Originally posted by username509

Originally posted by redpins

Hero Engine accepts almost all indies applying to get into beta. That's a upgrade option which would yield better gameplay mechanics and base engine. It would also expedite the process of making a mmog with their source codes, and examples. Big World is another solution, less examples but its basically straight forward. Hero does "area" inside zones. So tecnically zones make up x areas that spin together. Though I think this is retarded, and for majority of the reasons I don't like working on Hero Engine, the examples that come with it can make prototyping easily done in teams of 5 and 6. You mainly just focus on particles and artwork, as any code written in Hero Engine is written VB-like with the functionality of C++ control. As for Big World, its written in plain C++ and Python for gaming scripts.

For my personal taste, and a bigger budget go with Unreal Technologies Atlas. Though a bit pricey, it turns unreal engine 3 into a full scale mmog with all the functional tools of the unreal engine.

I don't see how your post was in any way on topic, but I'll bite.

What other games beside Mortal uses Atals technologies?  I thought Atlas network solution was only used by StarVault, and they haven't had any other games released using Atlas MMO techonologies.  You can't use Atlas with the UDK  (unreals free developers kit for indy developers) so Indy developers for the most part stay away from Unreal for cost reasons.  

Ok, I do not think you have ever heard the word map, let alone atlas, but I will bite.   I've run out of ideas now, I tried two and they didn't work, bollox.

Originally posted by GreenHell

Originally posted by BigGayNorman

It is such a shame SOE sacked this game off.

I dont disagree with you. I've said "it had so much potential" about a few SOE games. They just never follow through or worse yet they destroy the game. For VG to get the kind of love it deserves it would have to be sold to a company that actually cares about it's customers and it's reputation.

Agree entirely.  Dam if your photo were not so hideous I'd be inviting you to the nearest Harvester.

Sounds mysteriously like a sales pitch... Are you after funding OP?

Originally posted by GreenHell

If this wan't an SOE game I think more people would be willing to give it another chance. Lets be honest here anyone who thinks that SOE is going to devote a ton of resources to this game 4-5 years after they came in to possession of it is fooling themsleves. You might get an update or two so you keep paying until they release one of their new MMO's but after that do you really believe VG has a bright future ahead of it?

 

It is such a shame SOE sacked this game off.

Guardion, HoX, ToS- most fun to play and best cross-section.

Originally posted by grawss

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Originally posted by Master10K

Originally posted by grawss

Wow. It's like the entire interview was strategically designed to strike directly into the heart of all The Old Republic has to offer. This interviewer seems to hate TOR through and through. :D

I kind of wish they focused less on voice acting and cut scenes. I think the point that TOR doesn't really offer anything fun or useful had been made ages ago. :/

 

Oh, and all opening scenes are cheese-fests. I thought that was the point. :P

This wasn't intended to be a dig at SW:TOR. This was just a follow up Interview; from the time he Interviewed Bobby Stein, about the voice acting, earlier this year and that interview wasn't all to favourable for GW2. Also Bobby Stein is the lead writer for ArenaNet, so it was going focus on either the voice acting or lore.

As said before,

 

This interviewer has lost all credibillity with me, he seems on a personal crusade against SW±TOR, Bioware and EA.

 

This makes his enthousiasme about GW2 equally uncredible, even for me as a big GW2 fan.

Do any other reviewers/previewers/interviewers/viewers have credibility with you? I generally find them to be a good source of information as long as you have some context. Saying, "this feature sucks, but this one is great" can mean quite a bit when you agree or even disagree with at least one of those opinions.

But in the case of interviews, credibility is irrelevant unless it is the developer's credibility that is in question.

Of course not, most interviewee's are selling a product, or they would not give up their time.

4914

Originally posted by RefMinor

Originally posted by BigGayNorman

Originally posted by RefMinor

I don't need to take a long hard look in a mirror, just because I am a fan of sandbox games and themeparks do not hold my interest.

 

You seem to believe theere is something wrong with holding a minority view.

 

Yes the majority prefer theme parks and game developers are happy to chase the cash by pandering to those tastes but that's no reason for me to question myself..

I am sorry, I don't.  I only take issue with the militant few who argue for sandboxes, mainly because I do not get how someone can care so much for so little.  

Sandboxes can appear empty if you are used to themeparks, but when you get that its the player interactions that create the world in the Sandbox, and the dev created content is only the backdrop to that, and you find your place in that world then they are far fuller than any themepark can be.

But it is always within developer defined rules, which frankly makes it a themepark without the entertainign cutscenes.  Please explain the difference, without pretending I am a moron.

