Trending Games | ArcheAge | Guild Wars 2 | WildStar | Warhammer 40K: Eternal Crusade

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,787,322 Users Online:0
Games:723  Posts:6,193,330
Star Vault | Official Site
MMORPG | Genre:Fantasy | Status:Final  (rel 06/09/10)  | Pub:Star Vault
PVP:Yes | Distribution:Download | Retail Price:n/a | Pay Type:Hybrid | Monthly Fee:n/a
System Req: PC | Out of date info? Let us know!

Mortal Online Forum » General Discussion » August Greenlight List- No Mortal Online

3 Pages « 1 2 3 Search
59 posts found
  Ramanadjinn

Elite Member

Joined: 8/08/11
Posts: 1293

8/28/13 2:51:48 AM#41
Originally posted by Toferio
 

I was referring to the general attitude I see so often from the defenders of the game, who claim MO doesn't have more players because it is so unique, niche and hardcore for your average MMO player. The kind of attitude I saw in following posts of yours:

  

As I said, my statement was not directed to you exclusively, but the general attitude of many MO players as a whole I've seen on these boards. MO is not a "difficult" game, it is unnecessarily complex and user unfriendly, poor design of which shuns many players away. Somehow, you make it sound like it is good and intended design. It isn't, they just can't do any better. But hey, that's just me, I may have misunderstood you. I firmly believe that a game like MO could get a lot more players if it didn't fail at its basic, which is why I disagree with any hint of "it is too niche/hard" argument. 

 

Referring to general attitudes isn't productive if those attitudes aren't being expressed within the thread.  It sort of derails the conversation, especially when as I pointed out it does so in a way that makes your side of the fence look more enlightened.

 

I do feel MO is a "difficult" game compared to many others.  Its fine if you disagree but neither of us are really going to prove our viewpoint nor would it be productive to attempt to do so.  

I also feel it is more time consuming and requires more effort on the part of the player than many other games like WOW and Neverwinter where one can just log in, get something done, and log off the game whenever they feel like it with no adverse consequences.  That sort of thing suits someone who has a lot of responsibilities, children, multiple or demanding jobs, a demanding social life, etc..  MO is not as well suited to that type of player.  

Mortal Online itself can be a lot of work, and people who aren't playing games to do work are often going to be turned off by it.

To say that the game can be difficult, time consuming, and rewarding in a way that is different from other games in the genre does not make any statement that the game is better than any other.  To say that very few of us within the gaming community enjoy this sort of thing does not make any statement that we are better than any other gamers.  If anyone has inferred that from any statement made here that is a personal problem within themselves.

 

The only disagreement that matters here, and the key place the opponents are being illogical, is in that many of us feel the game has value and should have more exposure.  That a few of us feel this way is evidence fans of the game exist.  Therefore it is illogical to say the game should not have more exposure, as even if some individuals hate it, it is clear some portion of the MMO community does not.

  Slapshot1188

Elite Member

Joined: 5/06/07
Posts: 4096

 
OP  8/28/13 5:13:12 AM#42
Originally posted by Ramanadjinn
 

The only disagreement that matters here, and the key place the opponents are being illogical, is in that many of us feel the game has value and should have more exposure.  That a few of us feel this way is evidence fans of the game exist.  Therefore it is illogical to say the game should not have more exposure, as even if some individuals hate it, it is clear some portion of the MMO community does not.

There is no illogic here. The game has nearly 200,000 forum members.  That is a number that is touted by the CEO.  That is around 200,000 people who actually cared enough to make a forum account.  A much larger number have obviously looked at the game but not made an account.  Compare that number to the amount of active players.  That's going to result in a rate of something like 0.5%.

 

By your reasoning, simply because SOMEONE... SOMEWHERE likes a game, that game should get more exposure because it's obvious that not EVERYONE hates it.  From my perspective, THAT is an illigical statement.

