Originally posted by busdriver

Originally posted by Coldren

Originally posted by busdriver

Originally posted by Coldren

Originally posted by busdriver

32/64=50% FYI kthxbai

 

32 ^ 2  (32 * 32) = 1024
64 ^ 2 (64 * 64)  = 4096

4096/1024 = 4, so 1/4th is open.

Epic math fail, chief.
 

 

Are you mentally challenged?

I know enough to know that a squared value isn't the same as multiplying a value by 2. That's what the little hat (^) is for.  
 

32 = 50% of 64 - True

32 ^2 = 50% of 64 ^2 = False
 

 

Excellent. Now go ask your mom what square kilometer means.

Gah. Foot meet mouth. Was reading it as 32 ^ 2 km rather than 32 km ^ 2.

My epic math reading fail. :(

Originally posted by busdriver

Originally posted by Coldren

Originally posted by busdriver

32/64=50% FYI kthxbai

 

32 ^ 2  (32 * 32) = 1024
64 ^ 2 (64 * 64)  = 4096

4096/1024 = 4, so 1/4th is open.

Epic math fail, chief.
 

 

Are you mentally challenged?

I know enough to know that a squared value isn't the same as multiplying a value by 2. That's what the little hat (^) is for.  
 

32 = 50% of 64 - True

32 ^2 = 50% of 64 ^2 = False
 

Originally posted by busdriver

32/64=50% FYI kthxbai

32 ^ 2  (32 * 32) = 1024
64 ^ 2 (64 * 64)  = 4096

4096/1024 = 4, so 1/4th is open.

Epic math fail, chief.
 

Originally posted by Toquio3

there is nothing to spoil for me, I simply wont buy the game. When I pay for a single player game, I want to play the entire game. Being milked is for cows and other such creatures.

Well, you can certainly just not play the game, but if you play an MMO, your argument holds no water. 

Expansion packs and content are added to games continuously. Are you still playing any MMO with the original content? Why is that different? Just because the ad comes from one npc, rather than gate appearing in a zone, or people returning with gear you can never have unless you buy it?

I don't see what sense your argument makes if you play an MMO.  You're being milked there worse than anywhere, because to be competitive or to even have others to play with, you generally are almost forced into buying it.

There's absolutely 0 need for you to buy the DLC in Dragon Age. The whole game can be played without it.

But then again, nothings stopping you from simply not playing. It is, of course, your perogative.
 

Originally posted by Toquio3

Do the npcs that sell quests for real money add to that immersion?

Did expansion packs that added content after the game launches break your immersion, then?

It's simply a delivery method. Although I bought the DLC before I even got to that point, so I didn't see the npc "Sell" it, I personally look at it as a superior method than putting an ad on a website.

Imagine if someone never went to a games website to see if there was new content/expansion packs.. They're going along, maybe on a second or third try for the game, but this time there's an NPC they've never seen before. The NPC informs them there is a new journey ahead of them, but it tells them about buying the expansion pack...

I don't see the harm in this. It's sounds to me like it's the smoothest way to incorporate new content, old content, and real world sales within the game world.

I certainly hope something like this doesn't spoil the rest of the game for you... Unless you're prone to let small issues outweigh more important things. Suppose it's about personal perspective.

 

Originally posted by Sikgamer

I heard very well of both SWG and UO, but I also heard both games were killed by bad updates which dumbed down the game. I don't know, I'll have a look at them both, UO in particular. Although I'm not a huge fan of isometric games, I'll see how it plays out. Shame I didn't get to try these games in their 'glory days' as people say.

I can't speak for SWG. H owever, in regards to UO, can't really say anything has been "dumbed down", but actually made more complex.

The key things you'll hear about in UO are the Trammel/Fel split, and Age of Shadows. Trammel/Fel was PvP related. Players who didn't like the open-pvp nature of the game. This doesn't sound like an issue to you.

However, Age of Shadows, a lot of people didn't like because it made the game more itemized. It used to be you had about 5 tiers of magic items with small variations. Supremely Accurate Katana of Vanquishing is an example - The accurate part determined it's chance to hit, and vanquishing determined how much damage, and there were armor equivilents. AoS actually made the game more like a modern MMO, in that it went from this simple nature to having a wide array of properties.