Originally posted by jpnz

Originally posted by BigGayNorman

Originally posted by jpnz

Originally posted by BigGayNorman

Originally posted by jpnz

 

Bad in what way?

Free Realms is actually a well designed game.

I see innovation and changes happening in the MMO scene. Whether they succeed or not is up to the market.

Working as intended.

Sorry, thought my generalisation was sufficient.  Please, and think about this before you answer because I will not accept Rift as an answer, name one significant change in game mechanics since 2004??? Please do.

Phasing is one.

LFG tool is another.

EVE's Incursion type mechanic is another.

Shall I go on?

Yes, because you have mentioned nothing that fundamentally alters the genre, just tools to (in my opinion) make it less fun.

I'd say 'phasing' fundalmentally alters the traditional MMO.

You couldn't 'change the world' to a player without affecting the millions of others before. So phasing is a mechanic that can individualize the experience to players.

 

Since we are talking about MMOs and not just 'wow-clones', NFS: World is a different game all together. It really does alter the genre.

Same with Age of Empires: Online.

Taking the MMO and applying it to different genre other than RPG is something we are seeing more and more.

Sorry, I missed this hence the delay. 

I gotta be honest, and I genuinely do not mean to be rude, but that response smacks of someone trying to justify a losing argument.  It simply does, can argue it until the sun goes down, comes up and goes down again, but that is what you are doing.

The difference is this.  A subscription is quite honest in that we need X times this many people to cover our overheads.  A cash shop needs to cover its costs but draws you in subtly, usually ramping up costs as you level.  And if the money does not come in the service falls away.  I like the model myself.   

Originally posted by Xzen

Agree with OP. When devs figure out that they can make an open world with that you can fill with content for both Themepark and Sandbox we might move forward. We can wait and see how ArchAge turns out.

I think the genuine probelm is the misunderstanding of sandparks and themeboxes.  The number of times I have heard that FallenEarth is a sandbox... ? How, it is far less sandboxy than WOW, it is a pure linear quest driven dullfest.  People need to understand what they want before they moan.  I would put money on 60% of the people on this site who clammer for a sandbox having no idea what they are asking for. 

Originally posted by RefMinor

Originally posted by BigGayNorman

Originally posted by RefMinor

Originally posted by BigGayNorman

Originally posted by RefMinor

Originally posted by GreenHell

I think WoW like success for a fantasy based sandbox is 1 -1.5m subs, it will take a lot of cash to build the AAA game that gets that though.

 At this point in time I think you may be over estimating the amount of subs but I completely agree with you it will take a lot of money to make it happen.

 

Well, it's a guess, but I think a AAA fantasy sandbox will get a lot more than EVE

Please no more fantasy, high fantasy or Tolkein crap, the dead horse has been flogged to dust.  The truth is an AA titles will win more custom than a sandbox every time. Why?  People prefer an AA themepark ride to a day in the allotment. 

 

Fantasy is what people want, I prefer SciFi myself. No one is denying theme park simplicity is what most people prefer, but there is space and people to support more well made sandboxes than are currently out there

I agree entirely, but the general elitist trend on this site of portraying everyone who enjoys an AA MMO as moronic is becoming ridiculous.  There is a reason people like them, because they appeal to the mass populous, if you do not like them go take a long hard look in the mirror.   

 

I don't need to take a long hard look in a mirror, just because I am a fan of sandbox games and themeparks do not hold my interest.

 

You seem to believe theere is something wrong with holding a minority view.

 

Yes the majority prefer theme parks and game developers are happy to chase the cash by pandering to those tastes but that's no reason for me to question myself..

I am sorry, I don't.  I only take issue with the militant few who argue for sandboxes, mainly because I do not get how someone can care so much for so little.  

Originally posted by jpnz

Originally posted by BigGayNorman

Originally posted by jpnz

 

Bad in what way?

Free Realms is actually a well designed game.

I see innovation and changes happening in the MMO scene. Whether they succeed or not is up to the market.

Working as intended.

Sorry, thought my generalisation was sufficient.  Please, and think about this before you answer because I will not accept Rift as an answer, name one significant change in game mechanics since 2004??? Please do.

Phasing is one.

LFG tool is another.

EVE's Incursion type mechanic is another.

Shall I go on?

Yes, because you have mentioned nothing that fundamentally alters the genre, just tools to (in my opinion) make it less fun.

Edit: infact I have to go so far as to call you out as a moron, please only raise a point if you have a point to make, otherwise I am busy baking bread.

you tried steam or d2d, both give away a month with purchase and are often cheaper.