 

Your arguments regarding exposure have been made many times in the past by other advocates of the company.  Each time they had a spike in player base which quickly reverted back as people left.  For example go and look up the posts related to the Dawn expansion, the Awakening expansion, the initial free trial, the subsequent F2P (misnomer) announcement, their "EPIC PATCH" numbers one and 2, and their facebook promotion.  Many of these received promotions on major sites like MMORPG.COM and MASSIVELY.COM

 

There have also been reviews, re-reviews, play blogs and more published on those same sites...

 

 Mortal Online did not fail because it lacked exposure.  It failed because it was a bad game created by a company that was in over it's head, blatantly over promised and under delivered, and behaved in a manner which many found to be shady.

 

If Mortal Online is eventually Greenlit (and I do believe that eventually the game will be as I cannot understand how a game that is released 3+ years is excluded) you will once again see a short rise in population followed by a return to normal.  This is what history has shown us.  Absolutely nothing in the official financial reports released by the company would lead us to believe that Steam Greenlight would be any different from the prior instances of publicity.

 

 

"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

  Ramanadjinn

Elite Member

Joined: 8/08/11
Posts: 1293

8/28/13 5:17:48 AM#43

None of that really matters as:

 

1 - You don't have any actual reliable data on what the present user retention rates would be.

2 - You lose nothing from MO having more exposure, while those few individuals who would benefit from it would gain something.  Advocating others not be allowed to gain even when there is no loss involved is illogical.

 

That is where you are being illogical and you have failed to show otherwise.

  Slapshot1188

Elite Member

Joined: 5/06/07
Posts: 4096

 
OP  8/28/13 5:21:18 AM#44
Originally posted by Ramanadjinn

None of that really matters as:

 

1 - You don't have any actual reliable data on what the present user retention rates would be.

2 - You lose nothing from MO having more exposure, while those few individuals who would benefit from it would gain something.  Advocating others not be allowed to gain even when there is no loss involved is illogical.

 

That is where you are being illogical and you have failed to show otherwise.

I'm obviously not going to convince one as passionate about the game as yourself, but I am quite content that 99 of every 100 people will understand what I said.  I have no need to convince you.  I will happilly watch the Steam Greenlight situation as either outcome provides ongoing entertainment for me.

 

"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

  Toferio

Advanced Member

Joined: 11/26/09
Posts: 1456

8/28/13 5:52:57 AM#45
Originally posted by Ramanadjinn

 

Referring to general attitudes isn't productive if those attitudes aren't being expressed within the thread.  It sort of derails the conversation, especially when as I pointed out it does so in a way that makes your side of the fence look more enlightened.

And as I pointed out, I referred to said attitude only because I felt your posts implied it, not for the sake of derailing the conversation. 

Originally posted by Ramanadjinn

I also feel it is more time consuming and requires more effort on the part of the player than many other games like WOW and Neverwinter where one can just log in, get something done, and log off the game whenever they feel like it with no adverse consequences.  That sort of thing suits someone who has a lot of responsibilities, children, multiple or demanding jobs, a demanding social life, etc..  MO is not as well suited to that type of player. 

To say that the game can be difficult, time consuming, and rewarding in a way that is different from other games in the genre does not make any statement that the game is better than any other.  To say that very few of us within the gaming community enjoy this sort of thing does not make any statement that we are better than any other gamers.  If anyone has inferred that from any statement made here that is a personal problem within themselves.

It is, imho, a false sense of complexity and forced time waste. The game is time consuming because it is based around grind, not because it is rich on content and depth. The complexity is there just or the sake of it, 99% of crafted items are completely useless. It is time consuming because you have to grind gear every time you die, not because it is challenging. 

Let's take WoW, which you mention, as a example. For the sake of argument I am going to ignore the recent expansion, to show what I consider "meaningful" time consumption. Let's examine raids. I don't need to mention the whole gear preparation and gearing up, because processes are similar in both games (even if in WoW it takes skill to acquire gear, while in MO it takes grind, and by skill I mean teamplay PvE). The raids alone take days and days of team effort to progress and clear, which is, imho, a much more meaningful time invested rather than skill and material grind in MO. 

