PvE and controls feels pretty similar to Oblivion, the graphics are rather similar as well. But that's where the likenesses ends. No storyline, not much rpg more kill kill kill as you say and it is a pvp-game.

But, I have only played for a couple of days and so far I really really enjoy the pve part of the game.

Sounds interesting to me!

Maturity wise it goes like this, when you are growing up and getting into adulthood you have all this trouble with what is mature and what not. Then when you reach a certain level of maturity you also get more sure of yourself and don't have to prove your maturity to everyone all the time - hence no problem of being in an alliance called something childish :)

What do you mean by Ryzom, granted I have only fought goblins so far in DF, but they were both tougher and far more fun to fight than what I used to fight in Ryzom!

I started in the dwarf area on EU1 today and it is not empty. Ok not loads of people running around, but not empty.

Considering I have yet to try DF you would be excused if you tell me to shut it. Now I hear DF is very grindy and well I may or may not like that, but at the same time - making it overeasy to be a newbie and making newbies competetive to vets on day 1 would make me loose interest in even trying DF. It is an MMORPG, not an FPS, which is why it is fine if it takes a couple of months to build your character - or even longer time for a casual player.

Originally posted by VirgoThree

I'm not certain but isn't Last Remnant turn based RPG? If it is you could try that it is available for PC and made by Square Enix I believe.

I agree, going by what you said you wanted, Last Remnant is probably as close as you will get. A typical turn based JRPG. But you really should play Planescape Torment, best game ever.

What a helpful forum! Thanks all, we'll see later, I'm trying to convince a friend to come along for the ride, would probably make it much easier being a duo by default so to speak.

What a difference this forum is now compared to a year ago!

Originally posted by randomt

MO gms did something similar

Well, it is still in beta so perhaps they are still practising? :)

Ok, thanks for the explanation Darth, for now I actually did reactivate Fallen Earth, we shall see if I like it better this time around. I will keep a close eye on the development of Darkfall though, it seems to have become a much better game than a year ago and if it continues in that direction then it should soon be an alternative for me as well.

Thank you everyone! I would have to say that thing about components for higher magic has me worried as well. I have played Fallen Earth by the way, which I think is more of a game along the lines of what I should like. The problem is, I just don't get into that game, I just don't have fun in it.

This is so difficult, if Vanguard was skill based it would probably be my dream game. I am much more interested in Darkfall now than a year ago, but I think I will wait for awhile and see what the devs are up to. Alos you never know, maybe Mortal online or that Xsyon (or whatever) surprises in a good way.

I think it is safe to say that Darkfall has delivered on the pvp side of things, but I believe one of the reasons why it got so much stick in the beginning was that it had promised so much more that made it attractive to a lot of pve-sandbox lovers.

And since I look for a game that has a sandbox feel and with good pve I ask, is Darkfall good for a pve:er:

- that accept that it is a ffa full loot game

- that likes to explore

- that wants the world/sandbox to feel like a living world, easy to get immersed into as a real online world

- is it good for solo pve:ers?

- is it good for group/raid pve?

- it is still ok if you just want the pve and crafting and could care less about the pvp, but accept the ffa full loot concept?

What I really am looking for is probably a Ryzom in a more traditional fantasy setting or a modern version of UO (but I would prefer todays pvp system in UO). I did try Mortal online this past week, and well it is far far away from being ready for release.

I tried the open beta this week, and while it does have some great ideas and a solid foundation for a good game, well it is still miles away  from release status.

It is sad to see game after game fall into this trap, release too early and you're fu**ed and this is too early if there ever was a too early release. But perhaps it is like this with small studios, either release and hope for the best or just close the project all together.

You need to set up an account with SOE to play, but I guess you knew that already, anyway easiest way to get started is to download the "Station launcher" and make a new account from that. Should be easy, otherwise contact customer support, I have done that a couple of times over the years and they have always been very helpful and decently fast in responding.

Same here, I always come back to EQ2 and now I am back again...what server are you on? I'm on the european Runnyeye, but maybe you're american?

I'm in Sweden and have no trouble at all, very stable and no latency that I have noticed.

Originally posted by Elikal

Originally posted by Amathe

I followed this game with anticipation for more than a year before it launched, and I beta tested it. While the game had many problems, one of the biggest in my opinion is that Brad McQuaid catered to a subset of the mmo market that wanted the game to be enjoyable only by the hardest core player. For years, every 5 minutes there was a post and an ensuing debate on the game's boards on how the game would just be another easy WoW clone unless [fill in some draconian feature that all but the hardest core player would hate]. Brad encouraged that and even went so far as to say, in substance, "many people will not enjoy Vanguard" and "the game is not for everyone," etc. He just kept throwing slab after slab of red meat to the "we want a very, very, very hard game that casual players will despise" constituency.

I said at the time (and took enormous crap for it) that while there is nothing wrong with hard core players (and having content that they enjoy), hard core players won't be enough to fill the servers. Also, once those hard core players consume the content, which they will very quickly, they will leave and move on to new challenges.  A game needs "medium core" players and casual players, and as many other types of players it can get, to pay the bills for the whole game and ensure the company can keep adding content. Likewise, a hard core player needs to feel like they have achieved something in game that not everyone has, and how can that ever be if all the other players are hard core players just like them?

Brad ignored that warning and kept encouraging the game's reputation for being a hard core player's only club, until the game got closer to launch. Then he belatedly realized that in fact, he did need a larger player base for the game to be a financial success. So what did he do? He started telling everyone how much casual players would enjoy the game and how much content he had in it for them. That was not true and I said so at the time. (Took a lot of grief for that too lol).

