Hmm, I hope FSS has some pretty good ideas on how to handle economy in the game (read money sinks).  Maybe they decided to place less emphasis on money and are driving for a barter economy? This would definitely put off gold farmers and similar vermin plaguing most other MMOs.

Originally posted by daveospice

I have to admit I thought the demo had potential.  Now I went out and got 4 pre-order boxes (2 for my sister and her husband, one for me and my roomate) and we all love the game to death!

Playing solo does NOT do this game justice!  The enemies get a LOT tougher when you group, and the combat is very fast paced and just INSANE.  I love it! 

Last night we were fighting these HUGE giant four armed dudes that were tough as hell and at one point we were all on ventrilo laughing our asses off because we were trying to run from them and they kept chasing us and pathfinding to us, and we kept dieing.  Eventually we figured out how to beat them but man was it fun!  Never had so much fun dieing in my life!

The hellrifts are awesome and I love going into one every time, although I wish there was more variation and that the hellrifts were stretched out more like in diablo 2 the side caves and such.

The combat rocks.  You've got to get this game!  Stick it to WoW and Tabula Rasa and get this game!

PS:  I hate almost all MMORPG's out today.  So, coming from me this is an accomplishment! 

TABULA RASA SUCKS!

Dunno about Tabula Rasa but it does sound a bit sucky to me..

Your HG:L experience seems just like what I need :) I'm definitely buying it!

As for MMORPG community right now.. I don't know what's with devs nowadays... It seems like there's some kind of  "Fun Police" doing the rounds and destroying anything that seems even remotely fun.. (WoW world PvP for example... ) Nice to see at least two games with emphasis on FUN (WAR seems to be the other one) rather than pure and unabashed grind addiction (Kids, contrary to popular myth, addiction is not cool and it is never, and I mean never, fun).

Hmm, imho you guys are missing a very important point here - the distinction between psychological and practical ramifications of this model.

Psychologically this model sucks in comparison to GW one. People want to own things. When you buy a nice shiny box you are secure in the knowledge that you own that content from now till kingdom come.

However, the subscription for additional content model is actually beneficial to players from a practical (read $$$) standpoint...

- For measly 10$ you get ALL THE ADDITIONAL CONTENT published so far. If I joined GW now I'd have to dish out 120$+ to get all the stuff.

- With some math and taking into account the periods you didn't actually play (vacations, exams etc) you'll find that this model will actually cost less money per day/played than GW.

- You can discontinue your subscription for whatever reason but you can still stay active in the game. People do take breaks from games and return to them. I see this as an opportunity to meet with game pals occasionally and have some casual fun using the original content. In WoW for example the second your subscription runs out - it's like you're dead, out, kaputt.

- Continuous additions of  new content - since the expansion team has a stable revenue stream they can produce new stuff regularly... From the company's standpoint (GW i.e. ) each new expansion is a risk - first you spend the money on development then hope it'll sell enough to make a profit. The HG:L model allows the company to keep a permanent expansion staff, pay them from subscriptions and churn out regular expansions without any risk to their profits. The FSS announced that they'll have mini-expansions (like new bosses and items) monthly and big ones (on pair with GW expansions, with new regions and classes) every three months... regularly... like clockwork... and I believe them because their business model allows them to do so.

However, being only human I do have my misgivings on the model. I too like to OWN things, to have them ALL MINE... forever...  On the other hand people used to perceive money as gold hidden in buried chests and now we can't imagine our lives without credit cards. So I suppose we can get used to this MMO payment model as well.

Originally posted by Arskaaa

Tis game is for kids. Adults should avoid tis.

Sir, I believe you might be much mistaken...

Imho the game's casual, happy-go-lucky style will appeal much more to players with limited playtime and those who do have their share of stress and competition in real life.

As a representative of 30-something, working and upwardly mobile crowd, I (and a lot of my pals in similar circumstances) find this game much more attractive than classical MMORPGs that promise  (and advertise) to take over your life.

Among other games that I played I tried EVE online, for example... It is an awesome game to be sure, but I really have enough RL hard work, competition, money worries etc to take them into my leisure time. If I were 10 years younger (and maybe 10 years older) I'm sure I'd play it incessantly. Now I want some nice casual quality fun without pressure and this is what this game seems to deliver.

I expect the average age of HG:L players to be 5+ years above the normal MMORPG player age. The fact that a lot of old Diablo players will flock to this game is bound to contribute to this as well.

Cheers!

/edit

... which is good news for 'money sucking vampiros of EA' since this player demographic has a bit more funds available than traditional teens and college students crowd.. 10$ a month means absolutely nothing to me - my time is what is expensive. I'd pay 10$ a day for an hour or two of guaranteed quality leisure time when I get home from work each day.

