---

Originally posted by Crownregent
1 : It completely alienates the PC fan base from EVE, short of those who are willing to shell out for 299 Dollar in the US and 1.500 NOK-159 British pounds or euro in Europe for a PS3.

 

2: The whole first impression of the game, including a race called Jovians which WAS orginally on DUST 514 official page, is now gone making the game much more unattractive to older Eve players who still are PC DIE HARDS.

 

3: To make the game not take advantage of Same Server as orginal game is a big FAIL, as this will make Ventrillo nigh to impossible from EVE to DUST514 unless CCP somehow make Unique channels for each of the guilds. Which will really defy the whole point of Dust 514 integration into the mainstream EVE.

 

4: To make a game thats a platform exclusive is one thing, but to make it completely opposite the main fanbase of EVE, is just plain suicide for a offspring mmo.

 

Just my 10 cents.

This will be yet another Tabula Rasa... Much overhyped. Too quick too short too far from the fanbase and deemed to fail from day one.

 

---

1) It's not meant to appeal to the original fanbase, but to a new fanbase. CCP is looking to expand their market, so they're looking toward consoles which have a very different userbase than PC mmo's.

2) See 1). The game is not supposed to appeal to EVE players, but console FPS players.

3) Dust DOES run on Tranquility. You CAN talk to people in EVE.

4) You're repeating your earlier points again. See 1 and 2.

---

Originally posted by GrayGhost79

---

Originally posted by Thane uh really, 16 on 16? wow, that's the ammount PC shooters had like 10++ years ago.     the only reason i bitch (and ignore) dust514 is the only reason i bitch and ignore every concole shooter :) it's on console. real shooters are played on the PC.   thx for the discussion tho. was fun.

---

Don't blame that limitation on consoles, it's really on the developers. Mag for PS3 was a pretty massive FPS. Mag could have up to 256 players in a battle and it was PS3 only. 

---

Actually, MAG only had 32v32 battles. The 256 battles were split up into 4 battlefields which only influenced each other partially (kill an objective here, something moves there).

Also, people tend to forget that the 256 battles in MAG were very unpopular. They're basically dead nowadays, while 32/64 battles are easy to find.

---

Originally posted by ArChWind

---

Originally posted by Nasa To the OP, I would like to know your view of:

• Unreal3 (used in TERA) Cryengine3 (used in Archeage)

  And thanks for the nice read  

---

The reason these engines never made it to my list.

Cry engine indie at the time I tested it was not very stable. I had problems even getting a basic block into it without a CDT. If one bought the full commercial package I am sure this would work for a MMORPG but the requirement for this list is low cost and good performance engine. Cry fails on low cost for a commercial game.

For a zone based indie game Unreal engine is fantastic. Only testing I had was UDK so I did not have the source to evaluate beyond that. With UDK it would be possible to make a (somewhat MMO) reason I say this is because each server would be very limited on the number of CCU. Some of the issues with both engines is the fact they are not built to stream areas out of the box. Similar to HE they tend to stutter on the boundary crossing when using the seamless design.

I did hear that Unreal had a atlas program but I haven't seen it in action.

Unity has a atlas and background streaming in the professional package so if either of these engines used the paged method I would expect the game to run a bit more smoothly.

The nice thing about Esenthel and BigWorlds and for that matter Multiverse is they are streaming engines. They are designed form the ground up for massive sized worlds. (although the bug in Multiverse needs fixed becasue it loads the terrain data but does not unload it which means you run out of memory). They break the data up such a way that background loading and unloading are in their own threads so you never get a big jump in FPS unless you screw with making models too many vertices or just plain to big for AOI.

 

---

Both UE3 and CE3 support streaming...

It's been a staple of UE3 ever since the engine was announced. A lot of games emply it, from Mass Effect to Tera.

CE3 does streaming differently but offers it nonetheless. It is however a bit limited in size as it ultimately doesn't really /stream/, limited by the floating point precision (10^63 for 64 bit) for geometry.

---

Originally posted by Garkan

---

Originally posted by sketocafe CCP is making an MMO, CD Project is making a standalone RPG. So no.