I am not saying all that to claim either of the games is better than other, but to show that both games are time consuming, but MO in what I feel a meaningless way. I don't understand (if that's what you implied) how the feeling of having something done when you log out is bad, it should be a must in every game. 

Sure, MO is a huge timesink. I agree that it doesn't suit your casual WoW player. Where I disagree, however, is that it could be designed to be much less of a time waste and still retain its core sandbox gameplay. 

Originally posted by Ramanadjinn

None of that really matters as:

2 - You lose nothing from MO having more exposure, while those few individuals who would benefit from it would gain something.  Advocating others not be allowed to gain even when there is no loss involved is illogical.

Incorrect. Just apply the logic you mention so much to figure out why, but I will explain my point of view. If MO "succeeds" (which is a very subjective term, but let's skip that discussion), it would show other developers that it is okay to release a shitty product (again, subjective, let's move on as I am merely explaining a personal PoV), to lie and cheat your playerbase (this is not even subjective, but facts), to never deliver on your promises and still success at being a game developer. MO is a bad example, and new developers following same path is what we, as players, have to lose rom it. You are desperate enough for sandbox games so you won't care, I think, but I do not want such practice to become standard. This is not even about MO, but about SV. 

  lizardbones

Elite Member

Joined: 6/11/08
Posts: 10427

I've become dependent upon spell check. My apologies for stupid grammatical errors.

8/28/13 6:14:23 AM#46


Originally posted by Ramanadjinn
The only disagreement that matters here, and the key place the opponents are being illogical, is in that many of us feel the game has value and should have more exposure.  That a few of us feel this way is evidence fans of the game exist.  Therefore it is illogical to say the game should not have more exposure, as even if some individuals hate it, it is clear some portion of the MMO community does not.


The game doesn't deserve more exposure. It can earn more exposure by showing itself to be a good or innovative product to enough people on Steam. What the people who currently play the game think of it is irrelevant. It doesn't matter that you like it. It only matters what the people who use Steam think of it. Starvault deliberately chose a small niche game play style. Well surprise, there aren't that many people on Steam who want to play a game based on Starvault's vision, even without knowing the game's history.

As far as the attitudes of the people on this forum, MO not getting a Greenlight on Steam (in their mind) justifies their views on MO not being a good game.

For every large, complex problem, there is a simple, clear solution that also happens to be absolutely wrong.

  Ramanadjinn

Elite Member

Joined: 8/08/11
Posts: 1293

8/28/13 6:16:23 AM#47

You really should take my statements literally as they are said and not infer anything from them.  If I want to convey any implication I will state it explicitly within the text.  It is too easy to misunderstand one another here without assuming meaning other than what is precisely written.

I can't disagree with your statements on WOW and the grind in MO as to how you dislike them.  I only disagree that changing the way MO functions could make us both happy.  Removing that "grind" as you call it would likely remove a lot of what I enjoy about the game.

I have 4 characters and 3 of them craft.  My 4th is only there to gather materials for my other 3.  The grind you speak of gearing up is all I do when I play the game.  That grind is 100% of my gameplay.  My friends also don't really have to grind as they can just tell me they are running low on armor or bows and I will have a shipment over to them.

Maybe the process could be simplified but I don't want it simplified.  I enjoy it just as it is.  I certainly wouldn't want it more like WOW.

 

I consider the notion that if MO were to find success would be bad for the genre because it would show devs that we are willing to accept games of this type to be ridiculous.  If the game ever finds "success" by your definition your whole argument would be invalid as the game would be a success and worthy of emulation.  Even moreso, the argument is invalidated by the fact that we all know the game is obviously not ever going to achieve any success by your standards and I never claimed it would or should.  SV's practices aren't going to be emulated by any majorly successful company for an extended period and we all know why.  

