't.  Bioware and EA are guilty of the exact same thing, thinking that what worked in single player bioware games would make an MMO a huge success.  Neither of them had the forsight to see that you can not develop an MMO with the same development philosophy as you do your single player games, some things just don't translate well. 

Originally posted by erictlewis

When most of your senior staff jumps off the ship, you best start to worry.

First the doctors ,  Dickerson, now this fellow.  Not to mention all the other names we seen in the past month.  Just saying there sure seems to be a mass exodus now.

Folks can clam oh this happens all the time when a game gets up and running,  yes there is some churn but nothing like this.

 

 Yeah, I'm not getting the "this is normal" or "it happens all the time" comments I see when people start leaving the STUDIO they worked for. 

You do not normally have a large chunk of your staff up and leave a studio because a project is finished, they either continue to work on that project or they end up working on another project.  If a bunch of people start leaving the studio then something is going on that's causing people to leave or forcing them to find a new studio. 

I'm not seeing a bunch of low level devs who moved up in Bioware during the development of ToR, gained the experience that would be needed to head up their own project, and so moved on to form their own studio to make their own games.  Normally developers tell you that that's what they decided to do,

When people suddenly decide it's time to retire, or just up and leave with no real explenations, it usually means they were forced in some way to move on or they're unhappy. 

It wouldn't suprise me in the least if what we're seeing is EA asking people to resign after ToR didn't meat expectation.  EA would very likely require everyone leaving to sign an NDA as well.  That's normal.  EA sunk hundreds of millions into a project, several years of development, and for what?  So they could have the most expensive F2P MMO on the market?  No, EA is most likely removing those people that they think are reponsible for not delivering the MMO success they expected ToR to be. 

I'd now like to draw your attention to Mythic, WAR, and the exodus of developers after the release of WAR.  Yeah, it's perfectly normal for a bunch of developers who made an MMO that underachieved to leave after the project is done.  When you work for a studio purchased by EA, that didn't live up to expectation.   

Originally posted by Hokie

Okay, someone help me out.

What exacly is unified inventory?

I know what I think it means. But I want to know what it really means.

 Unified inventory was just a change to the way that hangars and cargo bay inventory windows worked.  It basically just mean that instead of having 10 diffirent windows, you have one window that you can access all of your other inventory windows from. 

People are being overdramatic about it being bad.  It took a little getting used to, but CCP has been pretty clear that they'll impliment stuff and then refine it with smaller iterations as time goes on; some people are impatient. 

I like what they're doing with this xpac.  Lots more options for building ships and items to build, hopefully a useful bounty system.  I'm hoping crimewatch will encourage people to do a little pvp in high sec as well. 

Originally posted by Nitth

 

---

Originally posted by Uhwop
If MS went the the closed OS route it could be the best thing to ever happen to Linux. 

 

I could see game developers switching to open GL and a linux based OS, as well as pachaging a copy of the OS with the games at first to get people using it.  People would be pissed at first because they wouldn't understand what was going on, but as long as the instal was as simple as put the disc on the cd rom and or clck a couple of buttons after the download, I don't see them saying no to the game if that's what it takes to play it. 

---

 

I would hate to develop 'installers' for the vast variations of Linux and its distributions..

 I don't doubt it.  It would be a huge pai in the ass, but I think developers would be highly motivated if they found they would have to start giving a portion what they make to MS.  Not sure how many people have noticed this, but the  amount we pay for the games isn't exactly scaling with what it's costing developers to make them.  We've been lucky enough to not have had the price of our games go up that much considering how much more money developers are spending to make them. 

Either the developers will do what they need to in order to move off of windows, or we WILL be paying more for games. 

That is if they actually go with the closed OS.  I personally don't think they're that stupid. 

I see this as more of MS already tried this and failed, so they're trying it again.  Games for windows wasn't really designed as an outstanding feature of windows, a lot of people don't even know what games for windows really was.  MS has been trying to bring that kind of 360 gaming experience over to the PC for a few years now.  Live actually integrates to the 360, it's not just your XBox live account.  Anyone with an Xbox live account can use that same account on the PC and talk to friends playing on the Xbox. 

