All Posts by Desirsar

---

Originally posted by Zorvan

---

Originally posted by Desirsar

The RPG in MMORPG.com has been lost for a long, long time. If "RPG" was mandatory to be listed here, half of the games would leave the list.

---

And believe me, we try to get them removed whenever possible.

---

Good luck with that, I don't think the site is going to shun its biggest advertisers and contest sponsors...

---

I saw this "There" on Dr. Phil once lol. Anyway, if you like this, you're gonna love Second Life even more.

---

Second Life falls on its face compared to There in terms of server and client performance, there's no way any of the sport-like activities in There would work in SL. Each one is good at a lot of things the other is bad at, so I'll keep on splitting my time between them like I always have.

Originally posted by Binny45

one that will come from a relatively unknown company, with unknown people who do it, not for profit, but for a love of the game.

It is my belief that being limited by the demands of investors limit creativity and often result in games that are released WAY too early, often leading to their unfortunate demise.

It's my hope that soon, one will rise from the ranks that will establish itself as a true, 3rd generation MMO.

Are there any takers out there?

That sounds to me like Jumpgate Evolution, but I have a feeling they'll make it too "easy" for the veteran Jumpgate pilots to like it, and too "hard" for casual MMO players to enjoy having to actually fly their own ship.  With any luck, they'll prove me wrong...

The RPG in MMORPG.com has been lost for a long, long time.  If "RPG" was mandatory to be listed here, half of the games would leave the list.

Most of the other posts in both this thread and forum seem to try to compare it to the wrong type of MMO - it's no different in terms of pricing than any other micropayment game.  It certainly has its share of roleplaying (I use a female avatar and I'm not female), but I think what's putting off most people is the lack of goals defined by the game - no levels that mean anything to gameplay, no "endgame", and anyone can have anything anyone else does within the payment structure of the game.  Some people can't define their own direction, they need to be told where to go and what to do - this is probably the wrong game for them.

My only big issue with it is the technical problems that it has.  Too many developers buy servers that just barely handle the expected load of the users rather than figuring servers that could run, say, ten of the game world simultaneously at that same expected load on each, and then figuring that cost into their business model.  Then they would just have to work out the issues with their client, and they'd be all set.

I broke down and bought Vanguard, I read too many good things about it.  I'll even end up back on the Station Pass if it works out so I can switch around between six games when I get bored of any particular one...

WoW is forced grouping?  You must have missed my post here asking which game I should switch to because I can't find a group, which is apparently because there's nothing worth grouping for until level 70.  (I tend not to have max level characters in any game.  I had one once, in EQ, but they added more expansions on me.)  I want a game where I can see the high end content (content that, as someone mentioned above, I'm paying for but never get to use, more on that in a bit...), but I can get there alone if I have to, and have an incentive to do it with other people (aside from it just being more fun that way.)  Sounds like WoW is exactly what you're looking for if you like leveling up characters.  Otherwise, CoH also matches what you're suggesting.

As far as the majority of players paying for the development of content that they will never use, Puzzle Pirates has already given us the solution, but we need to convince MMO developers of it.  They have servers where access is paid in "Doubloons".  They can be purchased for real money, and are used to buy "Badges", which give access to each part of the game.  In order to have Pirate rank in a Crew, you need a badge.  In order to Captain your own Crew, you need a different badge.  In order to work at Shoppes that create items, you need yet another badge.  To play the Parlor games (other than whichever game is free on a given day of the week, you need still another badge.  If you're paying cash for doubloons and you want to do everything, it's actually cheaper to pay for a regular subscription.  That said, they also have a system of exchanging doubloons for Pieces of Eight, the currency used by the game world.  If a person wants to acquire lots of game money quickly, they can spend real money on doubloons and trade them to someone who has been saving up their PoE earned by their character.  In that sense, it's entirely possible to play the game without spending real money on it.

