I know I seemed pretty harsh, and I will add that I was referring to unpaid positions.  I know that doesn't soften it much, but there you go.  The gaming industry has infamously low editorial standards, and they seem to be getting lower all the time; this is not something I can ignore.

However, if I were running a PR firm or an ad agency, I imagine I would LOVE to hire anyone associated with this site.  This is not sarcasm or exaggeration.

I guess it all depends on the sort of writing you want to do.

Originally posted by Aethios

 

---

Originally posted by observer

• How much Honor can you get per Hour inside AV?
• How much Honor can you get per Hour inside AB?
• How much Honor can you get per Hour inside WSG?
• How much Honor can you get per Hour inside EOTS?

If World PvP can give equal, or more, Honor per Hour than any of those, then it would be a success. Knowing Blizzard though, it will never happen. Do not hold out hope.
Why waste time in anything other than AV? Fun? Sorry, but it's all about the gear.

---

 

Yeah, and it's quite sad that it's come to this. People will automatically flock to whatever gives the greatest reward, and when there are no rewards left to be had, they simply quit.

Rats in a Skinner Box ... how is this surprising?

Originally posted by gillvane1

Originally posted by Hexxeity

I wish a game would differentiate between "lazy" quests and "worthwhile" quests.

They could put all the "Kill 10 monsters" quests on a town crier and say, yes, we know it's lazy development, but we're calling it content and it's here if you want to do it.  You'll get bonus XP and maybe some coin, but that's it.

And then all the quests they actually put effort into could be out in the world on NPCs to be discovered.  Maybe some have ? cues and maybe some don't.  But all of them are story driven and require some reading.  This won't stop the Thottbot phenomenon, but at least you'd know you're getting a bit of an RPG experience.

 

I don't want an RPG experience from NPC scripts, I want a RPG experience from playing the game with other people.

Which is why I don't read the quests. If I want an RPG experience from reading canned NPC scripts, I'll get a single player RPG.

Then why are you even participating in this duscussion?  If you don't like quests, don't do them, but I don't get why you would even read this thread.

No one promised you anything.  They told you what was planned.  There's a difference.  When you start developing an MMOG, you have know way of knowing exactly what you can or can't deliver by the release date.

I wish a game would differentiate between "lazy" quests and "worthwhile" quests.

They could put all the "Kill 10 monsters" quests on a town crier and say, yes, we know it's lazy development, but we're calling it content and it's here if you want to do it.  You'll get bonus XP and maybe some coin, but that's it.

And then all the quests they actually put effort into could be out in the world on NPCs to be discovered.  Maybe some have ? cues and maybe some don't.  But all of them are story driven and require some reading.  This won't stop the Thottbot phenomenon, but at least you'd know you're getting a bit of an RPG experience.

Seems like something they would have mentioned by now.

I work in publishing, and I can tell you that if I were hiring, I would laugh and laugh at anyone who put MMORPG.com on his resume.

I'm not a blind SOE hater.  In fact, I've never played SWG or MxO.

However, I tried really hard to like EQ2, both at launch and after the revamp.  Oh, and again at the launch of Faydwer.  I still think it's a tedious, shallow game with lackluster classes and a poor balance between solo and group play.

And I don't think EQ1 has fared so well under their continued guidance.  Some things are better than they used to be, yes.  But some things are a lot worse.

Vanguard is better than it was at release in the same way that dying by lethal injection is better than being burned at the stake -- not quite as painful, but you'd still rather be doing something else.

Oh, and let's talk about Legends of Norrath while we're at it.  Worst customer support of any game I have ever played.  And that is saying a lot.

So while I'm not a rabid enemy of SOE, they have yet to prove to me that they can make an MMO I want to play.  I really don't think DCU is going to be any different.

The bit about loot systems is not at all general, and your advice there is irrelevant to a number of MMOGs I can think of.

It would have taken a LOT more development time and money to deliver a satisfying PvP experience of the sort requested by the OP.

