Originally posted by ricefarmer

 seriously, i know western developers usual have horrific animation when it comes to combat but this is terrible, static.. and boring looking.. the space combat looks terrific in comparison.. watch any of the ground unit combats.. they are ugly ass hell too, typical of western games... something needs to change! it looks like a laggy pc game from the 90's

I really hate to say this, because it's funny and.. really annoying when I'm watching an episode of Star Trek.  How often does someone use cover effectively?  Not very often does that happen, I saw an episode where one of the security officers ran face first into multiple klingons with weapons drawn.  He knew they were in there waiting and he didn't care, it's as if he wanted to die.

In a lot of the episodes I've seen, no matter what series.. combat has looked stiff, and rarely with much strategy involved.  I hate to say it, but maybe they are staying true to what we've seen in shows.  I'm sure things will get better. 

Originally posted by toria

i must be the only one who doesnt like wow.

You are not alone.  In fact, a lot of people who play WoW don't like it.  There's just nothing out there that piques their interest enough to leave..

Brainwashing I say!

Originally posted by Mrbloodworth

 

Club penguin is one of the most successful MMO's of all time. Again, the responses here just show how jaded, and simply uninformed the experts  Forum users here on the MMORPG forums are. The game may not be fore you, however that means jack shit to its success or popularity.

 

Learn to distinguish the two.

 

The fact the almost no one has heard of this game in modern MMO circles proves that it shouldn't be here.  I don't think anyone is saying it wasn't successful.  But it is a childrens networking device.  Not a real MMO.  Very few on this site even care about it and most of the very few will never play it.  It does not deserve to be on the list.  Most of the people who play it probably are completely unaware of this site or most of the other games out there. 

You might get a nose bleed way up on that mountain, I'd suggest you come down.

I'm sorry, but this is a complete sham.  Okay, not completely, but there are perhaps only a couple games from this list that actually deserved it.  Lord of the Rings and Aion, and most certainly Guild Wars.  Those three are excellent choices.  However, can we look at the rest of them for a moment?  Keep in mind, these are my opinions.  Not a personal attack.

Vanguard might deserve this spot only because it miraculously managed to rise from the ashes after an abyssmal launch to actually be able to draw enough subscriptions not to have to shut it down.  Definately a fence choice.

Fallen Earth was released fairly recently and does not deserve making this list.  I'm sorry, but shoving newly released titles into a top ten of the WoW era is downright disrespectful to the other games that have launched and succeeded.  Bad choice.  Disrespectful.  I whole-heartedly disagree.  Picked primarily because no one has made a post-apocalypctic MMO.

Atlantica Online is a FTP that isn't even king of the FTP.  While I admittedly do not know much about this game, I'll say this - There is a reason I don't know much about this game.  I'm not saying this was a bad game, nor am I saying that it wasn't successful for what it is.  What I am saying though, is that with games such as Age of Conan, Warhammer, Dungeons & Dragons and Everquest 2(They launched around the same time).. this is a real tough title to add to this list.

Pirates of the Burning Sea was a launch failure according to what I've read and testimonials from my friends, although opinions are just that.  It has had nowhere near the success nor was it the quality of the afor mentioned titles.  I have a feeling you picked this for the list simply because it wasn't attempted successfully in the past.  And it's success is up for debate.  Again.

Maplestory actually isn't such a bad choice.  A lot of people are playing it or have played it in the past.  It's free.  I guess I actually do agree on this one.  Maybe not it's position, but you could do worse.  And you have..

Aion has just recently been released.  But, the overall quality of it is tremendous.  That cannot be denied.  If it weren't for the anti-western market appeal, this game could have quickly challenged the top spot... and still might just do that. 

Club Penguin is a childrens game.  It is a social networking device.  It is NOT a real MMO.  Sure, they've made money off of millions of idiotic parents across the world.  To each his/her own.  While the massive success of this is hard to dismiss.. this should have not made the list.  You've admittedly claimed that monetary success was not the primary factor in your selections.  What was the factor here?  Did you have fun playing this game with a bunch of 6 year olds?  Did you marvel over the design or technological achievements?  I'll answer this for you, and I think I'm going to hear thousands of echoes as I type this out from the rest of the readers.  NO!  Not that I'm anyone important, but you lost a lot of credibility with that selection.

