Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by gamespam

I would play if there was a purpose to pvp.

Holding territory that has a certain resource(s), or gives buffs, or dungeon rights.

Something, ANYthing.

 

Then go do Tol Barad.

The purpose is to a) get the rights to do dailies, and b) BH.

And please win while you're at it, it's been a few weeks that I haven't be able to run that raid because when I can play it's never under my faction's control.

And so far I am not having any issues with armor models, each one feels unique enough to me, I only started playing seriously on Cataclysm though, merely watching WoW from a distance up to now. 

AFAIK Zul'Aman will really just be a heroic version of the low level version, while Zul'Gurub will be featuring different bosses, there will be a quest arc explaining the lore behind it, though I'm pretty sure most won't give a crap about lore while they're busy complaining about the game because it isn't perfect and it never claimed to be perfect.

Never.

MMOs should be dynamic enough for no one to ever feel they reached "end game". My definition of "end game" in this case is a fixed number of activities with a very limited number of variations that have to be looped over and over, simply because there is nothing beyond that in terms of progression.

By dynamic I mean something that should make this transition of content tiers to feel much more fluid. In World of Warcraft for example, this fluidity could be done through new quests arcs in new phase regions explaining the development of the story, along with "events" like the ones before the Cataclysm or the opening of the gates of Ahn'Qiraj. The thing is that they must be varied enough to feel like you're progressing towards something instead of doing a huge chunk of the same thing which is what easily happens when you're only doing one type of activity - like doing only questing, only raiding, only running dungeons, only crafting, only BGs, only arenas, etc.

This is ridiculous. You pay for an internet you can't fully use, it's like blaming YouTube for streaming videos, somehow they think it's valid for P2P technologies.

In my ignorant opinion, it mostly goes to investors.

Not to the folks that work on the game, since they probably receive a fixed salary that has nothing to do with the game success.

Not to increase the development team, since they already have their planned content development team when they received the initial investment. They will be quick to shrink it though in case the subscriptions start to fall.

Not to improve the servers, since investors already approved a server structure that is "stable", works like the fixed salary idea - no benefit from a game success.

The investors made it all possible, but their worry to receive their initial money back and start profiting often limits the long-term vision that is needed to succesfully run a MMORPG over the years, and I'm not talking about changing the subscription model to a F2P or B2P model as a long-term vision.

Originally posted by Zzad

Originally posted by Netspook

My favourite MMO should cost $50 per month!

Most parents wouldn't pay that, so the annoying goldbegging brats would be gone. And the douchebags would reconsider, since getting banned would mean a lot of wasted money.

Result: a wonderful community!

a wonderful and RICH community because 50e x month is expensive as s****.

I Hope communities are not based on how much money you can /you want to spend on a game....

u must be kidding...........

Ironically, if the game is high budget and F2P it usually ends up with strong microtransactions which in the end  result in the same thing, it'll just feel more like the real life social piramid.

And I am not considering Guild Wars 2 since it's not F2P but B2P instead (which is the model I have more hope for, I'll gladly take one-time payments instead of a strong microtransaction shop full of advantages or hidden monthly fees for sale or monthly payments for game access).

Originally posted by Treekodar

Originally posted by reddo

It's times like these when I wish there was a luxury shop or something, seeing as how I've bought the game already. Then again, I could always just donate directly to Japan's relief effort. 

Or you could give the game to a friend.

Yeah, do that. It'll make a country and +1 happy. It's actually amazing how GA has no monthly fee and no cash shop at all and still decides to redirect 50% of its revenue for a weekend. This game should get more purchases than WoW for what it's doing and how it completely goes against any corporate suit (money, money, money) thinking.

And regarding the reactor, uhhh, and here was I thinking we were kind of busy enough already with global warming.

I have no issue with games that take 20+ hours for my first playthrough, my pace is incredibly slow but usually most of my fun comes from exploring the environment and doing side quests/minigames instead of watching the main story evolve (which is the reason it makes me go so slow, but most of the time I feel no need to go through a second or third time).

Less than that will require extra modes or stuff like that, I'd like at least 25 hours of fun for my $50. For $60 I'd probably want 32 or something, and for $10 I'm happy enough money-wise with 4 hours spent, though these $10 indie games rarely are that short. Sure, I can forgive shorter games, but this is all so subjective it's not worth talking about as measuring fun is pretty much an opinion.

