All Posts by madiusmax

Originally posted by eric1000

 

Originally posted by Shadowhearth

Hmmm looking at graphic... Well it is dissapointing a bit, in all vidoes there were no shadows at all! They really could do atleast a but better in graphics, thought everything else looks hot and sexy allright.

 

Thought i newer judged game by its graphics, gameplay is moust inportnat thing in mmorpg, but nice graphics are spicies which make it better!

 

Thought alot of poeple who have low ended pc will be really happy, they wount need to spend 1000eu+ 50eu( for a game) to play it  

 

You likely saw the vids that were shot before the lighting was done, watch this one http://war.curse.com/videos/details/677/

That is a nice little video that gives a little glimpse of the lighting of the game. Must make a note however that that video is almost a relic, having come out sometime last fall.  Just keep in mind that it is purely a demonsration video and the what exists now, out of beta view, is probably alot sweeter.

Warhammer will be an RvR game that includes PvP/PvE.  There will be enough PvE to attract that type of gameplay as well as enough PvP to attract that style as well.  As it has been stated before, you can do solely PvE or PvP and reach the same satisfaction.  Warhammer will however have a system that has emphasis on the PvP aspect, which could possibly make pure PvE players give it a shot and like it.  With that said players can still do pure PvE regardless.  Some of the "best" endgame items may be found the city sieges, which are PvP for the most part, yet there will be plenty of stuff in PvE to make them happy as well.

The game will be what you make of it.  Ultimately the goal is to have the players willingly, not forced, participate, whether that be in the RvR or the PvE, or optimally in both.

Note: All areas where i used PvP above should infact be referred to as RvR instead.

Another note about the city sieges:

Its pretty obvious yet something that may not always be considered, with there being 6 different races in the game that leaves the potential for 6 cities to be sieged, and thus 3 battlefronts at any given time.  I could see a realm united and attacking a certain city and winning everytime, yet that still leaves two other cities on their side open for being taken.   It was stated in the video that  it would be near impossible that all three cities of an opposing force would be sieged at the same time.

There should be some very interesting outcomes and decisions on if a certain race will be willing to give up defending their certain zones in order to aid another.

First off, great find there. Gave alot of really good information and answered a few questioned I had.

I like the idea of the city sieges to last 12-18 hours, because as I saw in another video somewhere it gives the opportunity for people who may not have been online at that given time a chance to go in the capital cities and have their share of the fun.  On that note I have heard that there will be certain rewards, or quests that will be there at the beginning to help give a reward for the people that did most of the work and were some of the first ones in there.  This time frame also gives time for the defending realm to gather what they can and possibly take back and save whatever is left of their city. Basically, I like the idea.

The realm/server balancing is of course going to be an issue that I am glad they are addressing.  THe effects that the caps will have are still yet to be determined yet the idea in principle is good in order to balance the servers, as well as was stated give incentieves to join the "losing" sides.  I think they are taking the right approach as you can't force people to join one side or the other, yet you can persuade them to.  Any game is going to have the same kind of problem, specifically if there are opposing sides.  There inevitable will always have to be a loser, yet Mythic has acknowledged this and are doing what they can in order to make sure that hopefully the loser won't always be losers.

Its truely the little things in this game that will make it great.

Originally posted by Phnx187

I gotta say, you guys impressed me. You are the first to convince me to come out of my "I don't post on forums" shell, just because of some of the ridiculous stuff I am reading. I am currently playing 0 MMORPG's right now because frankly I think all the ones out right now suck. I played wow for a couple years, and I am a big fan of blizzard, but I can't stand WoW honestly. Ofcourse random friends keep conning me into playing with them sometimes but the result is the same. I stop playing. Now as for WAR vs AoC , who cares? Honestly they both look like bad ass games. But I'm definetely waiting for AoC, over WAR only because I spent a lot of money building my PC (and i just bought a 55" wide 1920x1080p hdtv witha dvi-hdmi cable). I want a game with good graphics and non-auto attack.  Whichever comes out first is really the one I am going to play unless I play it for a bit n I think it sux, then I'll play the other one.  WAR will prolly be more successful because of it's history as an awsome game, and Arnold didn't ruin it, haha. I think that AoC will be the better game though, it brings new technology into the world of MMO's and that's really what we need cuz were all tired of the cookie cutter MMO's and want something new. WAR is just a completely new DAoC with similar to WoW graphics. 