It's like they realized that you can't just throw live onto windows and expect people know about it; let alone use it.. So they develop 8 around the concept of a unified gaming platform like enviroment. 

That, and microsoft is always trying to use apples ideas.  I mean, do people really think MS invented windows?  Hell, do people really think that MS ever created anything? 

They can't even create an original retail enviroment, the Windows store in the mall by my house looks exactly like the apple one.  It's like someone at MS was like, "hey guys, if we look exactly like apple people won't be able to tell the diffence and we'll sell more stuff."    Imitation may be the sincerest form of flatery, but in MS case it's really just seems like a lack of creative inovation. 

If MS went the the closed OS route it could be the best thing to ever happen to Linux. 

I could see game developers switching to open GL and a linux based OS, as well as pachaging a copy of the OS with the games at first to get people using it.  People would be pissed at first because they wouldn't understand what was going on, but as long as the instal was as simple as put the disc on the cd rom and or clck a couple of buttons after the download, I don't see them saying no to the game if that's what it takes to play it. 

I don't think people put up with paying MS to play games online on the 360 because they don't mind.  A lot of people I know that do actually don't like that they have to pay, but they don't want to spend money on another system that the people they game with don't have. 

MS just keeps getting greedier and greedier.  They seem to think that just because they have a monopoly on the PC OS market that people will tolerate it because they think they have no other option. 

And if the PC gaming industry isn't big enough to get linux OS's on PC's then MS will just end up being the last nail in the coffin of PC gaming.  Not like the same people making PC games aren't making console ones as well.  Hell, it could result in a lot more Sony console exclusive games. 

Originally posted by SneakyRussian

Originally posted by Uhwop

Originally posted by DavisFlight

Originally posted by Uhwop

Originally posted by DavisFlight

Originally posted by AdamTM

Originally posted by DavisFlight

Originally posted by SnarlingWolf

Originally posted by Fadedbomb

Niche (nich): "a distinct segment of a market."

 

 

 

 

 

That is far more accurate to how the term is used in all of the English speaking world. So by that more accurate definition Themeparks are not at all a niche market in MMOs, they are currently the main market.

That MMO market have you been around lately? Because the most successful "themepark" (almost always synonymous with WOW clone) was Rift, and that had to merge servers within a month and failed to even pass hardcore MMOs like EQ.

If SWTOR, WAR, and AoC are the "main market" then I'm scared for the genre. Meanwhile we have sandboxes like Eve and Darkfall that are steadily growing over time...

Since when is Darkfall growing?

Since over the course of 3 years they've opened a second server, hired 30 more devs (more than doubling AV's staff) moved into a larger office building, and are relaunching an overhaul of the game for free?

You don't do that when you're bleeding money.

 Not of that had anything to do with the game growing.  Thanks for demonstrating you have no idea how the business world works. The new server wasn't opened because the EU one ran out of room, it opened because NA players needed a server closer to them. Wrong. There were almost daily posts by people who said they werent going to buy the game until an NA server came out. Meanwhile the EU server had a long queue to get into it.

The relaunch was directly related to the fact that the DF needed to many fixes to make it feasible to just patch and make an expansion, and so that they could attempt to draw in more players with a better game.  And you think a game that wasn't a success would have the money to pull that off in 2 years? Tasos even said as much. 

Nice spin though, but your wrong. Learn to spell bud.

So how do you explain the free overhaul? Or the 30 new developers? If Darkfall never grew, how did they afford the new office? The relaunch?

Your story doesn't add up. Mine does.

 I only ran a succesfull small business for over a decade, and at an age when most guys are still trying to figure out how to talk to women.  I'm pretty sure I know EXACTLY how business works from the ground up.

No your story doesn't add up because the guy in charge of the game has said the complete opposite of what you're saying.

All of AV's money is got through defense contracts with Greece, learn a little bit about the company your cheerleading.    

@Uhwop....DavisFlight's logic is fairly straight forward.

 

What about your "experience" of running your own small business leads you to believe AV hasn't grown if they've hired 30 more developers etc etc?