Wizards 101 follows up the worst selection ever.  Are you really saying that Wizards 101 beat out the likes of Warhammer?  Age of Conan?  If you are, well.. I won't go on, because I said I wouldn't attack you as a person.  One does have to ponder your thought process here.  You want an IT game from indy circles?  Try Eve Online.  I know it was released prior to WoW, but seriously, how many kids actually play Wizards?  Even 8 year olds play WoW now.  A dying game gets the #3 slot no less!  Warhammer should have gotten this spot.

The #1 and 2 selections are spot on.  Guild Wars is a great game in it's own right, and to tack on the fact that its FTP.  You can't get much better.  Lord of the Rings will have subscribers until the game servers are shut down 20 years from now.  Or unless Lord of the Rings 2 is released.  It's unfortunate because there are several games that don't get recognition because they were released a few weeks to a few months before WoW, but have managed to survive the WoW era and prosper.  And then there are the obvious AAA games that get left out to garbage that wouldn't be on my top 50 to play list.

However, this is all my opinion.  Agree or not.

Originally posted by Zorndorf

Do not blame WOW that other products can't reach and turn out the same success rate.

The more you will blame WOW, the more you reinforce the theory that it stands out miles above the rest.

"WOW is the most succesful game in revenus in the complete history of video gaming".

No other single product comes even close.

The reason is simple: out of the 100% market of paid subscription based MMO's, 80% choose to play WOW.

Or did you find ANY other game in the last 30 years that generated more than 200 million dollars on a YEARLY basis?

Nope, well... WOW makes around 1.2 BILLION dollars on a yearly revenu.

It makes up for the standard of mmo play. Like it or not.

 -----> You don't like that standard? Pity, you represent 2 % of the people, because the other 18% are badly fabricated copies of what Blizzard offers in PVE/PVP/World design and simply ... great gameplay. 80% of the complete market that consists of what 50+ sub based games ...

Learn to respect the majority.

I'll start off this way.  If we respected the majority, the USA wouldn't exist.

I was waiting for the first fanboi post of this thread, I knew it was coming.  Arguing points that have nothing to do with the topic of this post, just to look at the words you type.  WoW is successful on a scale that has not been reached by any other game developer in the history of the industry.  We all know this.  The OP knows it, as well as everyone else that is reading.  Why you have to hammer home things that are already known is just a silly thought in my opinion.  The vast majority of gamers are playing WoW.  And why not?  It is really the best out there.  However, not once did you mention reasons why.  Well, I'll give you something to chew on.

I quit WoW over a year ago when I realized how incredibly mind numbing it was to have to devote the rest of my life away from work to a game in order to be successful at it.  I understand you have to put work in.  I did.  I was geared out in T2 before burning crusade.  I bought it, grinded to 70.  And while I was grinding rep one day, I asked myself..  "Why am I doing this?".  I didn't have an answer, and have not played since.  It's the same game over and over.  It's not my preferred game, and that is all.. but what I'm really getting at is..

And this should make you think..  You are right, Blizzard has so many subscriptions because there is not a better game out there.. WoW is a huge success.  However, think about it on the other side.  Blizzard has so many subscriptions because there is not a better game out there.  Does that mean WoW is great?  Or.. does that mean the MMO industry as a whole is nothing but garbage, with the king of garbage at the top?  Think about it.  We have quite a few single player games that are amazing.  There are revolutionary ideas all the time.  MMO's are expensive.. but you'd think someone would go out there and put that same kind of effort and creativity into a MMO.  Just because instances PvP and PvE is successful doesn't mean you can't add other things into the mix. 

Problem is, these indie companies are trying to be TOO different.  Full loot is fine.  Player run economies are fine.  Seemless, instanceless worlds, sure.  But, some of these companies are going way off into left field, attempting to do something radical.  I have plenty of ideas.. Unltimately, the path away from WoW is going to be difficult and long,  No one is doing it right.  And that.. is unfortunate.

