---

Originally posted by Khalathwyr

---

Originally posted by Pilnkplonk
Hmm... in the trailer I can see only Marines and Orks... I have a bad feeling about this... I won't let it get to me tho....
Still waiting for the official presentation.
If this turns out to be a 2-faction thing with (gasp) emphasis on "story" and PvE....
I just hope to god they didn't draw all the WRONG conclusions on why WAR failed..

---

In the trailer there are Chaos Marines (Khorne), Space Marines (Black Templars) and Space Orkz. That's 3 factions right there. The only worry as I see it is that THQ/Vigil starts the artificial alliance crap that Mythic did with WAR.
All armies fight all armies.
That's the way to do it.

---

^ this.

Plus, the "starting" 3 factions are also the most popular table-top factions. Based on sales at least.

Also, I thought I saw some IG in there. May have been scout marines though.

Anyway, I so excited. That's the alpha footage ( I presume) and it already looks amazing. I have such high hopes for this game. I hope that a GW IP finally gets the love and attetion it deserves.

---

Originally posted by Besttheiswow
...why try to innovate...

---

worst. ideology. ever

I equate it to the AoC brand of sub-classes.

What I *really* hope for though, is that the sub classes are equally engaging and productive. With AoC, while some classes have equality in both trees, some sub-class trees just arent' up to snuff... forcing the choice on the player.

Not even if they had a gun to my mother's head and told me to choose "play or she dies". I'll always remember & love you mama!!

"... before the dark times. Before the Empire"

---

Originally posted by Gdemami

---

Originally posted by Jpizzle

Actually, you’re wrong. Personal expectations are a tie-in to the attrition and success of the game. If only 10,000 people bought it and all 10,000 loved it, then its niche. If 100,000 bought it and 100,000 loved it, then it’s successful. But, when you sell 100,000 copies and lose 60-80% of your player base in less then 3 months, that’s quantified by the quality of the game.

Obviously those numbers are just an example, but STO falls in the last category, not the first two.

---

And since you have no numbers to back up your guesses, it leaves your so called point absolutely moot.
(leaving aside how ill-logic your assumption is)

Also I can't be wrong when you put your words into my mouth.

---

Ok. LOL. Ill-logical, huh? It's cool. I deal w/ stubborn people all day that can't concide when they're wrong. On forums is no different. Besides, I'm married so I'm totally used to it :)

---

Originally posted by Gdemami

---

Originally posted by Jpizzle

They went for (or at least the expectation of 90% of mmo gamers out there) a virtual universe based on a rich and expansive lore.

---

They went for casual friendly MMO and they did it quite well, imo.

Personal expectations is a personal issue and irrelevant to game qualities and design.

---

IMO they didn't even get a casual MMO right. Certainly not one that warrants a box fee, a premium $15 a month, and added shit to pay for on top. They failed miserably even if it was F2P.

Actually, you’re wrong. Personal expectations are a tie-in to the attrition and success of the game. If only 10,000 people bought it and all 10,000 loved it, then its niche. If 100,000 bought it and 100,000 loved it, then it’s successful. But, when you sell 100,000 copies and lose 60-80% of your player base in less then 3 months, that’s quantified by the quality of the game.

Obviously those numbers are just an example, but STO falls in the last category, not the first two.

---

Originally posted by Gdemami

Could Star Trek IP be great base for 'epic' space game? Sure, it could.
Though, that does not set any premise for what the game is supposed to be like.

IP is nothing more than lore and visuals. They could use Star Trek IP and make a Rocquetball game, Mario-like arcade or RTS out of it.

---

Yet they still failed to really do shit w/ the IP. They didn't go for campy. They went for (or at least the expectation of 90% of mmo gamers out there) a virtual universe based on a rich and expansive lore.

Even when an IP is used for a campy type rendition, it can be well received and still be outside the norm for the IP. Blood Bowl, for example, is a wonderfully fun football game... based on Warhammer.

Craptic came up way way way short. You may think it's fun, but you're in a very tiny minority. Look at CO. Do people still paly it? Yea, but no where near the amount that bought it.

It'd be different if only a few people bought it and stuck w/ it. Just like w/ STO, lots of people bought it and most people are disappointed in it. The coverage post launch in less then 3 months shows that. Websites will cover community issues, small details regarding in-game events. Basically anything that gets them clicks. Craptic games don't get clicks post launch.

I hate this picture so much. I mean, any dev using the Jersey Shore Duckface really isn't a dev I'd trust to fix an already broken-beyond-belief game. I didn't even touch upon his despicable and juvenile unprofessionalism. Fail new lead dev is fail.

Just like Cryptic's other half-assed garbage-in-a-box, it got tons of unwarranted press by sites looking for clicks prior to launch, and in less 3 months, no one even cares about it.

The "gimmie gimmie" kids have all moved on to w/e is the next big thing, and any player that looks for longevity has either felt duped and moved on or saw this fish tank simulator on rails from a mile away and never thought twice about it.

Either way, they now have 2 games that are less then a year old, and don't have 150K monthly subs between the two of them. The lifers money is what's keeping Atari from locking Cryptic's doors. Knowing Atari, I'm sure they have the best intentions too *cough*beingsuedbyTurbine*cough*.

