Originally posted by Flummoxed

Originally posted by Khalathwyr

Any RP minded table-top GM or DM could create a more "fantastic" and unique world that what's being pushed out today.

 

YES!  ABSOLUTELY.  I agree 100%. 

Local Hobby GMs / DMs are FAR MORE SKILLED in creating immersive scenarios and campaigns than the so-called professionals today. 

With the exception of Bioware and a cuople indies, the phony commercial rpg "designers" today are not worth a DAMN.

The so-called professional game designers today aren't fit to stoop down and untie the sandals of the hobby designers.

My friend actually made a DnD Campaign that was nearly Identical to Dragon Age's Storyline about a month before it was announced. :P

It's a traditional RPG. I don't think you like these anyway, so I have no idea why you picked these up. neverwinter nights, BG and all that Jazz. The beauty in Dragon age is in it's interactions with NPCs. You seem like you don't want to do all that pesky talking and get straight to the action. Not your game. Do research before you buy things.

Also the loading screens are only bad in orzimmar and the beginning. And I've spent whole 2 hour periods without cut scenes. Unless you think of a conversation as a cut scene.

Yes, and the roswell aliens live among us along with the 5 kennedy snipers.

Originally posted by tro44_1

1)How did EQ manage to get Sandbox to switch over to Theme Park mmos, back in the day?

2) Was EQ hated on by Sandbox fans, like they currently do now when it comes to WoW?

3) What do you think made the MMORPG industry convert over into Theme Park style, rather then sticking with the traditional Snadbox gaming, that many Old School MMO players enjoyed soo much?

 

I was wondering. How did EQ manage to be soo succesful as a more Theme Park oriented MMO, around the time that Sandbox Mmos were dominate? Anybod have an idea as to what unfolded during those ages?

I wouldn't know, I wasn't playing mmos then, but I can only assume that's it because it was something new and appealed to everyone?

Originally posted by Fariic
 

When the server isn't lagged all to hell, combat is much more fluid.
The past weekend was especially horrible. Monday morning they rebooted the server with a new config, and it ran flawlessy in the morning and early afternoon my time. I played from 9am-1pm US EST time.

I don't think that combat is "slow".
It's slower then I think people expect from FPV. Think of a game like Oblivion, or Dark Messiah. You can attack about as fast as you can click the button. No real need to think, to plan, and no time to.

Early on combat is much slower.
You've not developed any.
With developed strength and dex combat speeds up. You can use heavier weapons that deal more damage, and can be swung faster.
It's even possible to craft weapons that can be swung every second.
Exactly how many times should I need to click the mouse button while fighting?

When you get out of middle school, and get into some real fights, you learn that it's not the guy that swung the most that won.
It's the one not on his ass.
That's the dif. between Darkfall, and Mortal Online's combat.

There is no game, that I have ever played, that does combat the way that MO does it.
It's dif.
It's kind of like a mashup of UO/EQ style combat, and an FPS.
It's got the twitch aspects of FPS, but requires a level of thinking and strategy.

BTW,
DARKFALL'S MOVEMENT IS SLOWER THEN MORTAL ONLINES.

I'm not sure were you're getting your info from on statloss.
What you mean to say is.
If 10 guys hit the same individual, and that individual dies within X amount of time, then each of the 10 guys that hit him gets a murder token.
Not one guy gets 10.

Statloss isn't in.
No one knows how it's going to work. You're speculating.
And people exploited the flagging system non stop in DF.
The dif. is that the flagging system doesn't mean squat in DF, unless you need to go into an NPC city, wich you don't for the most part. Being red in DF means nothing. I spend most of my time red.

And calling DF a "good PvP" game is debatable.
But we already know that.
 

^ this guy
 

What I don't think a lot of people understand is that the company prducing this is not large at all. They are making a very large and pretty darn good-looking game. They need money. DF did almost the same thing when it launched, now being 8 or so months after launch and it's finally getting into the swing of things with a stable income.

Mortal online doesn't have a lot of the features installed yet, they are just testing the most vital ones and removing bugs right now. They are going to add 6-9 (can't remember) times the land and a bunch of new features at launch and then debug as things come up. That way they can get more money to keep creating the game. If they ran out of money from their producer, than it's really the only logical thing to do. Either way, you can't compare it to a game that's been released for the greater half of a year. That's just unfair.

I personally like it better than DF already, though. It's the only MMO (save for CoH) where I've played it for more than 3 hours straight the first time I played it. It takes a little getting used to, but it's still fun. Plus I like the idea of making my own house wherever I want...Mountain fortress, here I come!