U3 engine is capable of some amazing things.  Though, no MMO can use all of the features because.. well, it's a MMO.  There's a big difference between developing a single player game and a multiplayer game with thousands of players in the same game world.  Things have to be sacrificed. 

I'd also like to reveal, if any of you aren't aware.  Only low textures are available in beta.  Not to mention, AA, AF, bloom effects and all of those things are not in the game.  The game already looks very nice for a MMO.  And unfortunately I will have to upgrade if I want to max out the graphics. 

Originally posted by kobietruman

you can certainly type but reading seems to another matter completely

again, since pay to play beta started..........(I bought the game, and got beta access for free)

yes there is a beta irc if you paid to be in beta(you can still join the general channel)

patch notes if you paid to be in in beta or find the leaks which probably are an NDA violation(you don't have to be in beta to look at them.  You can download the client or look at them, they are posted on the website)

videos which are leaks from those that have paid to be in beta which are obviously NDA violations(This is a form of communication and a small idea of what the game is like, is it not?)

when was the last newsletter?(A newsletter is redundant with all the information already out there)

the last news item on their own webpage was a copy paste of an apologetic letter from their money handlers

the only recent communication to the general community (those that did not pay so that they would have the cash to conduct their beta) was a statement that closed a thread stating that they were on schedule(They are)

there now, near blackout wouldn't you say?

 

They are in beta.  What kind of information are you looking for exactly?  They have made updates in one form or another after whenever they do anything in beta.  Even the smallest fix is communicated to the public.  Read patch notes.  Read Twitter.  There was a Q&A recently that gave very specific information on what they are implementing within the next week.  All of this information about MO is available for you to filter through.  I can't figure it out, what do you want?  Would it make you sleep at night if they posted on their news page? 

Take it from me, things are going swimmingly, so to speak.  There are still several months in beta left and I see no reason why the game will not be playable come the holidays when it is scheduled to release.  In fact, their biggest problem is server and patcher performance, so that should tell you something.

Considering if I wasn't in beta, I'd have access to all of the information that I have now is proof that there hasn't been a blackout.  You're just lazy.

Originally posted by -Zeno-

That looks great.  Now post some FPS screenshots with 50+ people fighting each other.  If it can handle it, great job developers!  If it can't, just another AoC failure.  Not everyone can afford SLI video cards for $500 a card or a $3000 computer.

There is a price to pay.  You either have great looks, bad multiplayer gameplay, or bad looks, and awesome multiplayer gameplay.

The game is going to look good, no doubt,  However, your GPU doesn't always have an affect on how well you can handle 50 people in the same area.  A lot of that has to do with memory and how well the game is coded.  The most powerful computer in the world will have problems with a crappy server code.

And BTW.  It's the U3 engine.  It's scalable and I have a 9800GTX($130) and run it fairly well, though.. the settings are fairly low, but that's on a 24in monitor.  1920x1280.

Does a giraffe have wings?

Originally posted by kobietruman

yes, they seemed quite open until the pay to play beta started

almost a complete news blackout since then

the game seems to be in a complete mess but devs have stated they are on schedule to release this year - pity

 

Okay, I can't sit back and watch people conitinue to lie.  You are lying through your damn teeth and either you know it already or you are simply too damn lazy to actually do some research. 

There has been no blackout.  There is a mortal online twitter page, use it.  There is a mortal online official forums page, use it.  There is a mortal online IRC channel, use it.  There is a youtube list of videos showing plenty of beta footage, use it.  Do you see the trend?  It's real damn easy to say that there has been a blackout if you are ignorant to the fact that there is an INTERNET where you can find all of this information.  Oh, by the way, try checking out the patch notes, which are conveniently posted on the 'download beta' section of the mortal online official website (use it).  They are posted for every single new client that is released.  There has been several, not one, several interviews as well as Q&A's on IRC.  There is a ton of information out there, you simply have to attempt to look for it.

I won't give details, but the game is not in a complete mess.  Things are very well controlled and if you read the PATCH NOTES, you will know that they have just introduced a simplified magic system as well as the introduction of vendors and currency to the game.  The only issue I have with SV is the fact that there is no real good way to report bugs.. and for some people, reporting bugs is impossible, barring sending an e-mail to starvailt directly.  Whch will get you nowhere, fast.

