Trending Games | WildStar | Elder Scrolls Online | Guild Wars 2 | Neverwinter

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,641,279 Users Online:0
Games:681  Posts:6,075,831
Funcom | Play Now
MMORPG | Genre:Real Life | Status:Final  (rel 07/03/12)  | Pub:Funcom
PVP:Yes | Distribution:Download,Retail | Retail Price:$30.00 | Pay Type:Hybrid | Monthly Fee:n/a
System Req: PC | Out of date info? Let us know!

The Secret World Forum » Beta Reviews & Impressions [ARCHIVED] » My positive review of why it will fail to score big

2 Pages 1 2 » Search
35 posts found
  sfc1971

Hard Core Member

Joined: 10/05/08
Posts: 418

 
OP  6/18/12 4:11:27 AM#1

Full disclosure, I played the two recent beta weekends and bought the lifetime subscription and an additional reserved name. I like the game, think it has a lot of promise and fixes some long standing grievances with MMORPG's and still think it will be another niche game, where niche is code for failed with just a tiny percentage of the gaming or even MMO population hanging on because the potential outweighs the massive badness.

Graphics

The game like no MMO before manages to create realistic environments, roads are flat, paths wind but have direction, houses are sensible, people are in expected locations. It lacks the flash of asian games instead it gives realistic grittiness. I love it... but I also got a GTX 690 and it barely does 30 frames with all settings maxed. Gorgeous BUT how many can play it at it most beautifull? To get some perspective on SWTOR I recently did the trial of WoW and UGH! It is just plain ugly, and yet, it is the top game. Age of Conan also was pretty (although the environments are much better designed in TSW) and that didn't save it.

I love the graphics but the high system requirements will put off many and most will have to reduce their settings to such a degree they never notice all the loveliness.

See how a game can both be a winner for me and that yet end up losing points with the general gaming population?

Avatar

When you create your avatar, you get the rather usual 6 faces, 8 hair styles on the left and a very poor version of CAS (Characters creation screen of the Sims on the left). So poor in fact it only got outfits.

So, your face will be pretty standard and you see plenty of people who are your clones in the game BUT you will have a unique outfit. Age of Conan originally tried a lighter version of this in that armour barely had any stats. My my, how the punters hated that. It didn't bind on equip either meaning there was no loot worth mentioning in the game, all that mattered was how good you were at playing, not what items you had managed to grind. Can't have that! The kiddies cried, we want our grind loot and AoC caved in, the kiddies still left and me as well.

TSW takes another path, your visible outfit is statless and is just there for looks. Invisible items called talisman carry the stats as do your weapons, so these are the items you roll for, that are bound to you and that you can craft.

The problem here is that while I love the outfit system, it will upset both camps, those who want to show of their loot will decry that loot is invisible (except for weapons) while those who want to mod their avatar like the Sims will want more control over their character, both looks and outfits will find the current offering to limitted. Add at least a dozen more faces, a few body sliders (breasts especially, some of us like them small and succilent)  and a hundred more hairstyles, combo hair especially.

While the clothes option add far more custimization then most MMO's, it still has miles to go. Star Wars Galaxies, for those who wore cloth, had far more options. And that is a very old game. Which also wasn't saved, but fondly remembered by many, for its luxorious avatars.

Crafting

What exist in the beta now seems lacking, there are no levels involved and the items created are pretty average and require so many resources that by the time you can make an item, you will have found better already.

It also lacks color. Literally, why are all the items represented with a black and white icon? 

Perhaps it will get better. At least it doesn't involve grinding. But again, this is bad. Those who hate craft grinding in other games tend not to bother with it creating work for those who do like it, so the haters are not affected by the lack of it and those who like traditional crafting will find this system lacking.

Think of it as a baby seal hamburger baked in kitten fat. The meat eaters will love it, the vegans hate it. Replace the hamburger with a tofu burger bit keep it the kitten fat and the meat eaters will hate and so will the vegans. The middle road ain't always the best travelled (paying happy customers).

Combat

Ah, the elefant in the room. Soom claim it is boring and some claim it has lot of hitten strategic depth. Both are right.