 I am exactly the same way. I stuck with City of Heroes for about half a year or more and didn't play anything else. Then I tried WoW and for some reason since then I haven't been able to stick to one MMO for more than a month. It's sad, really ):

 If they retextured the PCs to look that good and re-did ALL the textures in the old world, I would come back. I just want it to look prettier. I really do. I also want it to be a little harder, but that's just me.

 I'm pretty sure they're not going to put balance-killing items out in the store. I'm fairly certain it will be cosmetic stuff and maybe mounts and pets.

 I hate the game from level 1 to 79.

I really don't like how the quests are laid out, and I also hate how I have to do them to get to the content that I really want to play quickly. At this point you should be able to get through most of at least eh early game content quicker. I also think that the quest paths need to be updated badly. They're all over the place and can lead you way farther away from a certain level area than you should be. But I heard they are doing that in cataclysm. Either way, I have never been able to make a character past level 65.

 I think there are a few, but I have not played them, nor do I know their names off the top of my head. 

I've always wanted to play a game where the world changed, though. Like, a volcano would erupt or a rockslide would happen or a meteor would crash and the terrain would stay like that. That would be awesome. (:

 I disagree with most of those.

 I am unfortunately too young for that. I think I was 1 when all that was popular. I didn't even start using the internet until I was 10-ish. I started playing MMOs soon after I got into the internet, though. maybe a year or less. The good old days.

Originally posted by Player_420

Wow the graphics and art style...... is ....... totally UNINSPIRED and BORING.

oh Bethesda...please win.....

Why? Bethesda won't make an MMO. Or at least they have not announced plans to, even if they win. They just don't want interplay profiting.

 I don't see how Bethesda can win this court battle. I don't know everything about the case, but from what I've seen, it looks like Bethesda is just trying to stall them to the point where interplay gives up.

Originally posted by ghettobooste

Originally posted by Rednecksith

Originally posted by Borkotron

Silly Interplay. You aren't Bethesda!

 

Thank God for that. Considering how badly they butchered the IP with Fallout 3, I'm glad they have nothing to do with this. At least, I hope not.

 

Seriously?

Fallout 3 is only one the best games of all time.  I suppose you could have hoped it was more like Dragon Age or the original Fallouts, but the game they made is freakin amazing!

He said butchered the IP, not made a bad game.

 You don't NEED money. But you do need man-power or at least a lot of free time. The MMO LOVE that's now in alpha testing was made by one man. The money people keep mentioning is for things like hiring people and marketing and everything. You just need the right programs, the right drive, and a heck of a lot of free-time. Now for game engines that support 2-d, there aren't a ton that I know of. I can do some research for you though. Gimme a bit.

 so...what's the idea?

Originally posted by Zorvan01

Originally posted by Vexe

Originally posted by Zorvan01

Originally posted by Vexe

Originally posted by Narug

Hellgate: London is still on the list at this site.

Guess that closes the case for me game related type wise.

Why?

 

In other words, the people running the site don't care that many of the games they advertise and have listed with forums are not mmos ( and in some cases barely qualified as rpgs ), so why should we?

I'm personally waiting for the day they have Call of Duty and Counterstrike listed as mmos.

No, I mean why is hellgate london not an MMO? Because there's a single-player option?

For the same reason Diablo is not. It was nothing but a piss-poor action rpg with multiplayer. Bill Roper just tacked on the term "mmo" to try to justify charging people to play the multiplayer portion.
 

Well I agree that you shouldn't have to pay for the multiplayer part of the game, I do think hellgate london is not a sure-fire example of "not an MMO". You can play with hundreds of people online, just all the zones except for hte towns are instanced. Like Guild wars kind of. The last time I played guild wars, anyway. Just not as many people.

In the previous diablo games you could only play with I think a max of 3 other people. Maybe even less than that. Unless they are adding a huge multi-player option that is much bigger than their previous game's, it is much less qualified than hellgate.

Originally posted by Zorvan01

Originally posted by Vexe

Originally posted by Narug

Hellgate: London is still on the list at this site.

Guess that closes the case for me game related type wise.

Why?

 

In other words, the people running the site don't care that many of the games they advertise and have listed with forums are not mmos ( and in some cases barely qualified as rpgs ), so why should we?

I'm personally waiting for the day they have Call of Duty and Counterstrike listed as mmos.

No, I mean why is hellgate london not an MMO? Because there's a single-player option?