For me randomization = good

Some of the greatest games in the history of computer games in general used randomization extensively... Lords of Midnight, Elite (8-bit games dudes :) ) and later Civilization series etc. Randomization is cool in my book because it means that you are going against something which doesn't care for your "personal enjoyment" - you actually don't know whether the fight is going to be fair. You have to use your ingenuity and imagination each time you go out.

Games that are overly scripted/balanced for the player are boring to me - why should I play the game at all if I know that some person designed my "experience" so that I am guaranteed to "win" if I put in some effort and find out the "correct" route? I want the feeling that I don't know whether it is possible to win at all each time I go out, and even then find some outlandish way to accomplish my goals anyway.

This is the reason why multiplayer games are so popular - unpredictability. Randomization is another way to introduce more unpredictability in games, which is one of the key defining features of any good game (from board games onwards)...

(This is why I'm against "stories" in games - "stories" must be carefully crafted and linear which is more appropriate for other mediums like literature and film. Games that rely on stories become linear and predictable and suffer as a cause. A good setting is a different matter... A game can have awesome and rich setting but no story except those made by player/players themselves - this is the point HG:L devs understand very well imho)

As for HG:L in particular - I hear that apart from levels and items, even the monsters themselves will have randomized features (i saw burning zombies mentioned). This would be extremely cool - For example as you go out that same old hatch you realize that most mobs are now immune to fire for example... or they have a 50% speed boost at expense of hp or they have a jumping capability.. This would definitely rise my heart rate a bit every time I go out on a mission.

(HG:L is like a box of chocolate. You never know what you're gonna get.  )

To answer the OP:

Yes, but how can you kill something that is already dead?

Lack of basic understanding of player psychology killed it... That and the horrifically primitive core RPG mechanics... and carebearism... and laziness of imagination on the devs' part.. etc...

It did set a new standard of technical quality but at the expense of almost everything else.

It is sad that the game enjoyed so much success. It has set back the whole MMORPG genre 10 years back (UO was a much much more sophisticated game at its core). And it scared off all other devs from publishing anything decent or innovative these past 3 years (no, LotR does not count). I /spit on its grave.

played the demo - shows promise

For what it's worth, i find it has TOO MUCH story.. (lengthy quest texts that you have to skip a sentence at a time...) being an old school guy I go with the "If I wanted a story, I'd buy a book."  motto.

As for hypothetical "Diablo clones", please do name one worth playing that came out since Lord of Destruction. Me and my wife (and a bunch of other friends who still read books when they want to enjoy stories) will definitely buy and play this one.

I played the demo for what it is - a basic demonstration of gameplay.

And it is exactly what I wanted - it is fun, it doesn't tax my brain, it satisfies my munchkiny instincts, shows a lot of potential for growth  and promises to be a lot of fun when all the content gets in.

As of now it is the smoothest gameplay experience I had in quite a while and the pace is just right for me.

For all the people bashing the game based on the demo... what is with you guys? This is a demo - a demonstration of core game mechanics and basic looks. You can't comment on story or game difficulty for example because these are not really represented in a demo.

The only gripes I have with the demo are

a) mouse pointer feels weird - they obviously use the same driver for mouse-look and inventory/menus

b) quest descriptions take ages to skip sentence by sentence... weird... an action RPG should have as little as possible time wasted on reading walls of text... "Just show me where they are.."

 It is smooth, it promises to be fun and what's wrong with lack of story or "immersion"? If I want these things I'll play some other game - AoC or WAR i.e. - but for nice brainless hack 'n' slash diversion this promises to be just perfect for me.
 My heart is big enough to love more than one game at a time

Originally posted by lomiller

WAR will be solid but nowhere near the numbers some people are trying to claim.  200K-300K subs is a realistic expectation. 

Dunno mate... all the RL people I know that are playing WoW are planning to switch to WAR the moment it comes out. Some of them do grumble about AoC as well but I can tell you that not one player I personally know plans to stick with WoW, especially since this crappy 80+ expansion has been announced (the Lich King something whocares whatever)

1. Hellgate: London

2. Warhammer Online

3. Age of Conan

 The rest imho don't have much of a chance.

me 2 cents, we'll see how it turns out in a year...

Randomization - you never know what is waiting for you once you leave the safe area I hear that even the monsters themselves have some randomized features

Usually I detest instancing in MMORPGs (i got GW as a present but never played it for more than a week - I do hate instancing) however, in this case instancing is perfectly justified for me if it makes this level of randomization possible.

The second place for me would be the emphasis on masses of mobs rather than taking one at a time. Frankly I'd like to see some insane situations like 50+ of them running toward you, somewhat like the psychodelia Serious Sam games had a few years back.

Originally posted by Orthedos

I have this question.  Is it possible for me to buy HG:L, playing it solo without going online till I get the hang of the game.  If I like the game, and if the online community feels happy, and if the added contents do come, if ...

Then I register my game and join the paid online community.  Can I do that?

Yea you can...