---

Originally posted by abyss404
Just get a damn job and pay to play one of the myriad of beautifully crafted P2P games. When are people going to learn that F2P games are a fraction of the experience you can get from a good P2P game.

---

This game is developed better then Cryptic's last two shit piles. It's gameplay, visuals and depth are on par or better then a lot of recent P2P releases (Global Agenda, STO, ChampO, WAR). Problem is (just like Cryptic) they're to money hungry. It could have been a resounding success. A slow, but steady, population increase to rival top P2P games.

But, greed took over, and that's when your statement takes merit. I'm not going to give them $30-$50 a month, for essentialy the same things I can do in tons of other games for $15. They can't get it through their thick ass skulls that people aren't going to willingly be raped like this.

So, they're essentially just changing the mechanic? Same stupid stat killer penalty that forces you to buy pots in the item shop. Same stupid stat killer penalty that will be more expensive, the more frequent you play.

Sounds like same shit, diff day to me.

Until they drop these ridiculous penalties, that force purchases in the cash shop, they're never going to see the influx of players they gameplay itself warranted.

"Hi!! Champions Online Coffin! Good to see you! I'd like to introduce you to a friend of mine. This is Nail."

Then they had sex. And, the adage applies.

---

Originally posted by MikeB
No word on whether this adventure pack will be free or for-pay, either.

---

OOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooooooooof course not. No one wants to get fired for telling the truth again, do they?

Adventure "pack" implies a "packaged goods" which implies "paid for". Enjoy what is essentially your sub-fee, Lifers.

I just don't see how they think this is going to encourage the 30K people left in the game to stay when they can x10 as much, with x10 the polish, in about 10 other games for ONLY the sub. Plus, why would new people pay $30, plus $15 a month, plus costume pieces (not needed, no), plus $$$ to round out the already shallow content?

The customers of this company baffle me. Why pay more for something less robust or complete then the standard out there? Not even just pay "as much" as others... MORE??!?!? I just do. Not. Get it.

PvP - Cimm, if you can handle making a name w/ lore aspecs, and aren't an ass-hat.

PvE - Wiccana edges out Set, but only slightly.

What times are you playing? Peaks for PvP is usually off hours, as peak play time (8-12 EST) people are raiding.

---

Originally posted by DEATHRAMENT
AOC no question.

---

^This

The improvements mentioned as ‘coming’ are things that have been requested or demanded to be addressed for one and a half years now.

Client and server stability are a must. It’s almost patronizing to list that as an addition to any game. I play AoC and anytime people list ‘stability’ as an ‘improvement’ I cringe. It should be a gol’damn standard!

But, for all its neat ideas and potential (which I think WAR has/had) it falls way way way short of being worth $15 a month. Other then large scale PvP encounters, which by the reviewers own accounts are viewed as counterproductive, the game is essentially as shallow and empty as a Cryptic game.

Having the ‘most fun’ PvP would be something to boast, if players could log on and experience it 24/7 (outside of the freebie area). But it’s not the case. WAR forces a mind-numbingly long wait-and-see type experience in RvR and players just don’t participate. Or, you have to be on at specific times. Further, it ostracizes casual players by not regulating “pre-mades” where the chance for random scenario groups to have a chance at winning (or having fun. Or not being farmed for RP) is zero. Being able to enjoy the core of the game is a gamble, and I don’t want to waste $15 a month HOPING I’m on at the right time, w/ the right people.

There’s just too many issues w/ WAR, and frankly the “band-aid” development that the game has gone through over the last 1.5 years shows in their patch notes and their populations (another factor that contributes to being able to have fun).

---

Originally posted by brindleburn
Plus lobbing off peoples heads is always satisfying.

 
I think I will play this until JGE or TOR

---

^ this.

I've been an off/on player about 4 times now, and 1.06 was the tipping scale from "improving" the holes in the launch client, to really "improving" w/ additional content. 1.07 will do that further w/ new PvP levels and the awesomely fun Shrines.

The OP is right. Anyone w/out an agenda against FC and an open mind will enjoy this game. People that have a narrow POV or aren't willing to see the changes, will continue to hate it. FC certainly warranted their trolls from the launch, and there'll be no changing that, but the fact is that this game is now a LOT of fun, and doesn't lack things to do.

The Tier 3 raiding is a huge hit, as is the renown system and token system 1.06 added.

Does the game still have flaws? Sure. There isn't a game out there that doesn't. But, when all is said and done, the fun factor outweighs them ten fold.

Its not for everyone. But, as it improves and becomes even more exciting and visceral, it will be "for" a lot more. RotGS has the potential to be a HUGE smash and population booster....

... you know, if Funcom doesn't pull a "Funcom" w/ the launch ;)

I can deal w/ paying extra ...

AS LONG AS...

 the game is huge, there's tons to do, and it's on a level that games that are 2-4 years old are at.

If you except me to pay more, you better damn well be offering more then what I'm already getting.

If it's some FUBAR half-assed junk pile like Cryptic makes, I'll be really sad that I can't play one of my fav IP's and it's greatest sub-IP on principal.

2 mil subs to break even. So, that insinuates that they need a least ONE month of 2 mil subs. Which also insinuates that they have 2 mil box sales. So ...

$50 (box sale) + $15 (one month) x 2mil = $130,000,000!!! To break even? Holy monstrous budget Batman

just based off box sales, it'd be $100mil, which seems more in-line IMO.