If we take that system and apply it to a fantasy MMO, WoW for this particular example, it actually works out really well.  Basic access to the game would be some set number of WoWCoins (just to make up a term for it) for the appropriate WoWPass.  Obviously, to start an account without having played before, you'd have to spend real world money on it, as well as someone who was returning to the game without an active account.  If you wanted to be able to move from the main world into regular, lower level instanced dungeons, you'd need a different WoWPass.  Battlegrounds and Arenas?  Another WoWPass.  High end raid instances?  Still another WoWPass.  They'd be priced such that all the passes together would be higher than a regular subscription as a way to push people into the original pricing plan.  On top of this, you'd add a system of purchasing WoWCoins from other players for in-game gold.  It would then be possible (if difficult, imagining the exchange rate for a game like WoW with its number of players combined with this system) to play without paying past the initial WoWPass for basic access.  In the same sense, if you're dying for an epic mount or whatever other item on the auction hall, you could buy enough WoWCoins to sell for gold and pick up the item you want.  One failing of the Puzzle Pirates system is that these players are segregated into servers of each type - full subscription or Doubloons - and traditional MMOs would be better served keeping both types together.  Also, this system would require a much more strict and active policing of botters and farmers, but I think it could be worth it.  This system encourages developers to create more content for players of all types, and prioritize development based on the number of people paying for each pass.  It allows players to pay rates according to what parts of the game they actually used.  The developers could possibly make more money over time depending how popular the sale of WoWCoins were for conversion into gold.  The pricing model can also be added to an existing game with little impact on the game economy itself (the converted gold would tend to be used only on high end items, but the money would likely continue to circulate past the first exchange for an item, as well as being used to pay for more subscriptions to increase the rate at which items were generated. - a small drop in availability of high end items at first, returning to previous levels as it balanced out, likely with no long periods of inflation or deflation.)

Well crap, I'm gonna go paste this in the WoW forums and see how bad the replies get.  I agree with the original poster in general, though, the games do tend to encourage solo play over grouping at levels below the maximum more and more as new games come out.  You can tell those that are serious about keeping both paths open by allowing solo play to maximum level while providing positive incentive for grouping (increased experience points is the easiest) to encourage socialization within the game without forcing a particular play style on any player.

Bah, my characters were Albion.  :)  Aside from issues with keeping beta characters (long story), I moved away from DAoC as soon as I realized the end game was mostly PvP.  If I'm going to play fantasy themed PvP games, someone had better create Die By The Sword Online - twitch melee combat with levels and quests would be shiny.

In all the different places I've brought up this topic, it seems like Vanguard is the only suggestion I haven't tried, but I'm still feeling like I want to go back to CoH or EQ2 as well.  Maybe that's a hint to work on some Forza 2 cars for a night and see how I feel about all the games tomorrow morning.  :)

That's one thing I loved about CoH, finding a group was never a problem.  (And finding people to permanently ignore when they realized I wasn't an empathy defender, but was, in fact, more effective, but still wouldn't group with me, was also easy to do.  :)  I loved how much hurricane was and probably still is overpowered, but no one used it properly so no one noticed...)  It just gets old after a while, repeating the same series of attacks against any type of NPCs over and over, and maybe having to find some glowing object to finish a mission.  That could be said about a lot of games, but it seemed to wear thin a lot sooner in CoX than other MMOs.

It's not impossible to make games that are single dimensional that keep you playing a long time - wrestling games have only one goal, any sports game (not counting a franchise manager mode or whatever), Forza or other racing games in the sense that you can both drive and paint the cars.  I just don't get why it's never done in an MMO in a way that it is constantly new and changed every time.  (Planetside is a good example, because your opponent learns what you're trying to do eventually, and changes their tactic.  Kind of hard to compare with a game that has zero PvE, I suppose.)

It's not an impossible thing for me to try games I've quit from in the past (like my current subscription to WoW), but it's hard for me to want to go back, even after major changes, when most players are not going to be using characters that I can group with, and I'm not interested in a game where I have to play some 200 hours of single player before I can play the multiplayer part.  (That could be said of Pokemon, but at least the single player part of that is fun plus it doesn't remind you constantly that you're not doing the multiplayer part yet...)

Tried that, but I can't remember what it was that put me off while playing it.  All the 3-D "free" ones kind of blend together in my memory unless they had something specific about them that stood out.  Silkroad I remember clearly, for instance, and I remember equally well why I didn't like it.  :)  I'm not expecting any of the micropayment games to have the depth I'm asking for, it's just never going to be in the budget of a game using that payment method.