---

Derp, I covered that. Fact is the game CD Projekt are attempting is as complex and as challenging as creating an MMO. The challenges they face are different but both are difficult in there own way.  CD Projekt are creating RPG mechanics covering over 4700 pages in 44 books, in a game filled with huge detail and no set linear path. Its basically trying to create something as detail heavy and as free formed as Morrowind combined with one of Biowares better RPGs like DA:O. The game will also have true next gen graphics. This is not something thats easily done

---

Eh, those 44 books are not all rules...

The core rules are explained in a single book. That book has a lot of lore in it aswell, in addition to item descriptions, examples etc.

The other 43 books MIGHT have one page worth of additions or revisions, but most of them are more lore, items etc.

That said, a multiplayer game is a vastly different animal than a singleplayer game. The latter is infinitely easier to produce, which is why they usually seem a lot more intricate. As a dev, you have a lot more freedom making a game when you only have one player to worry about, and his interaction with the game world. You can have the game change around just for the player, so to speak.

In a multiplayer game you have to design for interactions between both the game world AND the player - Depending on the amount of players you want involved it gets infinitely more complex to design properly. You can't really have the game change just for one player, it has to change for everyone. But how do you do this? Do you block swabs of content off because one single player did something specific? Do you leave everything as it is even though some groups of players have done different things to make change happen? How do you balance out skill levels and player abilities so that a small group of players can't game the system to make it impossible for the others to play?

So many more factors enter into designing a multiplayer game that it's not funny anymore - Especially RPG's where the interaction is not limited to 'point at something and shoot it'. Even in shooters it can be difficult to get it right.

And lastly, a singleplayer game doesn't 'need' the same amount of content as a multiplayer game. A SP game can be finished in a weekend, maybe a week of fulltime play, and people will be content, shelving it to maybe pull it out again after a year or two.

A multiplayer game has to be intersting to play for not just one weekend, but every weekend. This brings even MORE issues to the table compared to singleplayer games.

It's not even close to as easy as you make it out to be...

---

Originally posted by tom_gore
It's a good idea, but on totally wrong platform. It should be on PC. CCP is nuts for thinking the net effect on a PC version would be less money for them. People who love EVE would still play EVE. People who love FPS games would play DUST. People who love both (like me) would probably play both.

Frankly, the guy at CCP who figured that there are a lot of people who play EVE because of the lore, but would rather play an FPS, should be fired.

 

---

It will come to the PC some time before 2015. They wanted to release it on the PS3 first to build a new community and attract a new audience - If you release it for the PC you have a very heavy EVE stigma surrounding it which would likely cause only EVE players to sign up for it.

After a while the PS3 players will have "their" game and the addition of PC players will, in the long term, end up more favorable.

---

Originally posted by Halohead

---

Originally posted by radesk Or maybe don't get "hacked" next time? I really don't think that any hacker would waste his time to hack a random player. You probably shared your pass or went to public pc to play it.

---

You really think those are the only ways to get hacked? Any Chinese gold farmer will want your account so long as it has gold on it, or characters that are high levelled and have the ability to farm more gold. Any number of suspicious sites can put a keylogger on your computer and get your password that way.

---

A half-decent AV and simply being sensible when browing the interwebs goes a long way towards not getting hacked. In the 11 years i've been doing stuff online it's never happened to me.

- Use stuff like Adblock and Noscript to filter out bad ads and scripts on pages. This alone can help quite a lot.
- Don't open every link in every email you get. A lot of people complain about getting their WoW accounts 'hacked' but won't admit that they eagerly clicked a link in an official looking spam mail leading to us-battle-net-login-account-admin.cn or something like that.
- Always check whether you're on the site you think you are, see above.
- Don't give out your passwords to anyone. ANYONE. Not even God, or whatever deity you believe in.
- Don't use the same password for EVERYTHING like a lot of people tend to do. If you use 'hunter2' as a password for your email and every forum and game account you own, well, it's very easy to get hacked in that case.
- Your email is the most important of all. Don't log in on public PC's. Check if the public wifi network you're on is secure and encrypted. Don't hand your password over to 'friends'. Make it a properly difficult password to crack.

