All Posts by openedge1

Originally posted by solareus

Originally posted by openedge1

Thanks for your input , Would love to see your sources as well.

My points are "questions", so that source would be me. That is probably the most ridiculous statement I have seen.

A. Go price Crytek of Unreal engines, and think abou tit.

But, it was your statement. You made it a "factual" statement with no proof. Just like the models using DX10, with no proof. I provide proof, and you still say the models use DX10.

Crysis is not used in an MMO, and yes, Unreal may be an expensive engine, but, the problem is you made a blanket statement with zero information to back it up. All I am pointing out is you stated the LOTRO engine cost half of other MMO's, so I would like to know where you received this information. How do you know this when all searches turn up zero information on the total cost to develop LOTRO. I also would like to point out that just because an engine was built in house does not make it cheap. The WoW engine was built in house, from the previous Warcraft III graphics system and development costs have still beeen noted to be around 20+ million US dollars.

B. Adevelopers is quoting from Warcry after release " If we get a problem , we can just throw money at it" You dig it up , I was there for the live chat.

So, for this information, we take the word of a standard forum poster. You state it as fact, and as such, you should back up YOUR data. Otherwise it is heresay.

C. With Codemasters posting 400k Subs and saying U.S.A. version has 400k subs leaving mmochart 200k short of the estimated posting on his chart.

Wait, have you not yourself stated the MMOChart data as being incorrect? I believe the words were "Where are his sources". Now, the same applies to you. To even make this statement look foolish, Midway for example has only ever stated a total of 250k boxes sold according to NPD. Now, this does not count since that last press release which was last year. The problem is, no data exists stating the total sales up to now...that can be found anyways. This is why it is important for someone who states such data to back it up.

D. DDO is posting profit, per many interviews with that game representives, again I read these articles on this site, you dig.

I have searched, and they do not exist. You as the poster are responsible for making sources known with such inflated claims. There again is ZERO evidence of DDO being profitable. This is 100% made up data.

E. Warner Bros. Power in the entire entertainment industry is well known, and they are smart investers.

My opinion, which is very educated, and pretty solid. Not factored by my disgruntle emotion like some posters throughout this forum.

I would actually say "Made Up" and not educated. I just prefer hard facts, and the only "factual" item you have stated above is "My opinion", which is what this information is. Zero proof.

Has nothing to do with being a troll either. I just would like my information to have actual facts is all.

Originally posted by solareus

Originally posted by green13

One can only wonder how much money this little boo boo has cost them.

 

Kind of watch you blubber all around trying to make a doom and gloom out look for one of the most successfully launched games of the 21st century. You vision is very small with this statement.

1. Turbine doesn't need WoW numbers because

         A. They used thier own in house game engine, cuttiing development costs in half from a normal mmo game that would eithe rhave to create an engine from scratch  or license a game engine

         B. They made all development money back at launch with the top selling game on the NPD chart at launch.

         C. They offord the life tiime subscriptions which appealed to a massive amount of players , and those lifetime buys aren't reflected on mmochart.

        D. A doom and Gloom game in this current market of 2008 wouldn't release a expansion, the economy is just to rough right now for any mistakes.

         E. Warner Bros.

You factor in all the extremely positive view of the game throughout the industry and the games community add up to "We don't need WoW numbers to succeed"

Doesn't matter if there is a misplaced Faq or a small problem with a patch , Turbine is at the top of food chain right now becoming the most powerful mmo developer in the United States, who did it all"With out WoW nummbers"

How much did it cost them, absolutely "0."

I think my only issue with these statements are you note these as "facts". Can you maybe make sure toi include sources? I mean, unless you are an employee actually...which I sometimes wonder due to the "factual" comments you make.

A. True, in house engine. But, how do YOU know it only cost half of another MMO? Do you have numbers to back that up? And can you specifically state WHAT MMO that LOTRO cost half of to make? Vanguard? EQ2, Tabula Rasa?