 Alright, theres my 2 cents. Flame on!
                                    

No offense but you have failed to bring anything of relevence to this "discussion" besides what has already been pointed out by others with similar views in other posts in this and other forums.  You do have a reason to play AoC because of your hardware but yet fail to bring any legitimate reason it will be better then the other besides what many many people have ignorantly stated on graphics comparison and gameplay.  In fact, no one knows which will be better, until both can be played in their final releases.

Sorry if that came off harsh, but your shell does miss you.

To be honest I don't really see why anyone, including me, are even posting in this thread.  The OP did not ask any question and was merely stating facts that they have found.  According to that website yes WAR has higher pre-sales then AoC, according to whatever set of data was collected for whatever time frame.  The OP even goes on to say that this does not mean that one game is better then then other.  Basically thats the end of this thread.  It was more of a forum statement rather then for a discussion.  Sure we can bicker why one is better then the other, or why one will be more successful, but as far as the thread goes there is nothing left to discuss.  We can only speculate on the outcome of both games.  Until both have been released for a number of months we won't have a winner.  Even by the time WAR is released I think we will have a pretty good idea of the success of AoC.

Oh and I agree with elvenangel, her posts always seem to set things straight at how ridiculous these postings can get.

basically what elvenangel said.

Originally posted by Anofalye

The only reason I still glance occasionnally at this title, it is because it is Warhammer.

 

These devs are wackos and I won't be playing their game unless they change CORE aspect to make sure someone can be happy in PvE.  But they won't.  They want everyone with a focus to RvR.  They can't change my focus in games now...

 

I don't care if 5% of their game is geared toward PvE...it must be FREE from RvR(and raiding) and then I will support it.  Without such a freedom, I won't put on shackles willingly.

As far as I know, the PvE portion of th game can be played without entering PVP/RVR.  I believe it depends on the type of quest as well. For the majority there are safe quests you can do alone and advance through the tiers, without having to do any, or at least little PVP.  Other quests may be group or public ones which may consist of scenarios or even crossing into the RVR areas to be completed.

Either way from what I have read, you can play the game through the tiers by only doing "safe" quests, and still be contributing to the overall endgame.  On the other hand you can do only RVR and reach the same similar result. 

Ulimately though i believe it is intended to try to attract more people towards trying out pvp, which seems to be what the game is "based" upon and may be where the best rewards are.  I think there will be a decent balance between both PvP and PvE in order to appease to the masses.

edit. The "safe" areas of course will be pending on the server type, as Open RVR may be a bit different then say a Core Ruleset server, but these are yet to be determined.

Originally posted by Tanr

Heh,  3 pages?  Wouldn't a simple "No"  to the OP's question have accomplished the same thing?

its funner if we disagree and speculate back and forth

Originally posted by markoraos

Lemme just point you guys to this little vid:

http://www.warhammeronline.com/english/behindTheScenes/vidPhoneDiaries/windowopen/august_2007_w4444gh/view21_2007_august.html

Pay attention to the equipment shadows on the character.

Let me just emphasize that the date on the vid is august 2007...

point taken, they are holding back

Why do we post? because we are bored.

The only "official" thing that can be truly taken its word upon is that the game will be released when it is ready.  It has even been stated that if there is need the game will be delayed longer.  The "release date" of CY Q2 2008 is basically a piece of pie being dangled in front of everyone.  Everyone is trying to get a piece of what they think and want the pie to be.  But really its not going to be fully given to anyone until its ready to be.

We can sit hear and debate what he said / she said, whats "official" and whats not, but really its because we have nothing better to do. Sure there is alot of stuff we want to know, lots more we want to see, negative comments about the game being thrown around, but in the end until everyone gets there hands on the game there will always be something else that someone wants to know.

Since we lack information we tend to speculate and make it up.  The absense of facts creates a sense that something is not right, and thus the game is bad or not gonna be ready.  The truth of the matter is people fear it not being ready because no one knows what is ready, for all we know the game could be 90% done, even though we have only seen maybe 70% of it. 

