Company of Heroes Online/

Not a sandbox, but who cares all I want is FUN.

Awesome pvp game.

I haven't looked back.

Originally posted by Realbigdeal

No since we already have darkfall. Its too late.

Barffail is not even in the same league as Shadowbane.

Shadowbane 2 with upgraded graphics, UI would rock the house.

Shadowbane was Epic and Noteworthy.

Play to Crush.

And Play to Crush we did.

Long live MoC.

Because with 10,000 players you have 10,000 opinions on what they each want to see in a game.

I like pvp

Some people don;t

I like full loot pvp

Some people don't

I hate crafting

Some people love crafting

and the list goes on and on...

No.

Final Fantasy XIV is not that good of a game.

GW2 has a shot.

Why would anyone play this dumb game?

Even the name is .... goofy....

Glad you like it.

Nothing innovative about Final Fantasy XIV

So I won't be buying it.

and this is ?

news?

Like anyone with half a brain cares...

Bleh, not a big fan of raids....

the realistic effects and the combat?

There must be more to it, but from what I've read it seems to be it.

Can anyone enlighten me?

Thanks

Here's an idea for you, why not make the gameplay better so that people would actually come back and play it?

I think GW2 is going to be worth playing.

Hi Sidd,

Just came across this thread and I have been very interested in Vindictus for a very long time - as quite honestly I have lost interest in the current offerings of mmo's.

This one seems really different.

I will honor your wishes for the chain and send you back the extra invites i get.

Thanks!

Originally posted by nickelpat

With every new MMO game we, as gamers, always dig for innovation, huge sweeping changes to the genre. We thrive on the evolution of the genre and love games that change it up.

It doesn't work though.

To begin I would like to look at what is unarguably the most popular MMORPG thus far. World of Warcraft. When playing it, a few things come out and hit you. The combat uses skills activated by pressing a hotkey and you target and opponent by clicking on it, or hitting the "Tab" key. Crafting takes a simple approach, it is quick and the game doesn't rely on it at all. It focuses heavily on the end of the game, with raids and high-level PvP gameplay, with questing taking the bulk of the playtime in the middle. The UI is customizable and offers a nearly endless variety of configurations. Lastly, it is accessible, the graphics don't require much more than a common laptop and the gameplay is inviting to anyone willing to sit down and give it a try.

To continue, I would like to present what was one of the very popular MMORPGs of it's day, EverQuest. It too had combat where you clicked an enemy and used skills with hotkeys. It too had many raids and much content at the end of the game, although not quite as focused on it as World of Warcraft tends to be. It also had a lot of quests and was simple and accessible to approach.

When playing the two games, you can easily draw the connections between them. There is not any major innovation from EverQuest in World of Warcraft. Yet, it is wildly popular. I believe that this lies in the evolution of a genre. Evolution happens in small steps. I think the easiest example (barring any actual beliefs you may hold) is that of Darwin's theory of evolution. A species evolves slowly. If it is a bird that eats nuts, it may develop a wider, thicker, stronger beak to crack a nut with. The bird does not just decide it's beak is too weak and immediately spawn a better beak the next time it procreates. It slowly changes and evolves through the process of natural selection.

I believe the concept can be applied to MMORPGs. We, as a species, cannot evolve from World of Warcraft with it's "Tab Targeting" and non-evasive crafting to a game with very active FPS-like combat and very interactive crafting and fewer quests. That is a jarring change, jarring changes are not good for anyone. Small changes ease people into a new product.

And to look at a few of the recent examples of games with some of these changes.

First of, we have Tabula Rasa. Personally, I absolutely loved it. I was apparently part of a minority here. Tabula Rasa maintained a more quest based game, but it had some more active combat. It used a "sticky-targeting" system instead of a full fledged shooter system. Skills were mapped to the Right Mouse Button rather then depending on hotkeys. The main downfalls were not so much the systems as the lack of content and buggy release. Tabula Rasa was quite messy at release and I think that was really responsible for the game's failing.

Second up, Darkfall. I never really played Darkfall, as it was no more than a passing interest. It opened with a pretty messed up purchasing set up with limited copies. After that it had issues of gameplay being grindy and full of exploits and bugs. I give the credit for the game's downfall to these shortcomings.