  Toferio

Advanced Member

Joined: 11/26/09
Posts: 1456

8/28/13 6:43:35 AM#48
Originally posted by Ramanadjinn

If the game ever finds "success" by your definition your whole argument would be invalid as the game would be a success and worthy of emulation. 

I.. what? How does that invalidates my argument in any way. That is exactly the issue, if the game is "successful" in its current state, it would be considered worthy of emulation, which is exactly what I am afraid of, SV practices established by new devs. Not that major companies would do it, but the new aspiring indies. 

Originally posted by lizardbones

As far as the attitudes of the people on this forum, MO not getting a Greenlight on Steam (in their mind) justifies their views on MO not being a good game.

Not sure really who thinks that, as Greenlight is shit for a system atm, lots of great games are being ignored. 

  lizardbones

Elite Member

Joined: 6/11/08
Posts: 10427

I've become dependent upon spell check. My apologies for stupid grammatical errors.

8/28/13 8:10:05 AM#49


Originally posted by Toferio

Originally posted by Ramanadjinn If the game ever finds "success" by your definition your whole argument would be invalid as the game would be a success and worthy of emulation. I.. what? How does that invalidates my argument in any way. That is exactly the issue, if the game is "successful" in its current state, it would be considered worthy of emulation, which is exactly what I am afraid of, SV practices established by new devs. Not that major companies would do it, but the new aspiring indies.  Originally posted by lizardbones As far as the attitudes of the people on this forum, MO not getting a Greenlight on Steam (in their mind) justifies their views on MO not being a good game.
Not sure really who thinks that, as Greenlight is shit for a system atm, lots of great games are being ignored. 



If Greenlight is a bad system, why do the people who like MO get so upset when it doesn't get a Greenlight? Why do they argue that MO deserves to get a Greenlight on Steam? Because getting a Greenlight on Steam is a real world indicator of player interest in a game's ideas, if not the game itself.

Games like DOTA2 have half a million concurrent players. The most popular MMORPG on Steam has 2,048 concurrent players. It's Star Trek Online btw. The idea that an MMORPG with a tiny audience is going to get a Greenlight on Steam or that it's going to get significant sales on Steam is ludicrous. There isn't anything about MO + Steam that makes sense.

For every large, complex problem, there is a simple, clear solution that also happens to be absolutely wrong.

  argirop

Elite Member

Joined: 6/05/09
Posts: 326

8/28/13 9:05:28 AM#50
Originally posted by lizardbones


If Greenlight is a bad system, why do the people who like MO get so upset when it doesn't get a Greenlight? Why do they argue that MO deserves to get a Greenlight on Steam? Because getting a Greenlight on Steam is a real world indicator of player interest in a game's ideas, if not the game itself.

Games like DOTA2 have half a million concurrent players. The most popular MMORPG on Steam has 2,048 concurrent players. It's Star Trek Online btw. The idea that an MMORPG with a tiny audience is going to get a Greenlight on Steam or that it's going to get significant sales on Steam is ludicrous. There isn't anything about MO + Steam that makes sense.

 

The answer to your question is really simple. MO fans do actually believe that if MO will get greenlit, SV;s incomes will significally raise and those incomes will be used towards games developement which is ridiculous as we speak. At the same time the same individuals fail to comprehend that even if we double or tripple the current playerbase, it will be very hard for MO to keep the new players ingame cause the game itself is in terrible state. And unfortunatelly i really cannot see SV changing its ways nor drawing a new course since the last 3 years they re repeating the same mistakes over and over again. My guess will be that even if MO gets greenlit and suceeds on getting a larger playerbase and ofc higher incomes, those funds will go in the same bottomless pit that all funds went till this moment we re making this discussion. And i m afraid that this bottomless pit hasnt anything to do with MO's developement or hiring professional developers to do the job that amateurs doing as we speak.

