I can't automatically assume that this is going to be The Best Thing Ever- after all, SquareEnix managed to screw up FFXIV even after building such an incredible reputation with Kingdom Hearts and Final Fantasy- but I have very high hopes. Bethesda doesn't mess around with its big name franchises.

Why three factions? Why not four factions, or six factions, or a dozen factions? When you're stuck with three factions two of them will inevitably team up and wipe out the third, ending up not much more different than the two-faction combat we have already. In the future I'd like to see upwards of 8-10 factions in games representing independent nation states, all of which can arrange complex political alliances. Roleplaying in that kind of scenario is a lot more fun.

---

Originally posted by Iofhua
Secondly, are there any good subscription MMORTS games out there? The only thing that really jumps to mind is Perpetuum, but I'm not too enthused by the time-based leveling the game has, it sounds too similar to EVE Online, which I played off and on for three years and then finally vowed never to go back. I don't mind the concept of time-based research, unless it takes you days, weeks or months for the next level, and that's when it becomes ridiculous. I would prefer an RTS set in a medieval setting anyway.
Anyways thanks for reading. I have used this website to find new MMO's to play before, and I have to say I really like it. I guess I just didn't feel compelled to post anything before now...

---

Perpetuum an RTS? You must be joking. Starcraft 2 is the only semi-decent competitive RTS out on the market now, any MMO dev claiming their game is an RTS must either have some sort of tactics/MOBA game or a broken gameplay experience.

All indications are that it's not going to be real-time combat, and that's just the way the fans want it. Turn based combat isn't outdated, it just caters to a different breed of gamer. You know, the ones actually sponsoring the development.

also I donated to this, worthy cause IMO

I concur with the OP. The same arguments "old" MMO players use against "new" MMO players were used against Starcraft 2 by old fans of Brood Wars. "Who would want to play a game where you can put more than 12 units on a hotkey or select multiple building facilities at once? There's no skill in that!" they said. Turns out people didn't really care for fake difficulty brought about by a bad UI, and the Starcraft 2 pro scene has long since eclipsed Brood Wars'. I don't know what to tell people complaining about games being too easy these days other than that they're clearly playing the wrong titles.

---

Originally posted by Caldrin

---

Originally posted by Vryheid
 

---

Originally posted by adam_nox
one of the bigger myths rears it's ugly head again.  old mmo's weren't harder.  They were less intuitive, less refined, and generally poorly made, which may have indirectly made them more difficult to play, but you'd only value this if you want to reward stupidity, not eliminate it.

---

 
Pretty much spot on. People love being nostalgic about old games and how "hard" they were when in reality the limited experience these early MMO gamers would have had and lack of online guides were the main causes of this perception of difficulty. In the old days you didn't have a video channel like Tankspot holding your hand through every raid boss, and you didn't have a wiki telling you exactly how to complete every quest and find every rare piece of gear. Games aren't becoming easier, players are just putting in a heck of a lot more effort into strategic planning and collaborating with others to maximize their combat potential.

---

again not true every MMORPG game out there had tons fo fan built sites with guides and item locations everything you could imagine to do with the game.. i think EQ literally had thousands of sites doing bascially the sames things.

---

Everquest guides were basically private fan sites rather than collaborative wiki-like experiences, meaning they rarely had complete information and took a heck of a lot mroe effort and time to remain current. Not to mention that this whole process of writing and collecting guides was still in its infancy. These days people data mine games to find complete loot lists before it even gets released.

The Deus Ex series is probably a great example of what you're talking about, especially the first game in the series. The storyline is semi-scripted, in that you're being directed towards one general outcome and basically have a predictable mission structure, but you can significantly alter the fates of important characters and the outcome of the game through your personal choices.

MMOs pretty much universally lack this concept due to developers wanting quests to exist in an instanced universe for each player rather than have one unifying plot.

---

Originally posted by adam_nox
one of the bigger myths rears it's ugly head again.  old mmo's weren't harder.  They were less intuitive, less refined, and generally poorly made, which may have indirectly made them more difficult to play, but you'd only value this if you want to reward stupidity, not eliminate it.

---

Pretty much spot on. People love being nostalgic about old games and how "hard" they were when in reality the limited experience these early MMO gamers would have had and lack of online guides were the main causes of this perception of difficulty. In the old days you didn't have a video channel like Tankspot holding your hand through every raid boss, and you didn't have a wiki telling you exactly how to complete every quest and find every rare piece of gear. Games aren't becoming easier, players are just putting in a heck of a lot more effort into strategic planning and collaborating with others to maximize their combat potential.

Dunno what you're talking about, the Brutal campaign on SC2 makes just about any MMO look like a walk in the park. MMO combat generally has next to no replay value and very little of the nuances that competitive multiplayer games do. Hence the focus on quantity over quality.