Stop talking from your behind.

Originally posted by Cristina1

Originally posted by joshe

 

---

Originally posted by Abloec
Someone on the offical forums posted this link and wanted to relay this to all of you of more SS's of the game. Just to give everyone an understanding of the future possibilities of these screenshots, Speedtree hasn't been put into the game yet so grass and trees will be totally revamped.
 
http://www.quadsoftware.com/index.php?m=section&sec=product&subsec=editor&target=editor_testimonials

---

Those are truly official sshots, but:
1. made using speedtree 4, now SV uses v 5 ;)
2. no antialiasing yet
3. trees & grass ... well, all of them are already in (MO beta v4.x brought more grass and some bug fixes)

 

Maybe some of those whiners will understand that its still beta ;)

 

please stop spreading lies. Mortal Online is not using speedtree version of any kind, they have made their own trees. They have access to speedtree 4.something that came with Unreal engine but the devs repeatedly said thats they are too resource heavy to be used. Speedtree 5 are better in terms of performance,  but they are not part of Epic's Unreal engine yet, when Epic integrate them then MO devs will evaluate them.

You stole my thunder. =P

This is all true.

Originally posted by Zarynterk

To be honest, I could care less about the NDA seeing as people who pre-ordered the game are getting hosed in obtaining refunds. However, that is not what this thread is about and we will save that for another time.

 

I have played the game, and from the 3 times that I have actually been able to login...and from the 6 hours of playtime, there is one thing that worries the hell out of me. It is the similarities to the beta of Vanguard. This game looks incredible at first, so you are taken aback visually. However, thats where the honeymoon ends. In my time in the game, I ran from one side of the actual gaming "world" to the other...and to be honest its about as big as...the barrens (if that). I was not able to travel farther due to running into an invisible wall...this wall encircled the entire "world" of the game and literally took about 30 mins to travel across. This is where the comparison to Vanguard comes in, for those that remember the start of VG, it was a huge empty world. MO's world is not huge however it is completely empty. Devoid of almost any type of mob, except for pigs, deer, and bison looking things which number about 20 in all..At this level of production to date, I expect volumes more...

 

The combat is decent, much like what you would expect from an Oblivion type mmo. It is a tad clunky, and slow to respond however being one of the first twitch based mmos I would tend to forgive the issues.  The armor and such is visually pleasing, more realistic which I prefer.

 

I would have to say that overall out of 10 I would give the game a 4... And before people start up with the "its only beta, blah, blah" I would ask themselves to think back on all the games that they have beta tested. Those games were at a point where they could be released and survive to a certain extent (SWG for example). Good or bad, there was at least a finished world where you can see where the game is headed...not just an empty "zone-world". And that in itself is the issue with Mortal Online. If the beta is any example of where the actual "status" of the game is...it should be pushed back at least another couple years. Just my 2 cents...

The fact that is is a beta is actually a real excuse.  In fact, it's obvious that you missed the part where Starvault released their beta goals, and right up in the beginning of the list were the words 'technical beta'.  Over the past month and a half, they have been testing the patcher, login, character creation, and server stability.  And at this time, it's pretty rare that I'm not able to log in and stay logged in for a significant amount of time.  So again, I'll remind you that the initial beta phase has been focused heavily on getting the server running as smoothly as possible.  After all, would it be any fun playing the best game ever made while crashing and getting booted every five minutes from the server? 

The reason for the world being emply is the exclusion of a LOD system that will greatly enhance your performance while allowing them to start adding content.  I'm not sure when you wrote this, but if all goes according to plan, Starvault will be adding massive amounts of content in one weeks time.  It seems like people are so used to seeing these major companies release 'marketing beta' access, and it seems as if most people don't understand the difference.  There is a lot of work that has to be done, they are a small team.  They have limited resources, why do you think we all have to pre-order?  Win-Win situation for them.  They get money to further development and they get free beta testers that are actually fans of the game and want to see a product that they can be proud of.