Making difficult passwords is easier than one might think. Simply try using some leetspeak, for example instead of writing Horseraddish, try typing it as H0rs3R4dd1sH. Or try and use other symbols in there: H0r$3R4dd:sH - Try and find a structure that's easy to remember for you but makes it infinitely harder for hackers to guess or bruteforce your password.

HAving a difficult password does NOT mean that you should use it everywhere! Nor should you give it out to anyone or anything.

I know it's difficult to admit, but the vast majority of people getting 'hacked' usually have no one but themselves to blame. It's sad that they never admit this and instead make others work for nothing to fix their own mistakes - Then the 'victims' start to complain about long response times, etc etc.

It would help if you explained what exactly you mean...

---

Originally posted by adam_nox
They pretty much abandoned the aspects that made EVE appealing.  Skills gaining over time is pretty much nonexistant given the stupidly slow rate of passive acquisition.

---

There's a hard cap to how much SP you can earn per day through playing games. This balances out the passive skillgain, allowing more casual players to not get too far behind. The boosters raise this cap but also boost the passive skillgain.

It's on the PS3 because CCP wants to extend an olive branch to an entirely new audience for their games - It will eventually come to the PC aswell, but at that point the PS3 players will have 'their' game in the way EVE is the PC players' game.

---

Originally posted by Torgrim

---

Originally posted by eyelolled I play the game. I enjoy the game. I will buy the expansions. I don't find wastelands like some people imply exists.

---

 

I'm sure they exist but not in the degree that is made out to be.

---

This. If GW2 has 'wastelands', other MMO's simply have utter voids where nothing even exists in the first place. Due to the scaling system there's reasons to go back to lower level zones, something you cannot claim with other MMO's where there are simply no reasons whatsoever to do anything outside of the highest level zones.

---

Originally posted by Torvaldr

---

Originally posted by Nitth

---

Originally posted by ShakyMo perhaps levels are the problem

---

How long have i been saying that for now....

---

So how do you plan on providing a tangible and measurable sense of progression.  We've already had the horizontal progression discussion and there are a decent number of people who want that in some form.  Taking away levels removes that.

In TSW I can see what % of the wheel I have completed and my level for each aspect of the wheel.  I'm gated on where I can go and adventure and what equipment I can use.  So a leveless system that uses skill points is not really any different than character levels.  They're just displaying the "level" and progress in a different place.

---

Easy. Make progression personal instead of impersonal. Story progression, actual world changing events, your own influence on the game. Try and design a game you'd want to play over and over even if there weren't any levels in it, or even gear upgrades, where the game itself was awarding enough by simply being fun.

Themeparks are designed to make you run through them once, maybe twice. They have almost zero features worth repeating more than that, that's why they're called themeparks - Just like RL ones. You don't go there every single day to repeat what you've already done, the only times you go there are a) when there's something new there or b) show your friends.

The only way to truly get people to repeat existing content is to introduce sandbox elements to a game and currently, very few MMO's offer this.

There's a good reason why games like Ultima Online and EVE Online are still around and kicking, even growing up to a point.

That said, GW2 is the best attempt a themepark MMO can make at getting people to repeat content by putting the focus on exploration rather than levelling and gear, incentivizing (re)visiting lower level content by scaling you down and giving level appropriate rewards.

Well, thought i'd post here again after i got it and played a little.

Most of my questions were answered, through experience, satisfactory at least. Some thing were less good, others better. However, i'm really enjoying the game now and for some reason my GF is actually playing it more than i am :>

Still waiting on the housing etc though. Would be nice. More than enough doors in Divinity's Reach for example where you can implement EQ2 style housing :)

Funny how the self-proclaimed gankers seem to try and avoid EVE... :)

I suggest Hello Kitty Online if one doesn't actually want to gank/pvp. ;p

Just to mention, but this wasteland thing is far, far, far more serious in games that do not have dynamic levelling. WoW for example is completely dead in any zone that's not a capital city or at least level 85. And with completely dead, i mean utterly lifeless - It's very very very rare that you meet any player in lower level zones, let alone higher level ones.