 AV has defense contracts with Greece, that's how they afford to do things with a game that isn't making them money.  No one redevelopes a game because it steadily grows, you do it when it's failing.  Their ability to do that has nothing at all to do with the game. 

They do not just make games.   

Originally posted by DavisFlight

Originally posted by Uhwop

Originally posted by DavisFlight

Originally posted by AdamTM

Originally posted by DavisFlight

Originally posted by SnarlingWolf

Originally posted by Fadedbomb

Niche (nich): "a distinct segment of a market."

 

 

 

 

 

That is far more accurate to how the term is used in all of the English speaking world. So by that more accurate definition Themeparks are not at all a niche market in MMOs, they are currently the main market.

That MMO market have you been around lately? Because the most successful "themepark" (almost always synonymous with WOW clone) was Rift, and that had to merge servers within a month and failed to even pass hardcore MMOs like EQ.

If SWTOR, WAR, and AoC are the "main market" then I'm scared for the genre. Meanwhile we have sandboxes like Eve and Darkfall that are steadily growing over time...

Since when is Darkfall growing?

Since over the course of 3 years they've opened a second server, hired 30 more devs (more than doubling AV's staff) moved into a larger office building, and are relaunching an overhaul of the game for free?

You don't do that when you're bleeding money.

 Not of that had anything to do with the game growing.  Thanks for demonstrating you have no idea how the business world works. The new server wasn't opened because the EU one ran out of room, it opened because NA players needed a server closer to them. Wrong. There were almost daily posts by people who said they werent going to buy the game until an NA server came out. Meanwhile the EU server had a long queue to get into it.

The relaunch was directly related to the fact that the DF needed to many fixes to make it feasible to just patch and make an expansion, and so that they could attempt to draw in more players with a better game.  And you think a game that wasn't a success would have the money to pull that off in 2 years? Tasos even said as much. 

Nice spin though, but your wrong. Learn to spell bud.

So how do you explain the free overhaul? Or the 30 new developers? If Darkfall never grew, how did they afford the new office? The relaunch?

Your story doesn't add up. Mine does.

 I only ran a succesfull small business for over a decade, and at an age when most guys are still trying to figure out how to talk to women.  I'm pretty sure I know EXACTLY how business works from the ground up.

No your story doesn't add up because the guy in charge of the game has said the complete opposite of what you're saying.

All of AV's money is got through defense contracts with Greece, learn a little bit about the company your cheerleading.    

Originally posted by DavisFlight

Originally posted by SnarlingWolf

Originally posted by DavisFlight

Originally posted by SnarlingWolf  

 

That is far more accurate to how the term is used in all of the English speaking world. So by that more accurate definition Themeparks are not at all a niche market in MMOs, they are currently the main market.

That MMO market have you been around lately? Because the most successful "themepark" (almost always synonymous with WOW clone) was Rift, and that had to merge servers within a month and failed to even pass hardcore MMOs like EQ.

If SWTOR, WAR, and AoC are the "main market" then I'm scared for the genre. Meanwhile we have sandboxes like Eve and Darkfall that are steadily growing over time...

 

What YOU like does not define a market. You can love sandboxes and love to play EvE and Darkfall, but that does not change that by a massive majority the main market of MMOs right now is theme park.

It's not about what I like, it's about profitability.

Themepark MMOs, for the last 8 years, have been a one way ticket into financial failure. Meanwhile, sandbox MMOs have been the only MMOs in the last 8 years to steadily grow over time.

 Only one subscription based sandbox has grown, and that is EVE.  UO, who knows, but it sure isn't gaining subs.  MO and DF both have steadilly lost subs sinse their release, that's a fact. 

Originally posted by DavisFlight

Originally posted by AdamTM

Originally posted by DavisFlight

Originally posted by SnarlingWolf

Originally posted by Fadedbomb

Niche (nich): "a distinct segment of a market."

 

 

 

 

 

That is far more accurate to how the term is used in all of the English speaking world. So by that more accurate definition Themeparks are not at all a niche market in MMOs, they are currently the main market.

That MMO market have you been around lately? Because the most successful "themepark" (almost always synonymous with WOW clone) was Rift, and that had to merge servers within a month and failed to even pass hardcore MMOs like EQ.