The game gives you two weapon/skill sets to equip at the same time from a choice of 9 and from those skill sets you can equip 7 active and 7 passive skills. You can change weapons easily and change which skillsets just as easily at no cost or penalty, so it is entire possible to do one mob with say blades/shotgun and the next mob with rifle/pistols. In dungeons this might almost become a requirement.

For instance with blades you got 2 builder (add points you can use for other attacks) skills that can self heal you when fighting. One, with a passive, gives 10 heal for every afflicted enemy you hit, another gives you 26 heal everytime you use it.

Fight single enemy mobs, the last one is obviously better, 26 heal everytime you hit is pretty good. Fight grouped mobs, some can easily be as large as 6-10 and you have the potential for far greater heals.

Of course, affiliction doesn't happen automatically BUT you might be fighting with some other player who causes it with their standard attack. Perfect synergy!

Lots of strategic thinking involved in creating your decks.

Pity the actual combat is so fucking boring then. Most MMORPG's give the player a long list of skills, each class their own set, to create unique roles on the battle field and unique game styles. Lord of the Rings Online does this very well, fairly early on, each class gets defined and a Loremaster playes very differently from a Guardian and knowing which skill to use at the right time for the right situation can make the difference between a good player and a bad one.

TSW simply lacks any such defining skills, you spend WAAAAY to much time simply hitting your builder skill, then your consumer for extra damage and build again. Shields from blood magic are barely worth it, they take so long to cast and take so little damage that in the cast time, you take damage you are going to heal. Just hit harder.

Recovery time after a fight is also painfully slow, slowing down the game. And I pity anyone who starts the game with a single target weapon, killing 4 zombies one at a time is the definition of boring.

The biggest problem is that the normal single enemies take to long to die, the fights outcome is never in doubt, you just need to keep hitten the same key over and over again to get their health down. It is the same problem AoC faced in its dungeons, the mobs just had a lot of health meaning it just took a long boring time to get them down with a group and lacked any of the quick action you had with solo mobs.

Mowing down groups of zombies is fun. Hitten builder attack 30 times on a single zombie is NOT fun.

Good move on the decks, now reduce all normal mobs by 2/3 health and instead give more grouped mobs.

How is this going to win and loose customers at the same time? Min-maxers who ask "what is best" are going to never get their head around the answer "it depends". There is no best deck, the best deck depends on what you are fighting and with whom. The tactical combat lovers are going to go spare over their 1 key being worn away.

Realism

In a lot of MMO's you are fighting the guard only a few meters away from his blissfully unaware comrade. Fantasy MMO's get away with this because modern man has no understanding of the range of a crowsbow and orcs are stupid. In SWTOR, it just seemed silly, snipers unaware of what is happening within spitting distance. 

TSW, at least in the areas so far, finally places enemies where it makes sense. The zombies especially are brilliant, they are doing something, eating corpses, kicking a wall, hunting. They are supposed to be brainless, so it makes sense they are not that aware of what is happening to other zombies. The distances, the world design, it all creates a more sensible layout. Roads are often clear as well, avoiding the "goddamn, how many times do I have to fight through the same mobs to get from A to B" syndrome.

To see drowned zombies pick up pods, carry them and drop them is also a welcome change from the usual randomly placed enemies.

On the whole a welcome change from the norm.

Story

You would think that the coming apocalypse would contain some Drama, you wouldn't know it from the story and quests. The worst offender is the closing dialog at the end of most quests. For some, your controller gives comments on what you have done but most just end with a reward and don't give closure. That is okay when you gutten some goblins but when you tracked down a missing person and found they killed themselves because their love had died... you need something more.

What story is there is decent, it just doesn't grip or move your soul. 

Bugs

SWTOR was praised for one of the smoothest launches ever. TSW runs no danger of that. There are a LOT of bugs. Nothing overly serious but the bar has been raised since the days of Everquest. If you are thinking of buying this, accept that some quests are broken, some skills have weird settings (shield with 65331 damage points in its description) and general unbalance.