Last, Mortal Online. What to say about Mortal. It was a great concept, but not so great execution. With a full box price but it was so darned buggy. Getting characters deleted, server connection issues. I do think it's too early in the life of Mortal to say it has failed. I will leave this one hanging.

None of these are good examples saying these types of changes fail, as each one can be attributed to content or bugs, not simple the systems themselves.

So then, what do I think will usurp the 800 pound gorilla that is World of Warcraft?

A game that maintains the same base systems of World of Warcraft but polishing it and improving upon it slightly. Better crafting, smoother, more entertaining combat, but with the same setup. A major contender could be Star Wars: The Old Republic, although it has yet to be seen what BioWare will do with the title. Rift: Planes of Telra is also a possible contender, more still needs to be seen though.

A serious, jarring innovation won't work though. It restricts the game to a niche, while not opening it to the same group of World of Warcraft players, people who want a more casual title.

I think the game that has the best chance of beating World of Warcraft will need to be made by Blizzard, or use a very well known IP, like Star Wars. The game will need to access many non-gamers, or those that only play World of Warcraft. This means that if it is advertised by Blizzard they will see it, or if it uses an IP that many know and love and it advertised well. It will need to be an awesome game of course.

Please, weigh in on my little bit of writing. Do you think a jarring, new, innovative title could overthrow World of Warcraft? Or do you agree with me that the new king-of-MMORPGs will need to be like World of Warcraft, albeit with polish and changes to separate itself from a World of Warcraft clone? Or did my article make no sense at all?

 

Thank you,

 

 

 - Eric

I think you are wrong.

The reason so many mmo's are failing right now, is because they are too much the same and people are crying out for innovation.

If you have nothing better to do... Aion is a wonderful game!

Grinder.

Blah.

Originally posted by Raserei

The negativity comes from the "caviar" gamer. They will never find the right game because they are in need of perfection with lobster tail...

No sorry your wrong.

Most of us don't like those kinds of games.

It's as simple as that.

I prefer Western Style games.

Haven't played one Asian mmo that I have liked. Not one. 

I thought it was a great review.

While fan boys will rush to "bash" the reviewer - for me it was a very good review.

Same old same old - just with a different story/setting - but basically the same mmo we have been playing for the last 10 years.

Great review.

Thank you.

I for one want something "groundbreaking" before I sub to a new game.

Not some old tired formula with a spiffy franchise splashed on it.

Originally posted by Emoqqboy

Originally posted by heerobya

Why they fail?

Most people don't like being lambs.

Lambs to the slaughter.

 

It's kind of funny... the wolves need sheep to prey on, but the FFA games discourage sheep from sticking around.

What happens in a game full of wolves? 

People are too afraid to fight because they may lose.

 

Either that or they have pissing matches over territory.

 Yep, thats kinda been my experience in FFA pvp concept games. It reaches a stage there's no sheep left, and the wolves need food.. and have to prey on other wolves. Issue being? Well, large percentage of the subscription fees or revenue the gaming company requires, derives from sheep. Just my opinion though, not trying to start an argument.

Well technicially you could call me one of those "lambs" as I am not a hard core pvper nor an "elite" player - but I LOVE ffa pvp.

I loved shadowbane.

Until they make another game like SB I doubt I'll be subscribing to any mmo.

Most mmo's right now are boring clones.

Kill people respawn, rinse and repeat - it's the same old tired pve formula with a different skin.

Boring. Boring. Boring.

Shadowbane had actual castle sieges - where your "team" could take over a world!

Epic.

There's relatively no strategy to it.

Good concept.

VERY poor execution.

not worth playing.

Originally posted by MadnessRealm

One thing I noticed is that I've rarely seen players asking to reduce the grind in F2Ps. It's mainly a P2P issue"

????

Are you reading the same forums as the rest of us?

That is the number one complaint against F2P mmo's - the grind.

No thanks.

Lack of money has never been a reason for me not to try this game.

I am not a fan of having to grind out skills to be competitive with others players.

imo HUGE mistake by the developer.

It will kill the game - and ultimately the only people left playing will be the die hard fans.

Oh right - that's the only people who are playing right now :P