If SWTOR, WAR, and AoC are the "main market" then I'm scared for the genre. Meanwhile we have sandboxes like Eve and Darkfall that are steadily growing over time...

Since when is Darkfall growing?

Since over the course of 3 years they've opened a second server, hired 30 more devs (more than doubling AV's staff) moved into a larger office building, and are relaunching an overhaul of the game for free?

You don't do that when you're bleeding money.

 Not of that had anything to do with the game growing.  The new server wasn't opened because the EU one ran out of room, it opened because NA players needed a server closer to them. 

The relaunch was directly related to the fact that the DF needed to many fixes to make it feasible to just patch and make an expansion, and so that they could attempt to draw in more players with a better game.  Tasos even said as much. 

Nice spin though, but your wrong. 

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Gosh .. does the OP know the concept of "common usage"? Not every single word is used by the strict dictionary defintion.

 

Literal definition in this case is a "specialized market". 

When someone using the word correctly, like say the maker of a sandbox MMO or FFA/ Full loot PvP mmo refers to their game as niche, it's because it falls into the literal definition and not common usage.  The definition didn't change through common usage, that's not even what common usage means.  Common usage measn that a word is used frequently enough in place of another world that it takes on literal definition and becomes acceptable.  Irregardless would techinically mean to literally not not regard something, but through common use it actually means the same thing as regardless and can be used in place of regardless as an improper word. 

It just so happens that a specialized market also tends to be a smaller market, but the word niche doesn't actually refer to a smaller market. 

WoW isn't niche, and neither are themepark MMO's because neither are actually specialized.  You can't even make the case that a themepark is specializing in the MMO market because they're the standard model.  A standard model can not be specialized, by it's very nature of being standard or commonly used.

MMO's can not be argued as being niche because they're actually common place product today.  A common place product by it's very nature is not specializing. 

Archage will be a niche MMO for the fact that it'll exist within a market as a hybrid themepark/ sandbox mmo.  Even if it got 20 million players it would still be niche because it's specializing in a model that is not standard in the genre. 

If the themepark/ sandbox hybrid model were to ever become the standard model in which the magority of MMO's are developed it would cease to be a niche; at that time themeparks would actually be considered a niche. 

Originally posted by Hrica

Originally posted by MeGaTronPower

I was talking to some of the older gamers who have played for 7 years in wow have not purchased mop on ventrilo. They told me its not the same, skill tree is not the same etc etc or its not vanilla wow. If your over 35 years old its time to move on from wow, blizzard made the changes especially skill tree so you can customize to deal with raid bosses or pvp on the fly. You customize the new skill tree on the fly on different encounters. Wow is changing to fit the needs of 20 year olds and college kids. In fact most of my friend who purchased are over 20 years old and are in college. Wow changed for the younger demographic market and no for old wow players, or old mmo players. You guys needs to accept this and move on.

 

Blizzard's goal is not here to retain old 2004 wow players, mop was designed to get those 20 year olds and college kids demographics with mop hence why the changes. They are sheding off old 2004 wow players and get those new generations of 20 year olds market, and it makes sence. Blizzard is smart.

well thank you..... MeGaTronPower......for saving me the money and not buying MoP

 

 The irony.

How is selling gold a scam? 

Scam:n.
A fraudulent business scheme; a swindle.

tr.v., scammed, scam·ming, scams.
To defraud; swindle.

Pet Battle system and the new talent trees. 

I really didn't expect the pet battle system to have as much depth as it does.  It actually exceded any expectation I had for it; I'm very suprised. 

Originally posted by Bilko101

Originally posted by moguy2
Wow , in the lower levels , is geared for the 9-14 ages. In the higher levels 15-22.. That is my take on that.

I totally agree, but I would drop the ages by 2 or 3 years. With it's cutsie, furry, squeeking little creatures it's a total kiddie game now.

It's a game that makes you feel like an idiot for playing it. I played it since launch, but it's time to move on.

WoW makes you feel like an idiot playing it?  I would personally be to embarassed to admit that a game I think is made for 7+ year olds makes me feel that way. 