I'm not allowed to talk about anything specific.  I pre-ordered the game though, so you can draw your conclusions.  I will say that I am pleased with what I've seen for the most part.  Is it perfect?  Nothing is perfect.  By the way, the reason it seems small is because they are only allowing players to test a little less than half of the starting continent.  So, that 30 minutes could become and hour or more.  That is running time.  It can be shortened by magical means or by horseback. 

Also, Vanguard was released in a state of utter garbage and in some cases, still is garbage.  Mortal Online is at least two months away from launch.  Honestly, I wouldn't expect it until early to mid-december at the earliest.  Their timeline is the fourth quarter for release, they haven't said or done anything that would argue against that either.  It's so frustrating that most people can't see past their first impression.  All they do is they look and they scream bloody murder about anything.  Even if there isn't much to complain about.  I'm not saying to give them a free ride because they are an indi company.  I'm saying let them do their jobs.  If it's released and it's not in a playable state, then I can understand.  Though, it's in a playable state now.. even if most of the features aren't in.  So.. yeah.

Originally posted by Galadourn

...that many people are waiting MO just to play another CS arena as an online battleground?

This is a troll post if I've ever seen one.  The only things that are similar is that they are first person.  Might as well say CS is trying to be EQ without the massive world and round based combat.  See how idiotic that sounds?  Or even better.  EQ is trying to be a DOOM clone with a massive persistant world.  I could continue, but I'm sure you understand now how dumb that was.

Alpha pre-order scandal?  I have no clue what that is supposed to mean. 

Originally posted by Consensus

The fact that a game that has only just started beta can EVEN BE COMPARED to a game which has been out for ages and has already had an expansion shows exactly how much better MO is.

Sorry but comparing which is better now is stupid. which will be better? in the end depends, MO has some development time left depends on what they manage in that time. I'm betting it comes out just as buggy and unpollished as anyone who is not a fanboy and has been following this genre for a while expects. but still hoping it will become better than darkfall :D cannot and will not play any other type of MMO.

Hehe, I've read IRC chat and there have been several people already claiming MO is 10x superior to DF at this time.  That's pretty funny.  Obviously a bit of fanboi there, but still.

Ideas can be compared.. I also wouldn't consider Darkfall being out for 'ages'.  Darkfall was released in early beta and even with an expansion... I'm not quite sure it's in a state that could be considered launch worthy to most gamers. 

Originally posted by ghoul31

Originally posted by DAS1337

 

UO and Shadowbane did not have many (if any) people running around naked.  I played both games for an extended period of time.  Your other points are valid but you're simply just making things up with that statement,

 

 

In Shadowbane, you didn't lose your weapon or amor when you died. You only lost stuff in your inventory. So there was no reason to go around naked in Shadowbane. SO you aren't making any sense with that statement..

 

I made perfect sense.  You claimed games like this always had people running around naked.  I made a point that in these two games that are very similar in design, running naked rarely (if ever) happened.  Again, I was making a point about people running naked.. which was your original point. 

I fail to see how any other game features has anything to do with that point.  I'm not surprised.  As I said, you'd deflect and argue about something else.. which you managed to fail at as well. 

Originally posted by asdar

I'll probably take a bashing for this, but I liked Darkfall. I love the archery, I like the combat, and I enjoyed the time I spent there. The game had a lot of well documented failings, which is why I quit. They had everything I wanted in a game, but all done at too low a quality to enjoy.

I'm trying to figure out MO, but I can't. I can't figure out from their forums or here what combat will be like. FPS style, click per spell style, aiming, not aiming or a mix. I can't figure out how many real skills there will be. That was a big downside for me with DF, and the lack or real skills.

Plus, and I never thought I'd admit this, I'm wondering about the PvE side of the game. I'm almost pure PvP, but DF was so empty of PvE that I realized you can go too far.

I don't care about graphics too much, DF was fine that way, but I would like better interface tools. If anyone knows that I'd appreciate a heads up on MO's chat and other organizational tools.