Crafting was important in that time, in that GM gear was great for most things, but AoS made the system infinitely more complex. This isn't necessarily a bad thing if you like crafting (As I do). Running BoDs, doing heartwood quests for recipies, crafting runics, and mastering all the skills that improve your primary crafting skill (to say nothing of harvesting skills) makes for a LOT to offer a crafter.

I essentially play WoW for fun, modern, go PvE or PvP that's smooth as silk and in 3D. I go to UO when I feel like crafting, creating a house,  roleplaying, or socializing.

You're mileage may vary, of course.

I'd say UO, but if graphics are an issue for you, I've got nothing.

The crafting system is incredibly complex. So many trade skills, harvesting skills, and endvours related to it (BoD system, runics, Heartwood Quests), it'd make your head spin.

The player housing is the best in any MMO bar none, although there are no offical "cities" or "forts", but guilds tend to go for plots of land close to one another and make them unofficial "Cities".

And if you find the right group of people, the community is amazing.

But, old, old 12-year-old systems that are amazingly more complex than anything out there. Graphics, even in the new client, are terrible, and some things older players have you will never get based on the account age.

I'd say give the free trial a go, but expect 0 hand holding, this is one of, if not the first successful MMO - You're going to have to try to learn things.

Originally posted by Zorgo

Oh thank God Zorn,
 

For a second I thought I'd have to play with my friends - i'm so glad it's not needed.

Never had friends move to a different server, or find out that friends already rolled somewhere else, and don't want to pay $35 a character for a transfer, or whatever Blizzard charges, or start over?

This is better for those with "friends", not worse. Better way to make them, too, because with the Battle.net implementation, you'll soon be able to chat and likely purposely form groups from other servers.

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

Doesn't this feel sort of like a lobby game, like Diablo or something, within the WoW game?

Why do you think they're making everyone create Battle.net accounts?

This is the first step to Cross-Server integration. Right now it will only work with PUGS, but I'm sure it's a small step away from being able to chose who you group with from other servers to run instances. Cross-server communication too. But hopefully, not cross-server trading, but I can see that happening.

 

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by Coldren

Zerging and population balance were still an issue, but that is an issue in ANY PvP system

You meant just open/world PVP systems, right?

No, I meant all.

Even WoW had issues with population for instanced PvP - That's why they formed the Battlegroups in the first place. Population imbalances left some sides waiting for 5+ hours to get into a BG.

Then there was Wintergrasp, which was time-based open-world PvP, and still they had issues with not only lag, but population. Now it's on a timer AND essentially an instance because you have to que up to join, and you can't fly into the area if you're not in the que. And Zerging was definitely an issue on top of that - Didn't take 100 horde much time to steamroll the 25 alliance members defending.

Every PvP system will have some form of these issues. Even if you control when/where characters can be made, you can't control when they leave.

Open PvP has it's issues, no doubt. Although it seems here many like the idea. While some of us remember it fondly, I can't help but think of all the negatives true open PvP brings (And I'm a PvP'er by nature here, but I understand the other side of the argument).

However, my proposition is, people don't necessarily want pure "Open" PvP as much as "Persistent, Balanced" PvP.

Prime example? DAoC Battlegrounds. They weren't instanced, you fought for something, and it was gaurnteed you were fighting people within a certain range of level or available skills/HP. You always knew where to go for a fight if you wanted it. Sure, you could run out to the frontiers and try to help, but you were mostly fodder.. It was POSSIBLE, but not smart. Zerging and population balance were still an issue, but that is an issue in ANY PvP system and it wasn't compounded by other problems traditional open PvP systems have.

If WAR had had Battlegrounds instead of Scenarios, it would have faired a LOT better. Anything on a timer has no meaning.

Originally posted by Methos12

True, but if I'm going to play a LoK game then I'd like it to be involved with the actual games that made me a fan of the series in the first place. I mean sure, in every setting there are these periods of history and important events which are left unexplored, entire eras even in LoK, but playing during those times which are so removed from the events of LoK games would be like playing in a game that has very loose connections with the source material... even name-only if pushed to extreme.

Again, I can understand that, but there's lots of elements that tie back to the game that would feel like you're still in that same world, would allow for an MMO, and  still not not break canon.

In the time before the Hilden where defeated, you can still involve  some characters from canon, such as Yanos and Vorador (Human before becoming a vampire). All before the time of the Soul Reaver was forged.