  Ramanadjinn

Elite Member

Joined: 8/08/11
Posts: 1293

8/28/13 1:31:38 PM#51
Originally posted by argirop
 

The answer to your question is really simple. MO fans do actually believe that if MO will get greenlit, SV;s incomes will significally raise and those incomes will be used towards games developement which is ridiculous as we speak. At the same time the same individuals fail to comprehend that even if we double or tripple the current playerbase, it will be very hard for MO to keep the new players ingame cause the game itself is in terrible state. And unfortunatelly i really cannot see SV changing its ways nor drawing a new course since the last 3 years they re repeating the same mistakes over and over again. My guess will be that even if MO gets greenlit and suceeds on getting a larger playerbase and ofc higher incomes, those funds will go in the same bottomless pit that all funds went till this moment we re making this discussion. And i m afraid that this bottomless pit hasnt anything to do with MO's developement or hiring professional developers to do the job that amateurs doing as we speak.

 

Not all MO fans actually think this way.

I believe if MO were greenlit SV's income would see no dramatic change.  

Regardless.. SV is a small company.  very small.  As such they have a small group mentality and their productiveness isn't limited by their funding alone.  And so funding would not necessarily increase their productivity.  With extremely small groups at times a large spike in income can have the opposite effect.  It sounds like most everyone could agree on this.

I do feel there are more people out there who would enjoy MO if they gave it a chance., but that is hardly a claim that the game is due for some sort of population explosion.

The main disagreement isn't that we feel people are going to flock to the game and love it if they just try it.  It is that many of us feel it is a good game that very few people are going to like.  You guys can call it crap and fling mud at it, but you're not going to convince us that something we love is crap, nor are you going to prove that it is objectively bad.  So we are at a stalemate there.

  Ramanadjinn

Elite Member

Joined: 8/08/11
Posts: 1293

8/28/13 1:38:39 PM#52
Originally posted by Toferio
Originally posted by Ramanadjinn

If the game ever finds "success" by your definition your whole argument would be invalid as the game would be a success and worthy of emulation. 

I.. what? How does that invalidates my argument in any way. That is exactly the issue, if the game is "successful" in its current state, it would be considered worthy of emulation, which is exactly what I am afraid of, SV practices established by new devs. Not that major companies would do it, but the new aspiring indies. 

 

 

I'm not sure how to explain clearly how if something is successful then it obviously was made with some degree of quality as defined by its customers.  I'm not sure how such a product should be an issue for anyone.  My point was you have set up a nearly impossible situation of which to be afraid to validate your point.  You claim you fear the game being both horrid and successful and as such indie developers will make horrible successful games and we'll be flooded with horrible games. 

That is a hypothetical scenario that is not only far reaching but implausible.  Through some sort of butterfly effect the game could usher in a dreadful new world order, but i'm not exactly going to claim that the game shouldn't be advocated because of that possibility.

 

It is all irrelevant though as nobody is claiming Mortal Online is ever going to find the sort of success you speak of in its current state.  If you feel it could i'd be willing to argue against that.

  Toferio

Advanced Member

Joined: 11/26/09
Posts: 1456

8/28/13 5:53:51 PM#53
Originally posted by Ramanadjinn
Originally posted by Toferio
Originally posted by Ramanadjinn

If the game ever finds "success" by your definition your whole argument would be invalid as the game would be a success and worthy of emulation. 

I.. what? How does that invalidates my argument in any way. That is exactly the issue, if the game is "successful" in its current state, it would be considered worthy of emulation, which is exactly what I am afraid of, SV practices established by new devs. Not that major companies would do it, but the new aspiring indies. 

I'm not sure how to explain clearly how if something is successful then it obviously was made with some degree of quality as defined by its customers.  I'm not sure how such a product should be an issue for anyone.  