You're hitting on every reason why I'm looking for a new MMO and I'm logged into WoW while I'm writing this post. Sure, you can solo to 60 - you have to, because no one is grouping other than instanced dungeons, and not really even that at lower levels. If it's supposed to be an MMO, why do I not actually play with people before 60? Just start me at 60, in that case.

I already play on RP servers, because they tend to have more intelligent and mature players. (Tend to. Not always, heh.) I would never join an RP guild... I was in a "light" RP guild that went nuts if you said anything out of character in guild chat, you were supposed to use a custom chat channel for that (that no one was ever in.) The rules of RP servers are that guild chat is the only truly unmonitored, OOC permitted channel. I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me when and how all our character got communal telepathic powers that work across planets that we can use /tell and general chat channels that they're supposed to be in-character...

I'm currently 17 with the troll priest I made on the server I'm currently playing on. (Chosen because the person who got me into WoW originally plays there.) I would group with anyone, anywhere, as long as it was mutually beneficial. I don't see people even looking for instanced dungeons near this level, never mind groups going out to hunt and finish quests in general. That may be another point in my original post needing clarification - I shouldn't be forced to group, but it would be nice if there were either benefits to that, or the majority of "interesting" content after level 3 or 5 or so was next to impossible without at least a duo. It should simply be worth everyone's while to play together rather than alone, but there should still be something to do when you're alone.

---

They've changed the levelling curve by about 15% or so from Levels 20-60, so you get to the higher level content faster (designed to help both new players, and old players levelling alts), and have made other tweaks to the content based on the playerbase's "Y'know? This bit right here? Just Isn't Fun" consensus.

---

Yeah, I've been noticing and hearing about that. I don't want to get there faster, I want getting there to be more fun. I'd rather see more MMOs put out every other expansion with no content for max level players, but enough excellent lower level content that everyone would buy it and leave their current characters to run a new character through it all.

---

I think that's the biggest change I've seen in Blizzard in the last, oh, 6 months or so... They're seeing what other developers are saying, and there seems to be a trend of more and more of them saying "We looked at this mechanic, and decided that it Just Wasn't Fun"...

---

Well, if that refers to levelling up a new character being "just not fun", start everyone at max level and be done with it.

I'd rank WoW's crafting near the bottom of games I've played. AO's would have been good if it made more sense. AA's was probably the best I've ever seen. EQ2's would be better if each item took about half the time to create as it does currently. As the system stands now, buying crafted gear before level 50 or more is simply a waste of money, you can get gear close enough to that just from your quests. It should be functional all the way up and down the board.

I'd say that EQ2 is probably closest to my description, actually, other than the finding a group part.  I should have elaborated on it a bit more - I should be able to find a group quickly, any time I want.  Any level, any class, any time, any timezone.  The server doesn't have to be crowded, there just needs to be a reason that so many people are looking, groups just sort of happen.

I only betaed LOTRO, so I'm not sure how that came out in its actual launch.  That also seemed like it was going to be close to what I want  AO would be there if it had a better population.  Umm...  This is why I posted this, because I'm stuck for other games I've played that come anywhere close.  If you notice the 126 hours played in EQ on my Xfire profile,  that was done in just one month.  When they launched the progression servers, I used a free month that was sitting on my account to try it out, and I got really hooked back into that again.  When they went back on their promise to progress the servers slowly (they started advancing as fast as the top two or three guilds, as opposed to letting closer to half of the server catch up), I realized that it wasn't going to stay interesting enough for long enough (eventually it'd turn back into the game that doesn't start until you reach max level), so I left again.

I guess that's another point I left out - I absolutely cannot comprehend the logic of game designers that make 75% or the game's content for players at or near the maximum level, and then continue to force new players and characters to work their way up to the level where the fun part of the game actually begins.  (To me, that's where you start playing with other people more regularly.  To others, I can see that being the level for which the majority of the content is designed.)