B. They made back all costs. Can you maybe cite your sources? I have more often then not been blamed for stating items as "facts" with no data to back it up, yet there you are doing the exact same thing. Again...unless your an employee, how do you know this? I prefer hard data.

C. Again you make several statements as facts here. A "massive" amount, appealed to? Did you have contact with these people, and know this? Also, how do you know the lifetime does NOT affect the charts? More anecdotal evidence works instead of your word.

D. True on this. I think we will see how this develops. But, also you would think a "doom and gloom" game would bow out or go under. Yet, DDO still runs, Vanguard is still going, Archlord is going and is even free. All failures according to the books.

E. This is a biggie. I also think it will change the game tremendously. I have stated before, WB (actually it is TWC) will have some say...but, overall they my pull Turbine away on their new IP idea's. Lets hope not.

But, all the above statements are of your opinion, so we need to always make sure we state sources, as I would hate for anyone to think these are being stated as facts. I have been slammed many times by you guys here for it, so, it seems only right that you either state this is your opinion, or cite sources.

Thank you

Originally posted by WSIMike

So I got an e-mail from FC today, as a former Anarchy Online player, offering me a free trial to AoC...

I read the email and, got a good chuckle out of this paragraph:

"Since the launch two months ago, Age of Conan has enjoyed a tremendous success. The game has been #1 on the PC charts everywhere, and it's already one of the most popular MMO's out there. Fuelled by a solid launch, some very strong review scores and great player feedback, Hyboria is bristling with fun and life, but we still miss you!"

I feel like sending an email with that quoted paragraph in it saying "... if only I lived under a rock and didn't know the *true* state of the game, that might have actually convinced me".

Fun stuff.

 

You understand, playing the trial will give you the best part of the game...the "Tortage Experience"

Of course, this experience will set you back 2.99 in download fee's.

Thank you for flying Failcom

Originally posted by Papadam

Originally posted by openedge1

This is a more reasonable statement to me. I agree that by having it in game, they can learn how to keep using it to improve the visual quality of their models. The example of the new NPC's with the last book is a great idea of the quality.

 

 

Just to clarify.. thoose NPCs are not from book 14 (if you mean the Hillmen screenshot posted earlier) thoose models have been the same since release! (some NPCs look really good and some... not so good ;) )

No...I meant this one

I am actually not sure which book they were released. I had never seen these models, so as such, I assumed it was the one of the last 2 books.

It does say it is from February, so Book 12 maybe? Or previews of Book 13? Definitely after the DX10 update though. And this is also the best example to show how DX10 can enhance visual quality for models, and shows exactly that they were NOT (the middle model still has the plasticky facial features, while the 2 NPC's have detail to their faces and even the beard on the male looks like real hair...)

If all the models were like the 2 end pieces, then we would have something good here. Notice how the females figure is not "malformed" (based on the "chest" area"), and the man looks like....a man, and not a ballerina like the ones we have seen with their size 2 waists.

I hope we see stuff like this in MoM for players.

Originally posted by solareus

It IS very subtle. Instead of maxing out all the shaders like in HG:L Turbine is taking bvery small and tested steps to make sure they are using the technology to enhance the game, instead of masking the game. I believe by 2 expansions we will see a steady improvement as time goes on, with added effects and tweaks that will be natural to the growth of the game.

Why put all your eggs into one basket.

This is a more reasonable statement to me. I agree that by having it in game, they can learn how to keep using it to improve the visual quality of their models. The example of the new NPC's with the last book is a great idea of the quality.

I just took issue with the statement that the models looked better, as they actually...do not.

The "player" models look the same, just with some "shadows" that may hit their features once in a while from environments. As we can plainly see in the elf image above, it really does not do much of anything. Ok...maybe make it darker, but that is all.

Cheers.

The problem with Wiki is the climate is very strict. If anything leans toward ways to advertise or talk up the article, it can be deleted.

