| 111 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
My name is Skyles and I'm an Altaholic.... Seriously, I always run a pretty wide stable of characters, leveling them simultaniously. Yup, I'll have a stable on my order server and another stable on my destruction server. I'll rank up slow as always, exploring every nook and cranny of the game as I go. |
|
|
I'll have the game on pre-order. I'm not a this-or-nothing fan though - I'll also have pirates of the burning sea on pre-order, and maybe Gods and Heroes or AoC; all four have lots of potential, and I'm betting one of them will pan out. But, of the four, the big money is on WAR.
Originally posted by Salvatoris People make games, not companies. Company and brand-name loyalty and hatred have always struck me as strange - when I like something, I usually try to find out who the people behind it were. I believe in the judgment and creative ability of the guys behind WARs development - the company logo on their nametag is irrelevant. |
|
Originally posted by Galupa Except that his facts are completely wrong. The game has always been scheduled for release in Q4 2007 - they've never suggested 2008. Some recent 'estimates' from the media suggest Q3, but Mythic itself is staying solid at Q4. AoC, however, recently shifted its release date from Q3 to Q4, delaying its release. The announced schedule is: First Stage of Closed Beta (Beta 1): Sometimes called "Friends and Family," somewhat inaccurately, this phase of beta is "EA Employee Only." At this stage there is actually a game, but it is not usually very complete or even stable for that matter. STARTED: Fall 2006 Beta 1.7, After Things Stop Going Boom Every Day: This is the stage you'll start seeing community testers. People who have tested for Mythic for years, or have been otherwise recommended to us as quality volunteer testers, are starting to be included. There is usually a restriction on how many people get in at this point, and often perfectly wonderful people are left out. STARTS: TENTATIVE DATE: Early 2007 Beta 2: Still closed and covered under NDA, invitees include prize winners, guilds that win the guild contest, and some members of the print and web media - usually the ones we have relationships with. People who work at GW retail shops are getting in here, and we've got some plans for existing Dark Age of Camelot players to be invited to check out their new sibling. There will be up to a thousand people by the end of Beta 2. STARTS: TENTATIVE DATE: Early Spring 2007 Beta 3: Closed, NDA. This is where Lady Luck will wave her wand. We will be choosing randomly from the giant pool of people who are subscribed to our newsletter. This phase will have thousands of people invited, possibly as many as ten thousand. STARTS: TENTATIVE DATE: Summer 2007 Final Beta: No NDA. Because there is no NDA, people often refer to this as "open beta." But I wanted to be really clear with you guys - we are not planning the kind of open beta where everyone with internet access can download the game and hop in. That's nutty. Right now, we are tentatively considering having everyone who pre-orders the game invited to this phase of beta. This phase will also invite winners from our big media promotions. STARTS: TENTATIVE DATE: Summer 2007 Tentative Release: Q4 2007 |
|
|
They've shown female dwarf toons of all four professions (or rather, the same female dwarf decked out for each of the four professions). There have also been concept art images for female knights of the blazing sun, female magus, female warrior priests, female zealots, and female witch hunters. That's all the empire careers - just leaves chaos chosen and marauders that we haven't seen concept art for.
|
|
Originally posted by Ealia
"The system we were playing on for the test was a Laptop system with an Intel Core 2 Duo 1.8 Ghz with 2Gb of Ram, Radeon x1600 Mobile gfx card and other standard goodies. The game was at almost max setting (no antialiasing) and was running perfectly fine with no performance issues at all." Have to assume the final product will require something a bit more powerful for the same results. |
|
Originally posted by AdrianS That's one version. The more commonly accepted version is that climax wasn't doing what they pretended they were doing (lots of nasty little variations to the story are floating around the web), and got dropped by GW when GW discovered their duplicity. Then GW did some research and found a new developer. They offered the work that climax had done to folks at Mythic, but were refused out of hand - there was absolutely nothing that climax had produced that Mythic wanted . The current version of the warhammer mmo began from scratch in 2005. |
|
Originally posted by Veiled_light
The game does NOT use the DAOK angeine. There is no such thing as a DAOK engine - DAOK is an end product constructed with an old version of the Gamebryo engine. WAR is not using an old engine. WAR is using the latest edition of the Gamebryo engine - the same engine that was used in the construction of Elder Scrolls: Oblivion. The quality of the graphics is not being limited in any way by the engine. The models look like the pewter figures, the textures look like the artists want them to look. |
|
Originally posted by ArzhAngel That's fine, for LA2, but that's no Warhammer Orc. Warhammer is a game with almost three decades of modeling and artwork already done - we all know exactly what a Warhammer Orc is supposed to look like. The folks at Mythic have it right, down to the muscle structure of the gaping maw. Spend some time looking at the artwork and figures on any of the GW websites, then you'll be in a better position to judge how well the guys at Mythic are doing their job. |
|
|
Bah! Give me a woman with a strong figure any day, none of those squeaky -voiced, reed-skinny human and elf ragdolls!
|
|
|
I love both settings, so they each have a pretty heavy draw. Right now I'm looking at games for the new ideas they're bringing to MMORPGs, the ideas that will improve the experience, but more importantly the replayability. Four games have my attention: AoC is interesting for its combat mechanics (possible gameplay experience +) - I'm just not convinced they can pull it off or that it will make that much difference in the experience. The battlekepps come right out of DAOK, from what I can see - a fun experience, but frustrating when all your hours of effort and achievement can be turned to nothing while you sleep (fight for the keep, lose the keep while you sleep). It's the only one that shown mounted combat, another + as far as I'm concerned. Nice ideas, but it seems like the least promising of the three I'm tracking. I have a good friend who's watching the game closely, so I'll probably end up giving it a try. Gods and Heroes is another one interesting for its revolutionary combat mechanics (paired combat animations, meaning when my opponent dodges or blocks, he actually dodges or blocks in full animation; when I spear him through the gut and throw him to the ground, I do it in full animated glory - big gameplay experience +). It's also incorporating squad combat - each hero gets to lead a squad of mortal men into combat, giving squad-wide orders or taking command of individual members (gameplay experience +). Pirates of the Burning Sea offers ship and crew command along with intense and repeatable realm vs. realm PvP as the nations battle for control of a wide variety of ports. The ship combat mechanics and crew boarding actions offer some serious gameplay experience +, and the battles for ports offer some seriously repeatable gameplay over a lot of different terrain against intelligent, adaptable opponents. WAR offers a lot of character customization and growth options (experience +), and some powerful replayability. WAR's top-end content will be fought over 9 massive open-field zones and 6 zone-sized cities. Each of those zones will consist primarily of PvP area - engagements happening anywhere, potentially on any terrain - and contain an array of open battlefield objectives and 2-3 scenarios. As the battles shift, moving forward and back, different terrain, battlefields and scenarios will become available. I'll probably end up trying all four, but PotBS and WAR seem like they'll be the ones that stay fun after I max. The other two sound like they're incorporating great ideas, I'm just not convinced that their innovations will keep boredom at bay after I've played a while. |
|
Originally posted by cupertino I suppose you could say that they're both cartoonish, but beyond that, taking into account that Warhammer gave us green orcs to begin with, can you really say that these are similar - or more similar than they are to, say, DAOK avatars or EQ avatars?
Edit: I suppose the fact that they're both based on warhammer tabletop minitaures can be pointed to, but beyond the basics - a Dwarf being a Dwarf, a Human being a Human - the difference in artistic style is staggering. Seems that someone would have to be pretty determined to claim they were more similar to to WoW avatars than they are to DAOK or EQ.
|
|