I guess I'm to old to play WoW. 

Played 5 years when it released, MoP actually made it fun again.  My mage feels a lot more like the mage I played in vanilla, the pet battles are actually fun and suprisingly challenging, and I think this is the best talent system yet; even better then WoW talent system that was pretty much broken for both my mage and hunter. 

Totally disagree withe the OP.   Also really don't dig him thinking he knows what an older gamer should or shouldn't be playing.  You be you and let everyone else be them.  The world works much better that way. 

Originally posted by TruthXHurts
I used to respect Stan Lee, but what he has let the entertainment industry do with his characters puts him right down there with Lucas in my book now.

 I'm a proud comic book dork.  I can't say that I disagree that the industry, movie in particular, hasn't been very kind to many Marvel characters. ( the "deadpool" character before he was turned into "deadpool" was a better Deadpool then what he became; WTF was that.  And the Kingpin in Daredevil sure didn't look like any Kingpin I ever saw in the comic book. )

But, The comic industry was literally dying.  I think it's fair to say that if it wasn't for Stan Lee, and obviously not just him, there wouldn't be a comic industry today.  Marvel realy never had that "character integrity" that you find with creator owned type IP's.  It's the difference between Sin City and spider man. Spidey is a corporate owned product, Sin City, as far as I'm aware, is creator owned.  Stan Lee's been the George Lucas of the comic industry longer then Star Wars has been around. 

It wasn't Bruce Banner in the original Hulk TV series because they felt that Bruce sounded to homosexual.  At least from what I've read, dunno if it's really true.   

I really don't see the marvel game filling the spot of CoH.  Completely different games. 

[mod edit]

Originally posted by FlawSGI

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Originally posted by Uhwop

Originally posted by FlawSGI

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Originally posted by FlawSGI

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Originally posted by DakkalordG

Now as much as most people hate Blizzard Entertainment and look at the Failure of Diablo 3 and the Ageing of World of Warcraft , Im still in love with the company . Because even though D3 was a flop and WoW is in its twilight years , Blizzard has also released Starcraft 2 , an extremely enjoyable RTS , and D2 , A hack in slash that has a place in most peoples hearts.

As well as that , WoW is still by far my favourite MMO and I have pre-ordered MoP because I still find enjoyment in playing WoW... Im hoping that Titan takes the torch from WoW and keeps Blizzards MMO scene alive and still allows me to proudly say "Blizzard are the best gaming Devs to date"

Possibly off topic, possibly not as it directly equates to what you consider success.

I know that D3 generated a lot of complaints, there were bugs and connection problems but in what universe is selling 3.5 million copies in 24 hours, 6.3 million in a week, over 10 million to date, the fastest selling PC game to date receiving scores of 8-9/10 by virtually every major publication and critic considered a flop?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diablo_III

 

 

Depends on what context one is discussing flop. Did it sell a lot of copies? Sure it did and you provide plenty of evidence to support your view. But what about discussing it in terms of value and entertainment, did it meet expectations? To many (me included) that is a huge no and I'd go as far as to say that to many people who have supported Blizzrd products in the past, this was a slap in the face. I don't think that just because box sells were high, the state and content of the game should be overlooked and this, as far as I am concerned, may have been the last Blizzard product I buy after what I feel has been shoddy products for years. I bought them on reputation and past games I enjoyed by the company but that has become a thing of the past in my eyes. Titan would have to be pretty damned amazing for me personally to want to buy it because I really have zero problems with nostalgia when I think about Blizzard. Numbers don't tell the whole story.

See my statement above.

See the portion I added before you quoted.

 Opinion isn't something you can argue as factual, it's an opinion.  There is only one context when you label something as a flop, and that is it didn't sell or sold considerably less then it's predicessor, neither of which happened in the case of D3. 

You're attempting to argue your opinion against facts.  The guy your trying "prove wrong" gave you facts that can't be argued against with opinions. 

Just because you didn't like D3 doesn't make it a flop because you inject opinion into it.  10 million copies sold is a fact, and it's a fact that any game that sells that many copies is a success. 