GW2 by comparison does a lot better here. While still not ideal, even as a low level i see a lot of higher levels tramping around lower level zones.

City of Heroes and EverQuest 2 also did and do pretty well here, respectively, making levelling still feel gratifying without taking away the relevance of lower level zones.

---

Originally posted by RedMachine72
Ok. I buy the game and don't sub I get 8 char slots and 288 bank slots, but the rest is restricted. I don't buy and I sub I can have only 2 char slots and if I want more have to purchase and only 72 bank slots with option to purchase. Hell even TOR is not that restrictive if you decide to sub. In ToR a sub unlocks everything and you don't have to make any type of purchase if you don't want to. But in TERA, unless you buy the game and not just switch from ftp to sub, you get screwed. Nice.

---

TOR is far more restrictive... You lose nothing in TERA when switching back to free, whereas in TOR you lose almost everything unless you've also bought it in the Cartel shop.

---

Originally posted by Onomas

---

Originally posted by lizardbones  

---

Originally posted by Onomas restrictions on there are almost as horrible as SWTOR. Was thinking of giving it another try, but whats the point when you are so limited in every way. Why i hate F2P games, just not worth it.

---

What are the limitations of the F2P? Do they restrict your ability bars? That still takes the cake for most nonsensical restriction I think.  

---

I was looking at their discovery edition restrictions. Not the same thing as F2P i guess.

You may only have 1 Discovery Edition on your En Masse account.

• Max level 28
• 200g limit
• Max gathering skill of 150
• Max crafting skill of 100
• 2 characters per serverChat restrictions:
  • Area chat
  • Global Chat
  • Trade Chat
  • Bargaining at the brokerage
  • Party search Whispers (you will be able to whisper to players on your friends list)Limits to: Bank. You cannot deposit gold into your bank. Parcel. You may not send parcel messages, but you may receive them. Friends List. You may not add people to your friends list, but other may add you to their friends list. If someone adds you to their friends list they will show up on your friends list. Whispers. You may only whisper your friends. Guild. You may not apply to or create a guild, but if invited, you may accept a guild invite. Trade Broker. You may not post items for sale, but you may purchase items.
  Other restrictions: No dueling, death matches, or battlegrounds. No trading. You may not transfer to another server.

 

 

The F2P stuff is here:

http://support.enmasse.com/tera/tera-rising-play-for-free

Which doesnt seem too bad. So i will probably give this another try. Didnt actualy get far into it.

 

---

Discovery edition will go away once the F2P hits.

There's 3 levels of accounts after Rising:

1) Free. You get pretty much everything current subscribers get, except for less bank slots and only 2 character slots.
2) Buy the game. You get everything. No subscriptions afterwards.
3) Subscription. You get everything plus a little extra. These things are all made out to max-level farmers and group players, with lower dungeon cooldowns and more dailies.

Tera isn't "great". Lets get that out of the way :)

However, it's good.

The combat is pretty good. It's unique as far as MMO's go due to some quirks, and the "no targetting" of course. Ranged classes still get some targetting spells, however you need to aim to obtain the target, so it still counts :)

Virtually every attack can only be made when standing still. There is a constant consideration to make: Do you get out of harms way, do you get into a better position or do you attack now? This makes the combat a lot more tactical than in other MMO's, where the positional play usually comes from 'fire' (highlighted areas on the floor you need to move out of). It's similar, but different enough to feel very fresh.

The world design is a bit... Strange. The world is divided in 3 seamless parts: The newbie zone and east and west continents. Between those however there's no real loading screens. The game makes use of UE3's streaming feature, you fly into a portal through 'warp space', exiting on the other side without a loading screen. You could compare this with Mass Effect's elevators.

The zone design itself is beautiful, but psychedelic. However, in most places it's still very 'Korean', flat surfaces with very little variation. The dressing is good, but there's very little real variation in how you move through them. Zone transitions also seem to be binary, one moment you're in one theme and the other you're in the next.