I hated the paying model until I stopped to think about it.

When you pay 1 subscription you get all the new content released so far, no matter how long ago the game actually released.

An equivalent would be if someone bought Guild Wars now and by paying 1 monthly subscription got all the expansions released until now.

Another cool thing is that even if you stop paying your subscription (for whatever reason, you forgot, don't have the money, wanted a break), you can still play the game although in a limited fashion using basic out-of-the-box features (which do include full MMO functionality) - so you can at least drop into the game world and say hello to your elite guildmates and do some basic adventuring with them for example.

And finally, even if you are not paying subscription and are without internet access you can still play the game single player.

This really does sound to me as having more choice as a customer on how much time and money I want to spend on the game.

(and besides, you can play it as a MMO without paying subscription - but you get access only to original game zones and items and cannot participate in larger group PvP)

Originally posted by flood950

 

Originally posted by Glam.Indie

I'm sorry for this silly question ... but Hellgate : London is a mmorpg?! thought it's a rpg

 

Its both.  It has a singleplayer option as well as multiplayer.  The MP option is very comparable to Guild Wars online play.

... or you can say it's multiplayer with single player option - think Guild Wars that you can play solo if offline.

Hmm, in one of the latest previews I read the praise how the game manages to seamlessly move from 3rd person to 1st person with a flick of the mouse wheel... Imho the class you choose will dictate the game's pace and perspective.

I imagine Marksman will be the fastest - requiring you to aim 1st person most of the time, while Templar Guardian might be the slowest - he actually gets more buffs  the more mobs are around him... according to game vids these buffs can be released for mass aoe and stuff. So I imagine he uses the least actions/minute of all classes (a good timing might be very important there though) and plays almost exclusively in 3rd person to have the best all-around situational awareness.

Well the MMORPG genre is changing and getting more diversified... HGL is as much a MMORPG as GW is, and I dare say much much more than Fury for example (multiplayer beat-em-up with RPG elements to be precise).

Instancing kinda changed the whole MMO field - we could say that even EVE is not a true MMORPG in UO sense - if you look very closely it is composed of a series of interconnected instances (closed off zones if you will) called "Star Systems" - you could say it is a bunch of GW-style hubs with combat enabled in them and nothing in between...

And stop the bickering please - If it's about perisistant character growth and it's played online where you can interact with massive number of people*  then it is a MMORPG... the rest are details. (And yes, a few of todays' online FPSs could well be considered MMORPGs, no one will get killed if they get included as well...)

As for this site, they might narrow their scope a bit if they don't want to start covering most upcoming games... Imho they're in position a magazine called "3D Games" might have been in 1993 say... What used to be a niche genre is now exploding into mainstream.

* "massive number of people" - for example you could say GW is more "massive" than WoW... In GW your character can group with any other character in the game while WoW characters are restricted to their servers.. this is a complex matter, folks

/ps

(hate reposting my own replies, but it seems the main discussion on this topic is here... so that was me 2 cents.. again - promise won't do it  anymore :) )

Well the MMORPG genre is changing and getting more diversified... HGL is as much a MMORPG as GW is, and I dare say much much more than Fury for example (multiplayer beat-em-up with RPG elements to be precise).

Instancing kinda changed the whole MMO field - we could say that even EVE is not a true MMORPG in UO sense - if you look very closely it is composed of a series of interconnected instances (closed off zones if you will) called "Star Systems" - you could say it is a bunch of GW-style hubs with combat enabled in them and nothing in between...

And stop the bickering please - If it's about perisistant character growth and it's played online then it is a MMORPG... the rest are details. (And yes, a few of todays' online FPSs could well be considered MMORPGs, no one will get killed if they get included as well...)

As for this site, they might narrow their scope a bit if they don't want to start covering most upcoming games... Imho they're in position a site called "3D Games" might have been in 1993 say... What used to be a niche genre is now exploding into mainstream.

Hellgate: London - truly casual muchkin-fest with a zillion items to collect!

Warhammer Online - persistent world with it's own weight - burn down someone's capital! The way its world structure is conceived I imagine that at each log in you'll never find the world in the same state as you left it.

2 games whose dev teams correctly identified what works and what doesn't in today's MMORPGs and made a bunch of right choices regarding the basic premises of gameplay.

The rest don't seem that much fresh or revolutionary to me. I.e, although I adore Howard, Lovecraft and the rest, AoC smells of WoW-like game focus (PvE grind, mindless PvP until endgame, PvE raids and some interesting PvP at max lvl... too much bother for me to level a char through 80 levels so I can eventually do what I bought the game for... and that would be guild v guild warfare in border kingdoms)... As for the rest, Darkfall seems interesting but so are the flying saucers and crop circles - I ain't buying it till I see it.

Yey! Finally!

A game that should have been here a long time ago!

Better late than never anyways. So whassup? How's the beta going? I hear all the best so far. :)