I dunno, previously you would have had to pay a sub just to play it, now you get four classes free.  My issue arrises when you pay a sub on a supposed F2P yet still have to buy classes or anything else that would otherwise be fee with a sub. 

Originally posted by RefMinor

Originally posted by BigGayNorman

Originally posted by RefMinor

Originally posted by GreenHell

I think WoW like success for a fantasy based sandbox is 1 -1.5m subs, it will take a lot of cash to build the AAA game that gets that though.

 At this point in time I think you may be over estimating the amount of subs but I completely agree with you it will take a lot of money to make it happen.

 

Well, it's a guess, but I think a AAA fantasy sandbox will get a lot more than EVE

Please no more fantasy, high fantasy or Tolkein crap, the dead horse has been flogged to dust.  The truth is an AA titles will win more custom than a sandbox every time. Why?  People prefer an AA themepark ride to a day in the allotment. 

 

Fantasy is what people want, I prefer SciFi myself. No one is denying theme park simplicity is what most people prefer, but there is space and people to support more well made sandboxes than are currently out there

I agree entirely, but the general elitist trend on this site of portraying everyone who enjoys an AA MMO as moronic is becoming ridiculous.  There is a reason people like them, because they appeal to the mass populous, if you do not like them go take a long hard look in the mirror.   

Originally posted by jpnz

Originally posted by BigGayNorman

Originally posted by jpnz

Originally posted by GameDevJake

I know how all of you feel and agree with alot of what you are all saying. Our genre is detiorating a lil. What I want to know is how to get it back on track.

Other than NOT BUYING new games, which wont happen, what can we do? How can we be heard?

Im only seeing MMO sites that give news and updates, rarely does the industry try to reach out to us, the gamers who buy their products.

Any thoughts?

 

Contrary to popular belief, the genre's been changing non-stop for the past few years.

We have all kinds of MMOs.

Need for Speed: World? Age of Empire Online? Free Realms? A tale in the desert?

All different MMOs.

Just because you don't know them doesn't mean they do not exists.

The problem is that your examples barely register on the radar because frankly they are bad.  If I were to say birds had diversified because they lost their wings, no one would applaud it when their gene pool was empty.  As for main stream improvements, we are still waiting for the next great Darwinian jump.

Bad in what way?

Free Realms is actually a well designed game.

I see innovation and changes happening in the MMO scene. Whether they succeed or not is up to the market.

Working as intended.

Sorry, thought my generalisation was sufficient.  Please, and think about this before you answer because I will not accept Rift as an answer, name one significant change in game mechanics since 2004??? Please do.

Originally posted by jpnz

Originally posted by GameDevJake

I know how all of you feel and agree with alot of what you are all saying. Our genre is detiorating a lil. What I want to know is how to get it back on track.

Other than NOT BUYING new games, which wont happen, what can we do? How can we be heard?

Im only seeing MMO sites that give news and updates, rarely does the industry try to reach out to us, the gamers who buy their products.

Any thoughts?

 

Contrary to popular belief, the genre's been changing non-stop for the past few years.

We have all kinds of MMOs.

Need for Speed: World? Age of Empire Online? Free Realms? A tale in the desert?

All different MMOs.

Just because you don't know them doesn't mean they do not exists.

The problem is that your examples barely register on the radar because frankly they are bad.  If I were to say birds had diversified because they lost their wings, no one would applaud it when their gene pool was empty.  As for main stream improvements, we are still waiting for the next great Darwinian jump.

I played this game at launch until I fell through the world one too many times.  I really did like the idea of it though.  There would be two prerequisites for me to rejoin. 1) pop and 2) patches.  Is this happening??

Originally posted by zonzai

I feel like Guild Wars did it right.  It required no sub but you still had to buy the game plus additional content.  But it never required the additional content and never gave you any XP or healing boosts or anything that changed the game play other than a few unique skins and extra character slots or storage space. 

The current crop of F2P games (not buy to play ala Guild Wars) aren't really out to make good successful games, they're just trying to make money by tricking people into thinking that they aren't paying to play the game.  Those kind of games are completely toxic to the MMO industry and even if you can argue that they have a role in the future of MMOs, arguing that they are the future of well-made MMOs is silly.  They just don't make enough money to compete with a big-budget MMO. 

STO could work as a free to play game.  Like Guild Wars, none of the cash content gives you an edge.  I'd still ike to see them require people to buy the game after a trial period though.  That adds more capitol and allows them to keep making content.

Yes GW1, call it F2P or B2P did it right.