That is the only reason, and it is a perfectly acceptable one.  It's not a PvP game, and was never intended to be.

False dichotomy.  It is not an all-or-nothing situation.

You can remove the ability to cheat without removing the freedom of choice that makes the game entertaining -- at least, entertaining for those who agree to play by the rules.

Originally posted by neonaka

No in real life, cheaters always win. Everyone stands by you.

Bill gates was a cheater and is now a Gagillionare.

The strong step on the weak to get ahead. People step on others to get what they want. Ever wonder how most people get all these fancy cars and huge houses? You think they get them by working hard and playing by all the rules? No they get them by crushing opposition, being the best at what they do by any means they can.

Same applies to the gaming world. Some rules can be bent, others can be broken. It will continue this way forever.

Freedom allows for this. The only way to stop this would be to stop every ounce of freedom in everything.

To not bend or break a rule it must not have the room to do so. If you every completely lock something down to the point it has no freedom to be shaped, what do you have?

You have nothing.

You are right about the details, but you have no concept of the big picture (and it's nothing to do with religion).

I feel sorry for you.

Srsly, MMORPG.com.  You need to make every member of your staff look up the word "capitol" in the dictionary.  You're doing it wrong.

If he plans to solo exclusively, why would he care about being "needed" for endgame? 

The standard answer to the solo question is usually Red Mage, as far as the basic jobs go.

If you are tired of WoW -- especially the combat -- you do NOT want to bother with LoTRO.  I think it's a pretty decent game, but it's very much like WoW, so I cannot recommend it for you.  I also think you would be dissatisfied with the class and race choices.

The people who want you to play Vanguard are not thinking about your personal preferences; they just want more subs so their game doesn't die.

The aspects of an MMO that you value seem best represented in DDO, which you seem to already realize.  Your intuition is correct!  Go with your gut, friend.

Originally posted by Nadia

I had forgotten about this article

but Ncsoft is supposed to be unveiling something later this year

 

NCSoft Unveiling First Console Game This Year

blog.wired.com/games/2008/02/ncsoft-unveilin.html

which I assume is connected to this

www.ps3fanboy.com/2007/07/25/ncsoft-announcing-ps3-mmos-by-end-of-year/

 

LOL I feel sorry for them if they still have their dreams hitched to the Richard Garriott star.

A lot of people seem not to understand the point of lawsuits, particularly class action lawsuits.

Especially in this case, one would not sue in order to get rich.  No one expects to make a million dollars off of Funcom's mistakes.

The point of a class action lawsuit is more about punishing the company and setting an example so it doesn't happen again.

Individuals of a certain mindset hear or read the word "lawsuit" and immediately assume the whole thing must be about those "damn liberals" trying to get something for nothing.

On the contrary, the members of a Funcom lawsuit would stand to gain very little -- probably only a fraction of the $50 they lost to the company in the first place.  But what the entire gaming community stands to gain is an actual legal precedent wherein a company has to pay out millions of dollars for essentially lying to its customers.

As a big superhero fan, I'm a little surprised at my utter lack of interest in this project.

Maybe it's the console aspect, or maybe it's the involvement of SOE.  Maybe because I prefer Marvel (though I certainly don't dislike DC).

Probably a combination of all the above.

I've always been annoyed by games that use the word "tinkerer" as a profession name.  There is already a perfectly good name for this job -- from the Middle Ages, even -- and it is "tinker."

"Tinker" is a job; a "tinkerer" is someone who happens to be fiddling with something at the moment.

It would be nice if something could be done to discourage game developers and publishers from releasing games that don't work and/or make false promises.

It is a big problem, it is rampant, and it is doing a lot of harm to the integrity of the gaming industry.

If I had been foolish enough to buy AoC, I would definitely join in on a class action lawsuit if one were to present itself.  But I wasn't, so I can't.

(I have gotten class action settlement money from PayPal and Sony in the past -- in amounts even smaller than the purchase price of AoC -- so I can tell you it does happen.)