That being said, tons of quantity isn't always bad for RPGs. In fact, I can't think of a single AAA western RPG that didn't use this as a selling point- think Skyrim, Dragon Age, Mass Effect, Deus Ex, Fallout New Vegas, etc. These games all have a degree of replay value, though, that MMOs generally lack. I'd like to have a totally different experience playing through an RPG as a different class, not simply have to take up a different slot in a triad-based raiding group.

Tera has better combat. Guild Wars has better character design, quests and environments. As someone who plays role playing games for the roleplay, I'm a lot more concerned about the latter. I do think that just comparing GW2 with your average hotbar MMO isn't doing it enough justice though.

---

Originally posted by Xzen
Want to learn how to use dodge? Play monster hunter.

---

You got that right. Half an hour of dodging hell just to kill one monster. People are going to have to learn to step up their game eventually, Guild Wars 2 doesn't look particularly forgiving to players who just want to stand there and mash spell rotations all day.

There really doesn't need to be some big philosophical debate about this. WoW-a-likes pidgeonhole everybody into fulfilling one of three combat roles while making them absolutely useless at anything else, Guild Wars 2 gives a heck of a lot more flexability. That's not to say one system is better or worse, it just means that everyone has to cooperate in different ways.

Final Fantasy XIV proved that having 90% of the accessible monsters in the game kill you in one hit was a terrible game mechanic and did not excuse bland, generic creature design. I want to control a hero, not some featherweight with a wooden stick who can't fight anything but giant rats. Developers in these types of games are clearly too lazy to make monster fights actually require skill rather than just a huge player mob.

Second, the monsters you cited earlier do not qualify as "original" by a long shot. They're generic fantasy creatures with no interesting lore and no explanation of how they came to exist. I appreciate interactivity, but originality means having to move beyond the standard D&D archetypes. Deathclaws in Fallout 2 were original. The Krogan in Mass Effect were original. Heck, even the Koopas in Super Mario Bros were an original concept and design. The 40 year old generic fantasy monster kit we expect in all MMOs is not original in any form.

---

Originally posted by Alasti
In EQ1, when I was levels 1, 2, and 3, I ran back to the guards to kill the BAT or BEE i was fighting, more times than I would like to admit.  Killing a level 1 when you were level 1 was not a sure thing.  Killing a level 2 (orc pawn) when you were level 1 was suicide!  THAT WAS FUN!!! Exciting from the beginning!  Had to be careful from the start!
 
In Ultima Online, when I first started out (they dont have levels in UO), I remember fighting a CHICKEN for the first time.....ummm...It kicked my ARSE!   That bird flailed on me like well...a Chicken that had gone crazy!!  I died!!...THAT WAS FUN!!!  killing anything in the early part of a toons life was NOT GUARANTEED!!  A challenge and true excitement from the start!

---

Wow, so you managed to have a grueling, mindless grind against crappy generic monsters right from the start. If this is the "fun" you want than you can keep it in your dark age MMOs.

FF XI is a terrible example of a player run economy. There needs to be an ecosystem where fighters need to continually purchase gear from crafters, which keeps the prices at a reasonable rate and encourages competition. Item damage was a non-factor in FFXI, which meant that top level players would hoard their gear and crafters were forced to sell low level gear just to make any money at all. Beginner crafters were forced out of business, veteran crafters were forced to continually deal with item inflation while selling increasingly worthless items, and the economy spiraled into the mess it is today.

A better system would be something like what's in Fallout New Vegas. No matter how good of a gear set you have, you will have to continuously buy more or spend a crapton of money to keep things repaired. You should be able to combine items like in Fallout instead of straight repairing them. In this scenario veteran crafters would gain the most profit by tending to veteran players, while new crafters could compete among newer players. With this balance in economy the currency continuously is moving and prices should be kept relatively in check.

Controlling the supply of money in the game is another issue, but that could be done by having some sort of tax on players to keep the global income in equilibrium.

jesus christ the complaining in this thread. i'm tired but I'm going to respond here anyways:

1. the graphics in mass effect 3 are fantastic, what the hell are you guys talking about? this is right up there with The Witcher 2 and Final Fantasy XIII as having some of the best graphics in any RPG ever made.

2. the endings were fine. and to the previous poster, the endings were fine in Deus Ex as well. play a bunch of multiplayer before finishing the campaign and you'll get a better ending. other than that I don't know what you consider "good", there's nothing wrong with leaving things to the imagination of the player.

---

Originally posted by TruthXHurts
There already is a Fallout MMO. You just aren't allowed to talk about it on here. 

---

You mean FOnline? Sure people can discuss it, just in another board though.

This is why games like Entropia continue to have insanely valuable digital items, because it's agonizingly difficult to get even a decent amount of in-game currency without investing a lot of cash. Stable economies = best for gold farmers.

Okay, so you have an opinion that's been posted by other people here a hundred times before. What exactly is there to discuss here?

---

Originally posted by BadSpock
Less debate on semantics, more examples.
Otherwise, the thread is going to be another huge load of garbage (like most threads) due to the ENDLESS debate between subjective opinions.
 

---

I think I provided enough examples in my post. I'm not sure what else you're looking for here.