All Posts by starbead

Of course WAR will cause a population hit in WoW. AoC did and it was a giant collection of bugs with some game and some nipple thrown in.

With WAR hitting before WotLK, it will have a solid impact on WoW's numbers (although WoW's numbers will continue to rise based solely on expansion into new territories, i.e. Latin America). Whether it will RETAIN those subscribers is entirely dependent on how the endgame stacks up. The early levels that have been previewed show a strong, polished product, so WAR may be able to keep more of its crowd than Conan has.
 

Of course WAR will cause a population hit in WoW.  AoC did and it was a giant collection of bugs with some game and some nipple thrown in.

With WAR hitting before WotLK, it will have a solid impact on WoW's numbers (although WoW's numbers will continue to rise based solely on expansion into new territories, i.e. Latin America).  Whether it will RETAIN those subscribers is entirely dependent on how the endgame stacks up.  The early levels that have been previewed show a strong, polished product, so WAR may be able to keep more of its crowd than Conan has.

AOC NEEDED a miracle patch.  WAR did not.  It was in good shape for release last weekend.

This phase is all about testing the servers, which are doing their part quite well.  They don't want feedback on how your rig runs the game, they want to see what happens when a ton of people are on screen at once.

The LOTRO preview didn't include high rez graphics, either.  And LOTRO had the most stable launch for a AAA MMO in recent memory. 

"It is 2008...  game companies can do better on customization."

The documentation in the game folder says that character customization is not finalized yet.

If it looks like this during the headstart, I'd start to worry, but for now just get in there and enjoy the fight.

Originally posted by Xephares

The investment was made, and yes, just as in stock, the investment can be taken back.  Once again, the post clearly states that I will sacrifice my chance at Beta for another if it is passed. 

No, the company does not owe me anything, it owes us, the fans, the supporters all of it's success.  Everyone who bought the books, the board games, the miniature figurines, any and all purchase of this title that has added to it's success over the years.  It owes the collective fan base that. 

I understand that the produces of this game have given what they owe, a well designed (in theory) game that has earned the right to speak for this title.  But yes, the investments were made in their entirety, whether people choose to take them back or not is a purely hypothetical examination.  I'm trying to deal with the facts of what is happening, and what I feel should be happening.

Uh, which company are you mad at again.  I am pretty darn sure that Mythic didn't get a retroactive cut of Games Workshop's Warhammer revenue.  Mythic actually paid the people that you say you have supported for years a large chuck of money for the license to make the game.

I bought the pre-order from Target last night myself.  I am having the exact same problem.  I was able to set up my master account but the beta code keeps being called Invalid.

Mine also had an O in it and Q solved the problem.  :)

I know there have been responses, but I wanted to add my voice to the chorus because it is annoying. :(

Most of these points have been apparent for a LONG time. 

We all know that Blizzard today is not the Blizzard of old.  Hell, even Bill Roper let the accolades go to his ego and thought he could ream everyone with Hellgate and they would just eat it up because it came from him.

The group of people who put out the classic Blizzard games is gone.  The group that designed WoW is gone.  Hopefully Carbine won't suffer from the same ego problems that doomed Flagship and NCSoft has helped ensure that they don't have the cashflow problems that killed Castaway.

But if you are still paying Blizzard expecting something different from WoW, you are in denial.

Originally posted by Fishermage

 

---

Originally posted by Retrad
Then why the hell say the first thing in the beginning? That makes it sound like it's just an RPG with online features, like Diablo 2.
 
I'm sticking to my original thought until more info is released.

---

 

If that's the case, then no one will care, it wouldn't be anything "anticipated," and he wouldn't have said the second part.

Sounds like an MMO to me.

And Flagship kept insisting that Hellgate was an MMO.  How'd that work out?

Not all games made need to cater to the casual.

Gaming is a business.  Making games has become outrageously expensive.  Making a big budget game for only the hardcore fans is not good business.  The question is can they make a game that can have the depth that the hardcore players desire, while still appealing to the casual players, who fund the game for the hardcore crowd. 

What happens when a company makes a big budget game for the hardcore only crowd?  Vanguard.

Originally posted by demren

Originally posted by Stradden

Originally posted by demren

Scenarios is just more battleground bs with a different name.  Up until EA's take over and pr blitz RvR has always meant massive open world pvp.  Slowly but ever increasingly they have been changing the definition of RvR to mean something more scenario oriented.   In press releases and demonstrations RvR is now about scenarios mostly and nothing is mentioned about open pvp unless someone presses the issue directly.   With what over 12 scenarios that we do know about in WAR not including the cityseige scenarios, it seems most likely that, for those of us expecting open world pvp, the rug has been quietly pulled out from under us.

 

Actually RvR means the active fighting of one realm against another.

WAR accomplishes this in a number of ways, including scenarios. Because fighting in scenarios helps your side in the overall RvR battle, I would count it as RvR. The problem lies in thinking that this is the ONLY form of RvR.

Having had the chance to play the game a couple of times, I can tell you that the game's RvR goes way beyond the scenarios and encompasses almost all aspects of the game. Focusing on this one point seems to be taking it out of context.

 

 

True but that still doesn't change the fact that what has been implied, meaning when one hears the word RvR, has changed. 

Yes in the starkest terms it means realm vs. realm.   But what was implied by that term when it was used for the last 7 years was massive open world fighting.  Never before now ,has it referred to battleground, scenarios or whatever you would like to call them.  