And I am not sure how to explain that success does not mean quality. McDonalds is popular, yet the food is unhealthy. Stuff made in China are popular, yet quality is shit. Nigeria scams are pretty successful and are emulated a lot. Do we need more of them? Hell no, and I am pretty sure they are an issue for quite a few. You create some hypothetical scenarios where there is only one outcome and only one point of view to support your illogical arguments. I don't want MO to be an example for other indie devs to follow, there is nothing illogical or hypothetical about it. 

  Ramanadjinn

Elite Member

Joined: 8/08/11
Posts: 1293

8/28/13 6:29:19 PM#54
Originally posted by Toferio

 

And I am not sure how to explain that success does not mean quality. McDonalds is popular, yet the food is unhealthy. Stuff made in China are popular, yet quality is shit. Nigeria scams are pretty successful and are emulated a lot. Do we need more of them? Hell no, and I am pretty sure they are an issue for quite a few. You create some hypothetical scenarios where there is only one outcome and only one point of view to support your illogical arguments. I don't want MO to be an example for other indie devs to follow, there is nothing illogical or hypothetical about it. 

 

It sounds as if it is your definition of Quality that I am in disagreement with.

McDonalds is a leading authority on quality by many of its aspects and definitions.  As a college student I have studied several aspects of the company in my courses on the subject of quality.  

I'm also unaware of any hypothetical scenario I have created.   As for yours, once again, it doesn't really matter what you do or do not want -- Mortal Online is in little to no danger of being emulated or set up as "an example for other indie devs to follow."  I don't know why you have some strange fear of this happening but I have not heard any reason why that fear is rational.

Your irrational fears have no bearing on the subject of Mortal Online's Steam Greenlight.  I don't say this to offend, but i'm hoping you will think about the subject rationally and maybe in some way realize Mortal Online is not some paragon of popular game design to be emulated and followed by future developers.  

  Talonsin

Spotlight Poster

Joined: 7/19/06
Posts: 1032

8/28/13 6:42:12 PM#55

To be honest, a large majority of the hard-core MMO playerbase also frequent forums like this one.  They already know about MO and they have already tried it and left.  Getting a greenlight on steam would only bring in the casual players and they would leave the game in droves.

 

SV uses a lack of advertising as an excuse but to be honest, steam users have been introduced to the game.  It has been listed for steam users to vote on, it is F2P so those same users can go play the game now if they were really interested.  The game has been mentioned on just about every gaming website sometime over the last 2 years.  SV and you guys that love the game can fantasize that there is some hidden playerbase that has been untapped but the reality is, most people who would be interested in playing MO and staying with it with all the bugs and exploits have already tried it.

 

 

  kalemar

Novice Member

Joined: 6/07/08
Posts: 9

8/28/13 8:09:38 PM#56

There are haters and there are lovers of Mortal Online. On one side you have the haters who state the age of the game and the number of bugs, the convoluted game mechanics and poor pvp. On the other side, the lovers of the game really enjoy the game mechanics, the style of game works for them and bugs are not a show stopper for them. Two sides of the story and two completely different views.

To me it comes down to what you enjoy. Some really enjoy MO and others don't. This argument will continue until SV close their doors as both sides will never agree. 

The statement (which I call the question) which started this forum post has been answered. Mortal Online was given greenlight status in August! 

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=112802437

Everyone will have a prediction on what will happen next. Only time will tell.

  lizardbones

Elite Member

Joined: 6/11/08
Posts: 10427

I've become dependent upon spell check. My apologies for stupid grammatical errors.