So, the game launched to poor numbers, as I predicted, which have become more poor with every passing day, as I also predicted. Every single bit of the responsibility for that rests on Brad's shoulders. I see that he has a blog where he does a post mortum of why Vanguard failed, and he still doesn't get it. He still can't see that there is no reason whatsoever that a game designer can't make a game that appeals to, and is enjoyed by, a wide range of playstyles.

Original Everquest was my first mmo. I was a casual player, and I loved it. Hard core players loved it too, and what they were doing didn't get in my way and I didn't get in theirs. We all had a good time. Some of the most fun content in the game was at lower levels. Brad forgot that (if he ever knew, because I am convinced now that EQ succeeded through the efforts of  less credited contributors), which is why he made a lousy game and did an even more lousy job of promoting it. 

 

Well said. I recall reading from one of the developers who did the actual programming I heard many had never made a MMO before and so they had no idea about how to make a MMO function. Of course the hardcore approach doomed VG to fail. You just can't build a MMO only on such a niche target audience who will rush through the game anyway. I never understood why SOE bought VG in the first place. It wasnt totally bad, but really it didnt have a chance unless someone would make a mayor investment into the game, which SOE didnt. But it still is one of the most sad failed games in MMO history IMO. It had many lovable characteristics.

One of the major issues as I see it was. Vanguard was released at a time when forced grouping already was SO out of fashion and the trend which is clear now, was already visible. Most MMO gamers today have no tolerance to large downtimes. I mean, it took sometimes up to 45 minutes to just travel the world to meet your group! Such things were possible in the EQ1 days, but when VG was released those days were LONG over and enough people said so. But as ever so often, they did no listen.

Other stuff like when you die in the depth of one of the deadly dungeons (I just say Kragnors End!) and then you lose ALL progress was such a big no-go at that time already. Anything halfway interesting like housing or ships or flying mounts were and are way too hard to get for any casual player. In the end VG was a way to elitarian game in a time where this design was already a dinosaur. I know I was bashed endlessly back when I was in beta, and most ex fans are still in denial and prolly will always be. But to everyone else it is clear as the day that such an elite concept could never work in our days.

Today most MMO gamers make very little compromises when it comes to grouping, penalities, long travels, downtimes asf., a development whose logical steps the great soloability of games like LOTRO and the NPC companion in a game like SWTOR is. The signs that this was the future was clear as the day back then already, but fanbois and Sigil leaders did not want to see it.

As much as I love Vanguard this is exactly how I feel as well! Well said both of you.
 

Ok, I might even agree with that Diablo statement :-)

Originally posted by Silok

Originally posted by OBK1

 

No worries, my skin is thick enough. I was mainly reffering to the feel to the world. As far as game mechanics go it is clearly a rip off of WoW but with some small inventions of its own, like the study system...love it or hate it.

The rubber banding is supposed to be fixed today, haven't checked yet. I might be positive due to the fact that I actually liked WoW but didn't like the setting, this is, as you say, very much WoW but with a setting I like better. We will see how it will develop, I must say I am surprised I did expect the next David Allen game to be completely different to this!

 

Well even that they stole it from EVE Online..

As you might see, I do play Eve...anyway name ONE game that does not steal from other games? What makes this game looks more like a WoW clone than all the othe clones is probably the UI which is more or less copied straight over. Anyway if you take ingredients from different games and put in another that is no more stealing than everyone else does in this business, and is exactly what WoW did, don't come here and say that WoW was not an Everquest clone (I do miss my old EQ, sob sob).

Still, I want to wait a month or so to judge this game, hard to judge after a few days of playing.

Originally posted by TheDarzin

Originally posted by OBK1

There are indeed problems, but to my own surprise I sort of like the game so far. The study idea is nice and the atmosphere the world has is also decent. Yes they copied the UI from WoW, good I say since it is familiar to almost everyone but the more I play the less like it feels like a  WoW-clone.

Anyway, I bought the game just a couple of days ago and so far I'm mildly impressed, but maybe that is due to low expectations? Still so far so good.

 

Not to be an ass, but I am, so I will ask the obvious. How is it not a wow clone? All you do is quest, and level, with a talent tree system stolen right from WoW. The study system is awful, and will takes years to get to respectable levels. But, you say it feels less like a WoW-Clone, how so? What is there to do that is different from anything you can do in WoW -- except PvP and run dungeons.

You either, level by killing mobs or questing.

You can craft, or gather mats.

You can sell stuff on the AH.

You can group but there is nothing to do while grouped.

The whole "Dawning" is a mini AQ opening ripoff in itself.

So, I need to know, just for once -- what is so un-WoW-like?

No worries, my skin is thick enough. I was mainly reffering to the feel to the world. As far as game mechanics go it is clearly a rip off of WoW but with some small inventions of its own, like the study system...love it or hate it.

The rubber banding is supposed to be fixed today, haven't checked yet. I might be positive due to the fact that I actually liked WoW but didn't like the setting, this is, as you say, very much WoW but with a setting I like better. We will see how it will develop, I must say I am surprised I did expect the next David Allen game to be completely different to this!

There are indeed problems, but to my own surprise I sort of like the game so far. The study idea is nice and the atmosphere the world has is also decent. Yes they copied the UI from WoW, good I say since it is familiar to almost everyone but the more I play the less like it feels like a  WoW-clone.

Anyway, I bought the game just a couple of days ago and so far I'm mildly impressed, but maybe that is due to low expectations? Still so far so good.