In the time of the Sarafan war, Kain is alive and well, as are all characters, except Raziel and all of Kain's other lieutenants would still be humans under the command of Moebius. Lots of battles between those two factions, and if I'm not mistaken, In Legacy of Kain 2: Blood Omen, the Saraphan, Hilden, and Vampires were all in the same time period, so 3 factions could be an option.

IF (And that's a big "If") the developers could keep the characters actions and personalities strictly to as they are in the cannon (Perhaps major faction leaders you rarely interact with, like Thrall/Jania in WoW), the battles could go on between them, without the canon ever really being infringed upon..

Of course, this is all a pipe dream.. Don't think the writer of the LoK series even works at Eidos anymore. She left some time ago..

Ah well. Good discussion.


 

Originally posted by Methos12

Ironically, despite me actually being a HUGE LoK fan, I'm strictly against it being made into an MMO. Why? Mainly because previous games, although they have given us quite an insight into the world of Nosgohth, it's factions and other things, have remained very story centered and have made use of few characters, but have in exchange explored these characters to unbelievable details.

That's the "problem" with LoK, at least when it comes down to exploring the idea of turning it into an MMO - it's too focused on already existing characters and their stories (and... you know, it deals with time travel and you don't mess with that) aka. it's basically impossible to introduce some random characters (our PCs, that is) and have them actually matter something or contribute anything sensible and useful. Perhaps if the game was situated during some alternative timeframe (for example, in the early days of Kain's rule or something), maybe.

I can see your concern, but I beg to differ on one small point. There is a lot of gaps in the lore that an MMO could fill nicely.

There is little if any exploration of the war that exterminated all of the vampires except for Kain, up until the assaination of Ariel and cumbling of the pillars.. LoK 1, I think touched on it (Not sure, haven't played it in quite some time), but not much. In Soul Reaver 2, I think it was, when Raziel fights himself, it was drawing to a close.

Where was the war? Where were the Hilden in all of this? Who did all the killing?  Or even better, go to the time period revealed in the temples in SR2 on the paintings on the wall, where the Soul Reaver was eventually forged. Before the vampires defeated the Hilden.. Surely humans must have existed in that time period, but it never explicitly says they did.

While I agree, using characters directly derived from the canon might have issues, but certainly, in all of Nosgoth, from the time of the war between the Hilden and the Vampires, or the Vampires and the Sarafan, there must have been a lot of nameless soldiers in that war.

Wanting Kain and Raziel voiceovers? That's my selfish part. They have awesome voices behind them that I'd make just about any excuse to hear again.

 

Don't know if it's been said:


Legacy of Kain

*Amazing, rich lore (with hopefully, equally well written dialog)
*The battle between the Vampires, The Hilden, and Saraphan is prime material for a DAoC-ish Trifecta
* Kain and Raziel voice overs please!

This actually has more potential material than WoW did with the Warcraft games before it, if you think about it.

Good article, with a lot of great points.

Again, as stated, couldn't agree more with your #1 and #2 choices, UO and DAoC.

Everyone who ever played DAoC knows why RvR was awesome, and they keep repeating it. Then Mythic ignored it with WAR to make it a bastard child of WoW and DAoC that no one really wanted.. Where are the destructible keeps? The perssitant battlegrounds? Free-moving siege? Did you guys completely forget everything you learned from DAoC for t his crap?

As for UO, well, I like many others could spout on for hours. Come back after what is now 12 years, and see how many people still at least occasionally play their current MMO. You'll never find a higher degree of customer loyalty.

As a side note, I also noticed, what is it about Trinsic that makes people so loyal? It's the only city mentioned in message boards with any connotation of citizenship....Yeah, Trinsic is awesome. My entire guild was focused around that city.. I've been resubbed for about a year or so now to UO.. I've spent well over 90% of my time there, crafting, working up skills, getting houses closer to the city gates, demolishing, repeating..  Sadly, all by myself... But since I"m in Trinsic, it's like I don't care!

Excellent article, and I agree with the heart of it, but I will say this:

From this point on, it's going to be difficult to impossible to not make the comparison to WoW for the very reason stated - It's a language. And as has been pointed out in the past, we think in language, so changing not just the terminology but changing the very way people think about MMO's is not going to be so simple by just introducing niche games.

The comparison with the McDonald's fails because no critic uses language unique to McDonalds (Or to be more accurate, whatever came before McDonald's to compare to the EQ reference in relation to WoW). They don't say, "The Big Mac in Burger King is the Whopper". They use an entirely different language to make comparisons.

