You can only do so much with a game - graphics, engine, UI, etc - without completely remaking it. WoW will hit that point eventually as well, and will not be able to incorporate some of the new functionality other games introduce without a complete engine overhaul.

I have always loved playing the utility class - able to do a little bit of this, a little bit of that. The problem with those types of classes is they are very much support classes and (usually) do not fare well on their own.

The first utility class I played was a Bard in EQ1, which was amazingly fun. I remember twisting certain songs for when I was soloing, and different ones for my group (in fact, different songs based on the party composition!). By playing a class that made any group more effective, it was always easy to find a group. The Bard in EQ2 was a farce, but Vanguard's bard was amazing (even if I didn't stay with the game for an extended period).

In many other games, they lack the utility class and have classes that can perform many roles. I enjoyed the Druid in WoW to some extent, but being able to only really perform one role even reasonably well at a time (due to eq/spec) felt limiting. Healers are fun because they make grouping easier without a dedicated guild, but they tend to feel shallow in solo play when trying to level. I've never been a fan of tanking; it just isn't my style.

WoW is the ultimate Chuck Norris clone.

I agree with the posters above. I had the pleasure of playing in the Mythos beta phases (from very early on), and I have never seen a development team so open and caring as Flasgship was to their Mythos community. Frankly, if Hellgate had half of the love they put into Mythos (and half the issues), it might have been a blockbuster. I digress; Flagship, especially Travis and a few others, were outstanding and I can't help but hope this Mythos fails so their MMO version of Torchlight can shine when it is released.

Originally posted by Guillermo197

Originally posted by Gabby-air

I have to agree with the above poster, this coming year is going to have some amazing new games coming out and going into the third generation of MMORPGs [see thread at pub explaning the generations] and the wow clones are going to be a thing of the past, only the best like lotro, aion and the like would keep going.

 

So instead, they release now, scam a few suckers and then go bankrupt in january 2010.

Nah, they will take the money they can get and then go F2P w/cash shop in Q1 2010.

Leave the reviews to those who can write objective, coherent descriptions of a game. This useless drivel hurts my head, and the teenage angst comes out in whiny, hormonal rages.

It would have been enough to say you didn't like the game, but the OP is trying to slander both the game and development studio. I have no interest in ever playing MO, but I hate seeing people go through this much effort to discredit a game.

If you thought you were doing the community a favor, you should really re-read what you wrote and think about it. The community is best served by clear, concise information (i.e., facts) and opinions based on content/functionality tempered by consideration for the phase/status of a game.

Originally posted by donjuanamigo

i laughed my ass off at this post. OP posts threads like this all the time and is not serious. all of you people who thought he was serious and posted some response to it, got owned.

You must be the OP's fanclub?

Waste of space. The Internet is dumber for having read this.

There is nothing new or exciting in the first 10 levels of gameplay that I saw. That right there was enough to send me away. The graphics are sub-par, the controls seem more "clunky" than WAR's, and the game is as generic as I've ever seen in a P2P MMORPG. I enjoyed Runes of Magic more, oddly enough.

Besides some nice graphiclal effects (who cares at this point though?), why would someone want to play Allods? What makes it stand out other than being free? What features?

You actually called to complain about this? I think you have too much free time.

A bonus is a bonus; even three additional points will help you nicely in DA.

To me, Dragon Age is everything right about a story-driven RPG. It is NOT an Action RPG (ARPG) along the lines of Diablo, not was NWN/Baldur's Gate/etc. People call the story linear, and on many levels it is - there are only so many different areas to go to and relatively fixed paths in most - but what is NOT linear is the perception of and interaction with the characters in the world.

You can single-handedly cause almost your entire party to leave you just by a few actions and dialogue choices. Dragon Age shows a dark world where you will be a hero - although whether you are a shining example of honor or a bloodthirsty knave is up to you to decide through the choices you make.

After reading half of the bashing posts, it makes me realize there is too much of the MMORPG/WoW crowd out there now. You don't want a story unfolding through a game (yes, making it almost to the point of an interactive movie at times), you want to go kill 10 murlocs and bring some generic NPC back their eyes; rinse and repeat as desired. 

Have you ever read a book for pleasure in the last decade? Dragon Age has all the high points of a fantasy novel - backstory,, character development, an engrossing plot - except you get to control the action. Make the decisions. Determine the ending (and yes, there are multiple endings). I can see how some people might not like certain features, but to HATE Dragon Age? You might as well admit you HATE true RPGs then.

There's no reason to hate WoW; it is a game and offers what it offers. It is also the undisputed "king" of MMORPGs today.

Sometimes I "hate" WoW players, but that's only because there are more of them than any other set of players, so of course there will be a larger number (not percentage) of immature "jerks".

I also despise the very concept of raiding, which has always been a key component to WoW. Sit around and be forced to play for 3-5 hours straight just to finish a single dungeon? The sheer act is contrary to being a properly functioning person in human society. Argue away if you wish, you'll only reveal your own disconnect with reality.