8/28/13 9:33:42 PM#57


Originally posted by argirop

Originally posted by lizardbones If Greenlight is a bad system, why do the people who like MO get so upset when it doesn't get a Greenlight? Why do they argue that MO deserves to get a Greenlight on Steam? Because getting a Greenlight on Steam is a real world indicator of player interest in a game's ideas, if not the game itself. Games like DOTA2 have half a million concurrent players. The most popular MMORPG on Steam has 2,048 concurrent players. It's Star Trek Online btw. The idea that an MMORPG with a tiny audience is going to get a Greenlight on Steam or that it's going to get significant sales on Steam is ludicrous. There isn't anything about MO + Steam that makes sense.  
The answer to your question is really simple. MO fans do actually believe that if MO will get greenlit, SV;s incomes will significally raise and those incomes will be used towards games developement which is ridiculous as we speak. At the same time the same individuals fail to comprehend that even if we double or tripple the current playerbase, it will be very hard for MO to keep the new players ingame cause the game itself is in terrible state. And unfortunatelly i really cannot see SV changing its ways nor drawing a new course since the last 3 years they re repeating the same mistakes over and over again. My guess will be that even if MO gets greenlit and suceeds on getting a larger playerbase and ofc higher incomes, those funds will go in the same bottomless pit that all funds went till this moment we re making this discussion. And i m afraid that this bottomless pit hasnt anything to do with MO's developement or hiring professional developers to do the job that amateurs doing as we speak.



If MO got 500 more subscribers, it would be a significant boost to the game. The question is now, since it's gotten a GreenLight, will it get those 500 players, and if it does, will it get them to pay money (it's F2P) and will it actually improve the game? I guess we'll actually get to see whether it happens or not.

I suppose a more interesting question will be whether or not MO starts to change because it does get a significant number of new players, but can't keep them.

For every large, complex problem, there is a simple, clear solution that also happens to be absolutely wrong.

  kkarrabbass

Advanced Member

Joined: 8/17/08
Posts: 160

I was a smart man once...

8/28/13 10:30:04 PM#58

I was playing MO from the very beginning. Then I left. Then I came back. Then I have left forever.

When I came second time I have found game in worse condition than it was when I left. But they have built Tindrem. And similar things happened to MO all the time. It was sad to watch how their priorities fucked up. Another thing. Game a priory is not a new player’s friendly. And it seems nothing really has been done during those years to change that. Could it be that Henrik Nystrom’s dream that blurry. He was always talking about lack of funds, and spent available funds on nonsense.

About popularity. Maybe, just maybe game already has all players, who really wanted to play it.  May be game only can gain new players from those who doesn’t know what is this game about. And for those… nothing attractive there.

  Jacxolope

Advanced Member

Joined: 1/15/13
Posts: 743

8/28/13 10:49:20 PM#59
Originally posted by kkarrabbass

I was playing MO from the very beginning. Then I left. Then I came back. Then I have left forever.

When I came second time I have found game in worse condition than it was when I left. But they have built Tindrem. And similar things happened to MO all the time. It was sad to watch how their priorities fucked up. Another thing. Game a priory is not a new player’s friendly. And it seems nothing really has been done during those years to change that. Could it be that Henrik Nystrom’s dream that blurry. He was always talking about lack of funds, and spent available funds on nonsense.

About popularity. Maybe, just maybe game already has all players, who really wanted to play it.  May be game only can gain new players from those who doesn’t know what is this game about. And for those… nothing attractive there.

Yup- I agree.

But this is going to be funny and you cannot get entertainment value like this very often. I missed the heyday of this sub-forum (*sad panda face*) but spent literally DAYS reading through old threads- Hearing the lies, broken promises, more broken promises, exagerations, viral marketers, excuses, more excuses, promises, "its going to be revolutionary!!!!", Population booming and "things are better than ever-

Viral marketers vs trolls , forum PVP at its finest. Truth tellers vs pathological liars and everything in between (*hint The pathological liars were the viral marketers) coupled with hilarious Henrick quotes and promises.

Now...All there is , is "dust in the wind". This forum has gone dry because nobody even cares enough about this game to call out the "lies", "promises" and excuses for what they are.

I feel the new green Light release will do wonders for this forum- Bring the entertainment and the laughter back. Already henrick mentioned a "new continent" in his stock market financial report... This is going to make DayZ (or whatever that game was) look like childs play.

I have my popcorn and beer ready for this and now am waiting patiently.

=)

3 Pages « 1 2 3 Search