Few games manage to sell 10 million copies, let alone 10 million in a months time.  Some of you here, where people are notoriously critical and have a general dislike of Blizzard, may not of liked the game, however it didn't sell all of it's copies in the first week.  People were still buying it several weeks later.  You don't sell a couple million copies of a game a few weeks after it releases because most people that purchased it disliked it.  If so many people didn't like the game, it wouldn't have managed to reach 10 million boxes sold, it would have sold heavily in its initial release and then simply died off. 

The fact is the game was received very well by the general gaming public, even if many people found some faults in it, and your opinion is entirely irrelevent to that fact. 

 

MoP is not Titan, Blizzard has stated that it's an entirely new IP and not like WoW. 

The OP did not make any assumptions about Titan, he stated his HOPES that it will be a good game that will continue Blizzards record of succesfull development. 

People around here are so full of spite and vinager that people can't even make a simple post expressing an opinion with anything to do with Blizzard without a bunch of people jumping on them to condemn their post and feelings. 

I am chastised. :)

My own opinion is that I hope Titan will be good.  The only thing I have to go by is WoW, I've enjoyed it off/on for many years.  Funny enough I still don't have a max level player in it.  I just take my time, do my own thing.  Wow let me do this. 

I am not sure but I think he meant me Venge. I couldn't tell because the meat of his rant didn't match what either of us wrote really so I could be wrong. In any case if it was directed my way, I wasn't arguing my opinion on anything, and I cetainly wasn't trying to prove anyone wrong, simply played devils advocate in stating that meaybe the OP erred in using flop instead of sucked but I understood what he meant without playine the senactic card. The rest was my personal input regarding Titan and Blizzard in general but was in no way stating my own opinions as anything other than how I feel about the brand. And I see someone else decided to play the numbers game and it feeds little into what the point was. I certainly didn't condemn anyones feelings and in a way I was agreeing with the OP, hence the confusion regarding the quoted rant.

 I was ideed addressing you and not the OP, because like you I also understood that the OP meant they didn't like the game. 

I was specifically addressing your "context of flop" in which there is only one.  Flop has never ment anything other failed, there is no other context in which you put it. 

You opinion, doesn't change fact.  A game did not flop when it sold 10 million copies.  And you can not claim it only sold as well as it did because of the names associated with it when it was still selling better then most games several weeks after it released. 

Word of mouth pushes sales beyond the first few weeks, not the title or developer name.  Just because you didn't like it doesn't mean that most people didn't.  If most people didn't like it, it wouldn't have reached 8.8 million AFTER THREE MONTHS. 

Yes it was a rant, and yes I think you're smart enough to have understood exactly what I was saying.  No, you did not state your opinion as just your opinion, you injected it as fact. 

Originally posted by corpusc

Originally posted by GrayGhost79

Originally posted by corpusc

Originally posted by Stravas
TBH DarkFall as it exists right now has the most interesting mob AI that I've seen . . . creatures actually flee from combat and then counterattack instead of mindlessly fighting to the death against even ridiculous odds as in 99.9% of MMOs.

 

exactly.  

don't listen to the opposite of reality comments of the clueless people.

the ones that think hotbar whackamole while rolling virtual dice, standing still and stuffing their face with thier left hand is what a game should be all about.

 

thats the inherent nature of many comments on mmorpg.com.   people obsessed with the traditional RPG models of  "combat" have no way of judging anything outside of that.

The problem is that is what it was supposed to do, thats not actually how the AI worked which is why the complaint about the AI  exists. It's not the worst AI around, but it's fair from the best lol. 

 

they said PVE would be like fighting quake bots and thats one of the things they succeeded at.

what game do you think does it better?

what other game even HAS quake bot like combat at all?

 

the complaint about AI was from people who wanted a "PVP game" to actually, you know.... be a PVP game.  without being forced to grind up PVE for 6 months.   AAA studios would a been hard pressed to keep up to those kind of grinding demands.

 You obviously weren't there for the rubberbanding, broken mob behavior, bugged mobs, broken loot tables, mob exploiting. invisible mobs, mobs not populating areas the way they were supposed to, mobs not moving the way they were supposed to, and mob towns not appearing and then growing the way they were supposed to.