I'd have to say UO because of the crafting, RP potential, open skill system, housing, and community.

DAoC is a very close second. RvR of this type hasn't been matched on any level yet that I've experienced.

Originally posted by VultureSkull

I have not played DAoC but do you trust Mythic can deliver DAoC2?

See how badly they messed WAR which came after DAoC. With all their experience with DAoC they still managed to mess up badly with WAR.

What is worrying is that if  the success of DAoC was down to 3 realms, (if being the operative word here) then Mythic either knew WAR would fail or think they could make it work with two. Either way they failed. Hence putting the success of DAoC 2 in serious doubt.

What was the lag like in DAoC and if it was not bad then why is it so bad in WAR?

They messed up with WAR for several reasons:
 

1) They were bound by the IP. Everything they did had to go through Games Workshop. EVERYTHING. With DAoC, they had complete freedom. It was their own IP, and they did what they wanted.

2) 3 realms DOES make a big difference. Tension between 2 sides is predictable. Throwing in a third makes things a lot more interesting. Had you played DAoC, you might have known that.

3) They were trying to compete with WoW and counting on the IP alone to make it happen. They dropped everything unique about DAoC to make it as close to WoW as possible, just with different skins. There are no destructable keeps in WAR, no third faction, classes have mirrors on either side only with minor differences, and the attempt at unique trades was a  horrible failure (DAoC's weren't GREAT, but the major ones like weaponcrafting and the like were at least THERE).

4) They focused TOO much on PvE, not enough on RvR. Anyone who played DAoC can tell you, originally, PvE was bare minimum. People would spend days in Albion (Before Shourded Isles) waiting to get a tree group in Lyoness so they could finish to 50.. Then getting your class armor for RvR (And it was THE RvR armor to have in it's day) took at least 30 people, but you needed to do it to be competitive. Everyone helped because they all knew eventually they'd need it too.

5) Global cooldowns.. You didn't have that in DAoC. That makes a BIG difference in a PvP game.

6) Casters could be interrupted in DAoC..  That makes a BIG difference in a PvP game.

7) Did I mention destructible keeps? I know everyone loved old frontiers, and in a lot of ways, that's what the new keeps in WAR are like, with only certain points of entry, but I LOVED that I could take down almost any wall and go through it in NF. That was the one big selling point for NF in my opinion.

 

Originally posted by MMO_Doubter

They wouldn't spring for a new engine for Warhammer. Why would you expect them to do so for DAoC?

They don't need a new engine for DAoC.

Both WAR and DAoC use different versions of the Gamebryo engine. The differences in version can make a big difference, as is evident when you look at screens of DAoC and screens of Warhammer. Texture processing capabilities, poly counts, resolution.. This engine is just fine as long as you implement it correctly.

And has everyone already forgotten the easter egg on the Chaos side in WAR? If you jump in to the portal at one of the starting Chaos zones, you're transported to one of the Albion starting zones just outside of Camelot (Can't even remember the name, it's been so long), only the ENTIRE TOWN is redone in the new version of the engine..... And it is GLORIOUS to look at.

Not only is updating DAoC with the WAR version of the Gamebryo engine a good idea that should be persued.. They've already shown it can be done. It's almost a foregone conclusion that they will at this point.

What they do with game mechanics (Balancing classes, abilities, Old/New Frontier hybrids - Does anyone NOT like the fact that walls are destructible in NF?) is the bigger question, and if it warrants a "2" moniker.

I do like the idea of coming back to Camelot though. If they do just do an upgrade and somehow revert some aspects of the game, I hope they keep all the zones, even if it's just for random PvE, because I'd love to see SI, ToA, and Catacombs areas done in the new engine.

Originally posted by snicol

Thinking about coming back, i have an account from Jan 98 still retrievable. My question is what is the population like on GL shard? And if its kinda defunct do they have server transferablity? Thanks all cant wait to get back ingame.

Sorry, can't speak for GL, but I can tell you, you can buy Transfer tokens for characters. If you go to the site below, you can buy a transfer code for a character.

http://www.uogamecodes.com/store/prod_detail.asp?ProdID=UOCHARTRANSFER&CartID={0DE63ADC-5197-4B57-9BC8-7333DFE4470D}&PromoID=996

Hope this helps.