The fact that we are even in this discussion board talking about it already has EA Mythic ahead, 8/10 people on here are going to play the game most likely. 

This is a bit off the death penalty topic, but I remember reading that there is a diminishing returns to renown points from killing a player again too soon.  Not sure how close the resurrection points will be but if too close it could prevent some sort of camping to take place.

Time indeed will be a great penalty, yet it has to be carefully calculated.  If the distance placed away after fighting is too far or takes to long to get back to, then I can see alot of players who perhaps die rapidly or many times simply not bothering returning if its too much of a hassle.

I think one of the main problems with this argument is the expectations of each individual.  Of course great graphics are eye candy to everyone, yet what people seem to believe is that every new game that comes out must top the previous one in this aspect.  No where has it ever been stated or expressed that Warhammer Online is striving to be the most realistic looking game out there. 

There is also a vast range of different screenshots floating around that I don't believe are good representations of what the game is/will look like.  Can't say I have seen the game personally myself, but it is pretty easy to tell the difference between a low res and hi res screenshot, and those shots that are not including certain aspects such as lighting and textures.  The screenshots that are being posted on various sites are also not necessarily the most recent screen shots either, they may be taken a while ago and just now recently released.

The strategy behind not showing all that there is to offer of the game is not necessarily a positive or negative thing.  Sure people tend to judge a game upon its cover, or in this case screenshot, but in the end I think Mythic and EA will feed the people what they want. People may decide not to buy it, but seriously with still potentially a few  months to go till release, everyone will be taking a second and third look before the game comes out anyways.  You don't buy something without looking into it yourself and trying it out.  To be honest it is still too far off even for myself to known if I will play this game, we'll see when its ready, so far so good though.

edit.   I hate to draw references but do the 8 million or whatever players who play WOW really play it for the graphics?

Originally posted by baso80

 

"No one is going to miss u"... LOL

 

U wanna bet Myhic doesnt agree with u? Or EA?

 

 

It really DOES matter. What doesnt matter is fanboys like u. Cuz u gonna buy the game even if its in black and white.

 

I think they are aiming for a bit more ppl than u fanboys.

 

Im gonna bet that our opinion of the graphics means a lot. Same discussions going on warhammeralliance and war-rvr and im gonna bet that many betatesters thinks the same as us.  This is indeed an indication that there is an opinion out there about the graphics that should tell Mythic that there is work to do in the graphics department.

 

First of all I never said I was going to buy the game or not.  I nor am a "fanboy" as I have never played any Mythic game or even WOW for that matter.  The popularity of the game is already present, look at the 600k+ beta signups.  That is not to say all those people will actually play the game, but if the beta testers are supposed to be some of the more "hardcore" players, just imagine what other more casual players will join, some whom have not even heard of the game. 

There are about equally amounts of posts about people who like and dislike the graphics, and i bet you most that dislike will play anyways.  The longterm subscriptions are what are still up in the air, that will depend on the gameplay and content of the game.  People will buy the game and try it out regardless of the graphics, if they stay is up to how fun it is, which is the point.

Every game has work to do with graphics, simply because our standards are too high for them.  Sure we could have a new engine and make it look alot better, but seriously, who wants to wait even longer for a game to come out.  New engines aren't developed over night you know.

I find it hard to see what the point of arguing over the graphics of this game really has on the game itself.  Graphics are a personal opinion, and if someone say the graphics sucks and you have no opinion of your own and don't play, then you have other problems to deal with. 

Play the game or don't play it no one is going to wonder where you are and miss you, your opinion of the graphics really is irrelevent.

I have seen all the videos, artwork, screens, and am still amazed at what is to come.  I enjoy graphics as much as anyone else, yet it is not a determining factor on if I play a game or not.

This is what impressed me the most....

www.youtube.com/watch

This video seems to be at a higher quality then just about most others, and while it does not show any pvp/pve it has plenty of glimpses of what we can expect from world.  Keep in mind also that this video is almost 3 months old.  Just imagine what else can be polished and redone.

Just stop arguing one way or another, it really doesn't matter.