The questing is boring, or at least, the quests themselves are. Virtually all quests are 'kill' quests, with barely any exceptions. The combat makes up for this lack in variety though.

To make long things a bit shorter: Tera is a game for you if you a) like the combat and b) like the visuals. Other than those 2, the game is average at best.

Edit: found an interesting paper about the US cases though, i did not know the cases there were not as black-and-white as i thought:

http://www.sutherland.com/files/Publication/104c7fcb-7342-4023-b4c2-5b0776303aa3/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/99a80cf1-3fd7-44a3-9506-1622c382abaf/CunninghamWitkowComputerInternetLawyerJournalJune06.pdf

Even the ProCD case left some nasty wounds on the industry apparently.

For the life of me i cannot find them. For some reason all my searches lead to US cases which are irrelevant here.

I only know of 2 cases for certain: One in the UK which ended 'undecided' (iirc the company settled with the claimant) and one in Germany where the claimant (customer) won the case.

That said - EU law and German law is there. Cases or not, judges can't exactly ignore it and make up their own laws.

---

Originally posted by niceguy3978

---

Originally posted by ChromeBallz

---

Originally posted by Roxtarr

---

Originally posted by banzai014

---

Originally posted by Roxtarr
Re-read the Terms and Conditions you agreed to and you may find you have no ground to stand on.

---

The EULA means nothing in Europe

---

So there are no Terms and Conditions for players in Europe?  How can you plan an MMO without agreeing to terms and conditions

---

Clickwrap agreements (such as EULAS) are not binding in Europe. This is because such things have to be signed and agreed upon before the payment is made (ie, the sales contract is signed).

Since these 'terms and conditions' cannot be viewed or agreed upon before buying the game (boxed in any case), it is deemed pretty much useless, pointless and illegal in Europe.

Companies can put in all the clickwrap agreements they want but unless they are made available before you pay for the product they are simply not legally binding or valid. Furthermore, changing the terms of the agreement is completely illegal without consulting all parties involved, companies do not get a free pass to change it one-sided as much as they like. This applies to 'normal' contracts aswell, let alone clickwrap agreements which aren't even legal in the first place.

---

 If they are non binding, then what grounds would their be to sue the company?  They are getting the same thing they got before the change (access to the game and future updates through the coin stipend).  What the OP seems mad about is that other people who previously didn't have access to the game because they didn't pay a sub, now have access to the game without paying a sub.  If you had a sub before, either monthly or lifetime, nothing changes except there is a new step to access issues.  I guess adding an extra hoop to jump through is annoying, but I can't imagine it is law breaking.

---

This is exactly why EULA's are pointless. There's no grounds to countersue either. However, please do mind that the lifetime purchasers still got exactly what was advertised: Perpetual access to all the game's features. The way Funcom offers it doesn't matter, the end result does in this case. While the morality is arguable, from a legal standpoint there's nothing to complain about.

---

Originally posted by I_Return

---

Originally posted by ChromeBallz
There's no "case by case" here. you sign a sales contract by buying a product. Changing that contract after it has been signed by way of a clickwrap agreement is illegal.

This is what has been decided in every case about clickwrap agreements that has ever gone to court, but since so few people actually stand up for their rights most companies still pretend that they're fully legal since most people actually believe that. Or, they don't, but they know that it's a stupidly big hassle to actually do something about it.

---

Prove it with cases and decisions please.

---

---

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1250343
The European Union provision is less permis-sive and provides for striking down terms that are merely unfair. Article 3 provides that a contract terms shall be regarded as unfair “if contrary to the requirement of good faith, it cause a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations.”

---

EU law, a German law is even more specific about this.

Do mind that the UK s much more relaxed about this, though this is also still an issue concerning EU jurisdiction in these cases where the parties involvled in the cases rarely, if ever, took the step to EU courts to verify their steps and procedures.

Also check this document:

http://www.ivir.nl/publications/guibault/ERPL_2011_6.pdf

At best, the entire thing is still under debate in Europe. It has never definitively been validated as legal.