One thing Mythic has said for the past 7 years was that the reason there were no battlegrounds in the endgame of DAOC was because it detracted from RvR. 

And yes there is many aspects beyond just scenarios, but when all of these aspects are pulling from single pool of people on a single server one aspect is gonna suffer while another flourishes.  I can safely say we know what happened to world pvp in wow right?  Who is to that is not gonna happen here?

 

World PvP was never a part of WoW.  Battlegrounds were always the plan.  They just did not make it in at release.

A bunch of 60s fighting just outside Tarren Mill for no real reason and no gain was not anything remotely like the built in RvR of WAR.  City seiges were never meant to be part of WoW, as evidenced by the fact that any attempt to do so crashed the servers for the first 2 years.  And now, 3 well geared 70's can wipe out all of a capital city.

The market for MMOs has changed.  They have to appeal to the people who want a deep RvR system and those who want to participate, but don't have the time to dedicate to Open World RvR.  It has nothing to do with EA.  A developer simply cannot spend the amount of money that it takes to produce a AAA MMO and appeal only to the hardcore players.  As much as I hate EA, the influx of cash probably did more to help WAR than hurt it. 

I would also dispute the contention that there is "single pool of people on a single server."  There are several different pools of players on any given server.  There are a lot of people craving the RvR system and really looking forward to that aspect of WAR.  There will be an entirely different group of people who aren't able to fully enjoy the RvR, but want to do what they can to help their side.

Of course, Mythic could screw it up.  If the scenarios are the quickest and easiest way to accrue the benefits of RvR, then Open World PvP will suffer.  Just like the stupid Arena system made any other form of PvP in WoW a waste of time.  There are many ways that Mythic can head this off, though.  I think that it would be best to wait and see if scenarios are "easy mode" RvR and detract from the open world experience or if Mythic puts barriers in place to keep the power players from using the casual, instanced system to hasten progression instead of taking in all aspects of the RvR if they have the time.

I would argue that if you have only played for 3 weeks or so and aren't loving it, then it probably is NOT for you.  The first 20 levels of LotRO are simply amazing.  It is after that that the fun level begins to drop off and its flaws become more apparent. 

I was a Founder.  I was paying under $10 a month.  I left at level 45 because of some really tedious game design.  Dol Dinen just flat out stinks.  4 tiers of quest-groups, each going a little further into the same area, with no sub-area distinction.  It was all but impossible to find a group going there who needed the same four quests that you did.  And someone inevitably dropped out wen they got the early DD quest that they needed done.

LotRo for me is a near perfect Middle Earth simulation, but a weak game.  Others will, I am sure, disagree, but that is my take on it.

Originally posted by waverat81

 

Originally posted by starbead

The fanbois have pwned the OP.  Long live Age of Vanguard!

What the hell are you talking about?

 

I dare you to name one game where the starting area is different for everyone every time. 

Dammit I fell for the troll.

I sincerely believe that the OP has been pwned by the Conan fanbois.  If you mean my use of fanboi, I must ask "Who else would be defending such a buggy, unstable, technological nightmare?"

The OP has been effectively dismissed, but that does NOT change the fundamental fact that from a tech standpoint, AoC is the new Vanguard.

The fanbois have pwned the OP.  Long live Age of Vanguard!

Based on what you seem to be looking for, LotRO could well be the game for you.  Its immersion is its strong suit.  If you are a Tolkien geek, then it will be heavenly for you. 

It is relatively bug-free and more stable than any other MMO I've played.

However, its gameplay is lacking.  I got bored and quit at level 45.  The combat and the design of some areas and quests turned me off.  There are open world areas of elites that have multiple waves of quests, so getting a group for Dol Dinen doesn't mean that anyone else is working on the same quests as you.  If you have a regular group to quest with, this irritant is removed, of course.

As to immersion, there is a 15 minute+ quest that is nothing more than following Frodo around listening to him qq.  (I /followed him and made a sandwich).

If you play, I recommend a Minstrel.  Best Healing Class Ever.

AoC won't be a Vanguard level failure, but it will be a bust in my opinion.

Its technical problems are at least as bad as Vanguard's were and its "revolutionary combat"  is just 3 buttons for basic attacks instead of one. 

However, it won't be a Vanguard type failure for one reason:  the kiddies need their gore and nipples.  Nipples will sell as many boxes to lonely teens as the Conan license will pull in.

NDAs are usually lifted when a game goes into Open Beta.  With the numbers of testers available to them, they don't even have to have an Open Beta.  They are doing focused stress testing, so OB might not even be necessary, in which case the NDA probably wouldn't be lifted early.

Somewhere between zero and two.  If early word on AoC is bad, I'll pass on it and see how WAR pans out.  If both seem Vanguardish at launch, I guess I won't be buying any.  WoW has a horrible endgame strategy, but they make leveling more fun than any other game out there, so WotLK is probably on my list.

If Conan rocks, I'll hold off for the full reviews of WAR before deciding whether to give it a try.

Originally posted by smitty0356

Diablo 2 somehow managed to make several classes of warrior and caster that was not in Diablo 1...  They just didn't meld paladin, assasin, and barbarian back into warrior because it was too hard to make them different.  I think this was a rush job since this game keeps being delayed.

OK, now ask yourself how many classes D2 had and how many AoC still has after this change. 

The number of classes needs to manageable, so you don't end up with a garbled mess like the GW class system.