What needs to be done is the addition of recent data like the 415k. Then to note that they have been taken to task on this number. Anyone can do this...and I am almost tempted myself. Mention of missing features can be discussed without fear of deletion as long as we have "anecdotal" evidence.

If the data is deleted by someone in "Norway", you can then petition the Wiki group to have it reinstated. The issue is making sure the comments meet all guidelines.

Anyone here wish to start a little write up?

We could do something like this

Make a heading called "Criticisms" (like the "Reviews" section) or we can call it "Reception" (look at Tabula Rasa or LOTRO for examples)

We can look at WoW and see they have a section called "Usage problems", which if someone removes the AoC criticism section, it can be used for arguments sake.

In so many words, it is possible to make notations of AoC issues on Wiki to balance the listing.

Anyone wish to help?

My idea as follows

Criticisms and Missing Features

Upon launch, Funcom had several features mentioned for launch, which had to be removed at the last moment due to complications. (blah, blah)...reference, reference, etc...

Legacy

When released sales were noted as being even higher than World of Warcraft's launch. As of (date given) the Investors reports note a population of...blah, blah. But, several sites argue these claims, and that some data does not match, as two reports were given with varying dates, blah, blah..

As of this time, quite a few problems still exists for the game (blah, blah...MUST HAVE REFERENCE)

_____________________________

Everyone see how this is working?

As long as the written information matches reference material (notable websites like gamespot, etc.), then there should be no issue stating this data.

Anyone game? Post your ideas here. I will write the wiki post under my pseudonym I currently have registered with Pedia if anyone wishes to brainstorm how this should be written (and serious discussion please, no "this game suck" posts, as we can see those will be deleted...thnx)

Cheers.

Originally posted by Rebn77

 

These were taken at sunrise

As you can see on the DX 10 model there is a slight "yellowish" cast. This changes throughout the day (At sunset it can take on a slightly "pinkish" cast). The shadow effects are also a lot nicer in DX 10.

 

*Edit*

Wow, photobucket killed the quality

So...you are saying instead of pinkish skin, he has...Kidney Disease?

But, the main fix is "environmental" shadows add some extra...shadowing.

Thank you for answering this for me.

Originally posted by Neverknow

 

Isn't that what Martha Stewart did that got her little diva ass jailed and reputation sunk? Insider trading, I believe it's called.

No. Martha sold off based on insider info before the announcements and the following day or two saw the stock plummet. She made money based on previous unreleased info.

This is illegal.

For Funcom, the data had been released, thus the sell off. This IS legal.

Originally posted by solareus

Each shader is then enhanced in dx10, though Turbine has just taken a baby step with the technology is a very significant step none the less.

Also believe Turbine has the know how to make the game look even better, but waitng on hardware technology to be more afforable on the mass scale, the feeling of what Turbine is doing marketing wise is presenting a game for everyone to play on almost most computers, and as a old computer 2 or 3 years from now will have dx10 cards and dual core cpus I think we will see turbine unload some more of the technology , again maintaining the game can be run on most computers, it is very smart marketing and stradegy to maintain the longevity  of the product.

But, this still does not answer the question. You state Turbines models looks so much "better" thanks to DX10, yet, you have shown what all video cards advertise and what Microsoft has available to the developer to program these features in.

DX10 is not really needed to gain an effect (which has been shown by all previous photo's of AoC using DX9, and the fact that even skin tags, creasing, age lines, etc...can appear on the faces)

What you fail to show is WHAT exactly this does for LOTRO. You keep saying the models thanks to DX10 is awesome, but I have yet to see proof of this.

The armor? A texture can be enhanced by DX10 to allow variations of color, bloom, reflection...but, this has not been done with the models as you have stated.

The video card has the power, but the Developer has to "enable" this in code. Based on the previous link I have shown from Turbine, this was not the case.

Show me where the "player" models have been enhanced thanks to DX10. It is an easy request.

Login, turn on DX9, take a snap of your characters face. Now, log off then back in turn on DX10, and then take it again. Easy stuff really.