Why no one can give you the OBVIOUS similarity between Mortal Onlines combat and Elder Scrolls IV:  Oblivion... I do not know.  If you've ever played it, they are nearly identical.  Same first person view.  Manual blocking.  Timed attacks.  Power attacks.  Same looking archery with ranging arc to your shots.  We haven't seen magic, but I will go out on a limb here and say that they will most likely mold it after Oblivion.  There are some differences.  Well, I can think of one.  Mortal Online has a sprint feature (supposedly) and Oblivion does not.  Combat is going to be slower paced than WoW, but a lot more tactical because you must read and react to your opponent in real time.  There are no auto-attacks.  Your skills with a keyboard and ability to outsmart and outmanuever your opponent will keep you alive, most of the time.  There are a lot of visual effects that you don't see in Oblivion as well.  Sweat covering your face.  Tunnel vision.  Blurry vision what you get the snot knocked out of you.  All very stunning.  There is also a mercy mode, this happens when you get a killing blow that just barely does enough damage to reduce your enemies health below zero.  They will go into a semi-unconcious state where you will have the choice of executing an incredibly brutal finishing move or you may let them go.  There has been some talk about a barter system while in this state as well.  You can tell them to give you one of several items of theirs for their life, or perhaps their gold.  I've been following this game for a LONG time.. and I think I've read and watched every single thing ever in existence about this game.. Hah.  So I believe this all to be fairly accurate.  This is also not a NDA breach.  This information can be found by anyone who's interested looking. 

Originally posted by ghoul31

Originally posted by DAS1337

 

ghoul31 - someone with a very limited understanding of how to compare games...

 

I think that pretty much sums it up =P

 

The companies making these games are vastly different.  While the sandbox ideas are similar, both games are vastly different.  I have a feeling you won't find naked mages running around casting blue orbs at each other either.  Darkfall is a failure.  How about playing the game first and then comparing.  You'll find you're way off.

 

well the MO beta has been a disaster so far. Just like Darkfall has been a disaster. They both are made by small independent developers, with first person view, open pvp, full looting. So in many ways they are exactly the same. So don't give me this nonsense that they are nothing alike.

Oh, and thats another thing they have in common. Arrogant, out of control fanbois like you.

 

Are you in beta?  Do you know?  From what I gather, beta is going as planned.  Things have really smoothed out in comparison to what was going on at beta launch.  There have been no real delays at all.  Companies are similar, indie, limited resources.  Idea's are similar.  However, the execution of both professionalism by SV and the ability to get things done far surpasses that of AV.  And I believe I clearly stated that there were similarities in the post that you so kindly quoted.. thus making you look even more like a tool.

I can sit here and list all the major differences, but you would probably just deflect and argue about something else completely irrelevant.

I think you have a skewed idea of reality.  That's all I can really say.

Originally posted by Yamota

Originally posted by DAS1337

Originally posted by ghoul31

I think that pretty much sums up MO so far.

 

 

ghoul31 - someone with a very limited understanding of how to compare games...

 

I think that pretty much sums it up =P

 

The companies making these games are vastly different.  While the sandbox ideas are similar, both games are vastly different.  I have a feeling you won't find naked mages running around casting blue orbs at each other either.  Darkfall is a failure.  How about playing the game first and then comparing.  You'll find you're way off.

 

A bit of topic but any MMORPG with full loot will have alot of naked people running around and fighting. Biggest weakness of full loot MMORPGs and why it is rarely a good idea.

On topic: Mortal Online seems to be alot more professional than Darkfall ever was (and no this is not an NDA breach since I havent played the game yet). However you still feel that it is an indie company behind it and not a big company with alot of resources, lets hope that does not prevent the devs from releasing a solid game.

UO and Shadowbane did not have many (if any) people running around naked.  I played both games for an extended period of time.  Your other points are valid but you're simply just making things up with that statement,

Who exactly said it was a bad idea?  It was pretty common back in the day and ever since EQ started going away from that, then giving way to WoW, the industry has been so money hungry.. they've just been copying the new trend.  There's plenty of room for a full loot MMO that is successful.  Just look at EVE.

Originally posted by ghoul31

I think that pretty much sums up MO so far.

 

ghoul31 - someone with a very limited understanding of how to compare games...

I think that pretty much sums it up =P

The companies making these games are vastly different.  While the sandbox ideas are similar, both games are vastly different.  I have a feeling you won't find naked mages running around casting blue orbs at each other either.  Darkfall is a failure.  How about playing the game first and then comparing.  You'll find you're way off.