Vanguard is one I never even got the chance to beta - I didn't have a fast enough computer to even apply for beta at first, then I wasn't accepted until I was too busy with school or something (I don't even remember what it was, now.)  The problem I still have with spending the money to try it is that I see post here (and reviews other places and comments from players in other places) that the world has large empty spaces that make it seem either incomplete or too big, and that there aren't enough people playing the game in general.  CoH does the solo and grouping part of my list very well - if I don't have time to join a group, I can log in, do a mission or two alone, or I can find a group without sitting around for a few hours when I have more time to play.  How does Vanguard rate in those areas?  (I was already aware of its crafting system, but I'd have to actually try it myself to know if it's what I'm thinking of.)

Edit - My 360 is almost constantly occupied by my Forza 2 disc, it's the game I bought the console for.  The only other games I have that get much use on it are skate. and Carcassonne.  As far as console games go, I still mostly only play Forza 2, Winning Eleven 9 on the XBox (I think it's been running on my XBox for almost a month straight without being turned off, even), and Pokemon Diamond.  As far as Mass Effect goes, I've never gotten into single player party-of-character games on consoles.  I love the Gold Box series of D&D games for the PC, but that's mostly because they use the D&D worlds and system.  In FF8, I had to force myself not to play cards until I at least got to the second disc just so I could advance the plot a little.  In FF9, I never made it past the town where everyone but one NPC plays cards.  (I never owned these, but roommates did.)

This whole post would be moot if some developer made a wrestling game that looked like a modern console game, played like No Mercy on the N64, and had a "wrestling world" simulation compared to Total Extreme Warfare.  You couldn't pry me away from that...

Also edit - If Mass Effect were a FPS game where you had a form of crafting for your gear, you outfitted and trained and kept your same NPC partners unless they were killed, and your NPCs could be replaced by online coop players, that sounds like something else you couldn't pry me away from.  Basically Planetside with any fantasy MMO's crafting system and no PvP play...  almost like a FPS Diablo game.

I was talking over game features with someone on Xfire as I was not able to find a group in WoW (to be fair, I'm not looking very hard.  At the same time, no one else seems to be looking either.)  I'll go over the things I want, and hopefully everyone will reply with a game I haven't tried that closely fits these.

- I should be able to hunt or otherwise earn experience when I can't find a group.  Soloing to maximum level should probably be possible (but not entirely necessary), but it shouldn't be the most efficient method, because...

- I should always be able to find a group, at any level.  This can either be due to the size of the server population, or the game could be designed with positive rewards for grouping.  (Positive would be experience per player faster over a given length of time, either questing or killing.  Negative would be making most content so hard that a group is absolutely necessary.)

- Item crafting should be interesting, and definitely not tedious.  (Component collecting can be borderline tedious, I suppose.)  Crafted items should be viable for at least either economic reasons or being functionally equivalent (or serving alternate functions) as dropped items.

- Roleplaying elements should exist in the world (strong, compelling, detailed world lore), but not be forced on the players, either by the game or by the community.  Basically, you should be able to roleplay if you want to, not do if you don't want to, but the world should be so awesome that even the most hardcore powergamers are simply compelled to by mystical force.

Genre doesn't matter.  Graphics quality doesn't matter (although I have a 7950GT for a reason!)  Age of the game doesn't matter.  Decent subscriber base would be good, but it doesn't matter if there are enough players in the world to make it work.  Games I've played before...  *runs electric current into the brain to remember them all from so long ago*  ...Everquest, DAoC, AO, AC, GW, LOTRO, WoW, AA, Jumpgate, SWG, EQ2, Planetside, Puzzle Pirates, CoH, DDO, EVE, Lineage 2, Tabula Rasa, Vendetta Online, and I've tried just about every pay-to-play style "free" MMO there is.  Some of those were only in beta, but I have a good idea of what the game is like and ability to find groups is like if I bothered to include it on this list.  The only free game I played much of was Space Cowboy, which doesn't really compare to my list here due to its design, and I don't mention that I've spent a lot of time in There and Second Life as well.  I also leave out the golf games, no real killing or quests there.  :)

Not really, it's pretty apparent that your opinion is tainted because you had negative expectations going in.  *shrug*  If you were intending to find something fun to do, you would have asked someone with experience.  (I would have said "search for Tringo at IceDragon's", but there are equally fun places to go.  Bowling at Imagination is good as well.)  Of course, if you search in popular places and click the "Show results in mature regions" on and pick the top spot, obvious in both name and description that it's a sex club, and go there...  well?

You can do anything in Secon