PR by video card makers is kinda like PR from a developer...look at AoC for examples of good PR.

Originally posted by Rebn77

Open, you're just upset that AoC doesn't have DX10. No reason to come here and take out your frustrations on the LotRO community .

Haha...that darn AoC DX10 mystery...makes me SOOooooo mad...hehe

But seriously...AoC's facial details even for DX9 really stands out compared to LOTRO.

But, LOTRO's landscapes walk all over AoC's..

I guess the "Truth is out there" Scully, and maybe one day we will find the game that has it all...maybe..

Originally posted by MaGicBush

I agree, but you should learn to spell.

First you kept telling us how awesome AoC was, and now you are knocking this guys spelling..

Geez

-1 dude

Originally posted by solareus

Once you use dx10 for LotrO, it is very hard to go back, it makes the Models and the game world so much better because of the shading and lighting . I never said that the actual model is "refined"  the models are enhanced with globally by dx10. The models themselves have nothing added to them or taken away, enhancing is the key word..

I knew the Sunrise screen shot was dx9 "The dx10 makes them just that much more awesome"

Can you show me an example of that "enhancement" please? Can you maybe "define" enhancement to me? What do YOU consider to be an enhancement and show me an example...(that is not armor of course)

I am just wondering. As Turbine never said it "enhanced" models with shading. And all screens shots for "players" (not NPC's) still show the original visual quality.

Thank you

My favorite part

Wow...who has the LARGEST numbers today on the markets!

Originally posted by Papadam

Originally posted by openedge1

Your point has merit. But, you still blindly believe that the investor is not going to try and have a say, and that is where the disconnect is.

LOTRO has "ok' sales and an "ok" subscriber rate. But, people do not "invest" into any type of property without hoping to get some return on their investment.

If a company sees a way for their investment to make MORE money, they will ALWAYS try go this route. To think that Time Warner when they see that WAR has a major successful launch and pulls in numbers, that someone in that board room is not going..."Hey if LOTRO did this, we could double our return.."

That is what I mean by being blinded. Especially if those WAR numbers take scrips from LOTRO, which will be a guarantee. WAR will steal scrips from many MMO's.

And when an investor sees that loss, you bet they will have a say.

But, this is all speculation at this point. We will have to wait and see if PvP is the answer to taking WoW numbers...

Maybe this is why Time Warner invested in Turbine?

"WESTWOOD, MA - July 31, 2008 - Turbine, Inc. announced today its partnership with Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment to distribute The Lord of the Rings Online™: Mines of Moria™ at retail in North America"
 

Just a wild guess :)

Do you guys not read links? Ok...I apologize for that issue.

Let me try this...

"“Our investment in Turbine is an important addition to Time Warner's entertainment initiatives,” said Rachel Lam, Senior Vice President and Group Managing Director of Time Warner Investments. “Online interactive entertainment is a huge growth market and we are very excited about Turbine, its unique capabilities and the obvious opportunities that exist with our own broad portfolio of IP.”"

Kotaku

I read this to be more than "Can we distribute your game for you?"

As well, the REAL discussion with Turbine is the investment to help Turbine develop a NEW IP also. Now, yes, TWC may leave LOTRO alone and work with Turbine toward managing the new IP, but then this could pull developers away from LOTRO, DDO, etc.

Again, speculation. That is all we are doing is discussing maybe's here.

But, it still boils down to TWC wanting a piece of the pie.

Originally posted by Yeebo

Originally posted by openedge1

Originally posted by jarish

Time-warner must think that Turbine is doing a pretty good job if they are willing to give them 40 million in today's economic situation.

Never said they did not. Just like Microsoft thought Sigil had an awesome idea in Vanguard. But, then what happened...they did not like the direction Sigil was going, and then took that funding away.

See how that works?

This is the exchange I was responding too. Time Warner Would be absolute tards to invest in a game that was already out for months that they didn't like the direction of.    That is v