P.S.: Yay me, 2000th post.

Different treatments, huh?

I guess they're just doing some prevention against a possible lawsuit because someone supposedly turned a pedophile by playing online games.

It's so ridiculously easy and there are so many ways to get gold currently, I really don't understand why one can be lazy enough to support RMT.

Currency is part of any MMO, why think you're above it and break the ToS for that?

As far as I know the bear will not be the same, instead it will be a new one, probably with a different color, with a shiny effect or something like that.

Sorry, I already found the "funny" stuff when this game started its "We're not in Azeroth anymore" advertisement. Blizzard is just being gentle to show the way back to Azeroth for those who feel like going back.

Business is business.

You should be blaming the judge, I'm pretty sure many including myself would make extreme claims to protect what they want if needed, now when the judge himself accepts such claims, Houston we have a problem.

He was the one supposed to prevent such extremes from happening (to the point of violating Human rights/Constitution/all this stuff).

Why is that happening?

Is the player hacking or is it a glitch?

Originally posted by JetFusion

"We dont want to sell anything that is going to compromise the skill base nature of the game"

said in a interview PAX 2010

 

If its like EA F2P games we are really screwed because in Battlefield heroes they said the same and then they @£§€§ us really well :D

It will probably be like that.

They said something about Battlefield Heroes on how it provided them a huge income boost when they added equipment with stat advantages for real money, despite the vocal minority complaining with 50+ pages of discussion about it on the forums.

So it's really just a matter of choosing: catering to a vocal minority by making the cash shop cosmetic/convenience only or filling their pockets with extra revenue from players lured into instant gratification for a game they enjoy for whatever reason, this choice is pretty clear IMO and probably for anyone that is not doing charity. Which is the reason I stick with subscription games.

Originally posted by bastionix

omg you don't use Add block.

what is wrong with you, are you ok

Wouldn't this website and any other that relies mostly on ad revenue simply go backrupt if everyone uses AdBlock? (or at least be forced into adding a premium account services or stuff like that)

I guess this means Lego Universe is doing bad.

I still miss Auto Assault.

Originally posted by AnthonyRusso

I am amazed that after so many posts on the article about anything in a game on this site there has been no negative comments. And this is an article about a push-back and rocky launch too! It really goes to show you how good a game Xsyon is becoming and the dev team and community around it are top notch. I'm glad to be a part of it.

 

People on MMORPG.com are too busy being negative with Rift right now.

Anyway, I really can't see any objective negative for pushing a release considering they're giving extra time to the pre-orders, it's just a win-win situation, more development time means a better game for release.

Can't wait until they provide free trials post-release then, so many people talking good about this game.

Originally posted by Robokapp

decline is decline.

Yes, all three probably show a decline - Steam, Raptr, Xfire.

Anyway I have no idea why the heck anyone wouldn't expect that, or even try to use that as proof of some "this game/developer sucks" arguments. It is what happens with MMOs, or any kind of game for that matter, in this case there's a subscription too, that while for some $15 might be worth it even if there's like only 15 monthly hours expected, for many many others nope, and for another considerable part it isn't even about a subscription fee but simply moving on to another game.

Anyway developing a MMO based on servers nowadays is a huge mistake in this regard, especially on a popular IP, you end up with an inflated initial player count and then you inevitably need a lot of servers to cope with that amount, including the opening of new servers. Then, when the numbers fall considerably, there is an additional effect of players noticing this reduction in active players, which results in that domino effect of doom and gloom and potential long-term players getting their feelings skewed by this movement.

While I am sure every developer wants as many players at release as possible, they should have plans for this since the drawing board, this extra thinking could save dozens of jobs when they start downsizing the development team thanks to the extra long-term players.

How would this be possible? A single-server zone architecture, a cross-server "dungeon finder" (does not solve the problem for open areas), something even more ambitious, cross-server areas (though it would make the lines pretty blurry) or hey, someone could come up with an even better plan, I don't even have a job in this industry to back up a single word I posted as a legitimate or viable concern.

I would like a key, thanks in advance.