This is a truly worthless post. Quit a game for its lack of merits, faults, bugs, or lack of fun, not because of an installation/update issue. Why not try asking for help next time?

Personally, I still think AoC wins my "coaster" award for being the least delivering, over-hyped MMORPG to date (I still like WAR more for some odd reason); I quit AoC many, many moons ago.

Originally posted by KarmaCry7

To explain this any further is pointless. I would rather players who play WoW start complaining about the other merchandise they charge real money for you to have, Mugs, T-Shirts etc and start there before getting bent out of shape because Blizzard (like Mr.Crabs) likes money.

Vanity pets are virtual merchandising, not cheating.

 

 

Actual, vanity pets represent an initial step in redefining what a subscription entitles you to in a game. I have no true sense of entitlement, except that I expect my monthly subscription to allow me to FULLY enjoy all aspects of a game. I consider that subscription price to be an all-in, all-you-can-eat-buffet-plus-drinks-and-desert price. Will I buy an expansion? Of course, assuming it provides content and/or functionality that enhances my experience. Expansions have to justify themselves on a cost-to-benefit ratio; you wouldn't spent $30 to add one new dungeon, would you (I guess some people might given the content and rewards for that dungeon...).

Can these pets be obtained in ANY fashion in-game? Or are they "exclusive" to the pet shop? Convenience (aka, allow people with money to obtain the same things that people with time can get) is fine, but exclusivity is not.

At the end of the day, it isn't about the pets. It is about the system itself.

Originally posted by astrob0y

Originally posted by Talin

 

RMT DOES NOT BELONG IN A SUBSCRIPTION-BASED GAME.

 

Says who? What law are you looking at? Is there something you have found deep inside the human mind? Damn you guys that wants your belifes to be something that the rest of us have to go with.

RMT does belong to the game that can embrace it. Deal with it our just turn your back. Easy as that.

Only a complete tool would indicate they actually WANT to spend more money for the sake of spending more money. That's what this is about - not content, gameplay, fun - money. Yes, we all know companies are in the game business to make money. However, saying we should go along with RMT systems when a subscription-based model is already in place is like saying you don't mind walking around the street with your wallet falling trailing on a string behind you. You're just asking to be robbed and taken advantage of.

Try again.

John, my boy, I've never seen you lay down such a fantastic line of absolute B-S in the many years I've been coming to this site. Well done. I don't think a Blizzard employee could have put it better, but then, after reading this, you are on their payroll, aren't you?

RMT DOES NOT BELONG IN A SUBSCRIPTION-BASED GAME.

I don't know if I can make this any more clear. If I could put the above statement in blinking marquee (my least favorite web-technique ever used in the 90s), I would.

"Vanity"-anything is a part of your subscription. You are paying for those features - the development, testing, and release - with your subscription. The fact that these pets have no statistical or "bonus" value is irrelevent.

The next step is, of course, something like new armor skins. Imagine being able to hide your lowly Tier whatever armor using these new armor skins... they will make your old armor look better than the latest gear drops! "No, they don't offer statistical benefits, so we're not giving players an edge over other players, just allowing them to change the look of their equipped gear." Extrapolate indefinitely and you see where this will go.

RMT is a perfectly viable model to provide the SOLE funding for a game. Allowing a subscription option with a monthly allocation of RMT points, a la DDO, also makes sense. What Blizzard/SOE/etc are trying to do is set very small precedents and allow them to settle in now, creating a mental acceptance for the players so they can incorporate more of these features in the future.

If anyone throws out the whole server transfer/character rename line, I'll smack them with a wet fish. That argument holds no weight and is irrelevent for the purposes of this conversation.

For those who never played/heard of Mythos, let me assure you that this team has the ability to make an amazing MMO out of torchlight. Mythos was planned as a F2P and combined the best elements of a diablo-style game with the socialization of a MMORPG. It was very similar to the Guild Wars style; large numbers of players gather in town instances, and adventure maps are spawned as instances for parties to play in.

When surfing the Mythos forums during its beta, you can't imagine how engaging and responsive the developers were to the community. Calling their development a labor of love isn't so far from the truth. Many of us followed the studio from bankruptcy to the creation of Runic Games.

By buying Torchlight now you are contributing to the funding and development of their MMO... so please keep the support rolling!

I was in the closed beta and I'll simply state that I hope the game has come a long way in the last few weeks. Feature-wise, I saw nothing new, and the features that were in the game did not have half the polish of MMORPGs released in the last two years. I have to echo previous statements above that a company trying to go the "indie" route needs to at least have a solid product during beta, otherwise they stand little chance at gaining momentum and interest.

I don't see this game lasting halfway through 2010 in its current state, although I wish the development team all the best on their endeavour.

The single-player game will not go multi-player as far as I've heard; a MMORPG based on the same lore and visual style is planned be built and is planned for release 2010-11.