Quests

The main reward for questing are action points you use to buy skills, you can buy all skills if you want to, so you need a LOT of action points. The game makes this possible by making virtually all quests repeatable on a timer. I got the distinct impression that repeating (or grinding) quests is the only way to properly advance as a single run through say Kingsmouth doesn't seem to prepare you entirely for the savage coast, and having done all quests of the savage coast, some mobs in remote corners were still red to me (white is on level, yellow a challenge, red means is that my kidney over there?)

The fact that not all quests are kill X quests is good but the investigation and sabotage quests are way to few. 2 of them, I could find in the savage coast and no investigation. That is just mean Funcom, you gave us taste but we want MORE now!

Mind you, general chat was filled with people wanting their hand held on locations and puzzles. Funcom has already added a rather ugly yellow outline to quest objects, they will probably add more handholding as the WoW kiddies are unable to find anything. Quests that require people to think just won't find mass market appeal I am afraid.

The biggest novelty is that you don't go into an area with a half dozen quests to be done, rather you can have only 1 combat quest active at once. A quest that grants you a LOT of XP mind you but it takes some getting used to. Just one of the many areas where the game differs from the norm. Not that this is bad, if it is done for the right reason but when you can't cancel a bugged quest... well, that ain't the right reason.

If you do something different, you must do it perfectly or people will just tell you to do it the old proven way. I am perfectly willing to try a new meal you cooked, but not if you burned it.

Overal

The Secret World departs in many ways from the traditional MMO path set by WoW. In some areas it succeeds in making it an intresting new game, in others, especially actual combat, it feels to simplistic, to boring. For me personally, the good outweighs the bad.

But I really suggest that they make combat a bit more fun, weaker enemies but more of them and less of just hitting one attack. Introduce maybe some skills for getting your ass out of a bad fight, something that now often just results in death if a respawn happens at the wrong time.

The game wil be intresting to play but mass market appeal will be limitted, its fanbase will be loyal enough but sooner or later any MMO needs new development and that costs hard money that can only be earned through subscriptions. And Funcom does not have SOE backing or long breath to do that I fear... or maybe they do. Anarchy Online is still going.

Nice game, pity it will bomb because of boring combat putting people off its more endearing and unique qualities.

  Aeolron

Apprentice Member

Joined: 3/24/11
Posts: 664

Everyones a mmo vet these days :P

6/18/12 4:13:50 AM#2
Originally posted by sfc1971

Full disclosure, I played the two recent beta weekends and bought the lifetime subscription and an additional reserved name. I like the game, think it has a lot of promise and fixes some long standing grievances with MMORPG's and still think it will be another niche game, where niche is code for failed with just a tiny percentage of the gaming or even MMO population hanging on because the potential outweighs the massive badness.

Graphics

The game like no MMO before manages to create realistic environments, roads are flat, paths wind but have direction, houses are sensible, people are in expected locations. It lacks the flash of asian games instead it gives realistic grittiness. I love it... but I also got a GTX 690 and it barely does 30 frames with all settings maxed. Gorgeous BUT how many can play it at it most beautifull? To get some perspective on SWTOR I recently did the trial of WoW and UGH! It is just plain ugly, and yet, it is the top game. Age of Conan also was pretty (although the environments are much better designed in TSW) and that didn't save it.

I love the graphics but the high system requirements will put off many and most will have to reduce their settings to such a degree they never notice all the loveliness.

See how a game can both be a winner for me and that yet end up losing points with the general gaming population?

Avatar

When you create your avatar, you get the rather usual 6 faces, 8 hair styles on the left and a very poor version of CAS (Characters creation screen of the Sims on the left). So poor in fact it only got outfits.

So, your face will be pretty standard and you see plenty of people who are your clones in the game BUT you will have a unique outfit. Age of Conan originally tried a lighter version of this in that armour barely had any stats. My my, how the punters hated that. It didn't bind on equip either meaning there was no loot worth mentioning in the game, all that mattered was how good you were at playing, not what items you had managed to grind. Can't have that! The kiddies cried, we want our grind loot and AoC caved in, the kiddies still left and me as well.

TSW takes another path, your visible outfit is statless and is just there for looks. Invisible items called talisman carry the stats as do your weapons, so these are the items you roll for, that are bound to you and that you can craft.

The problem here is that while I love the outfit system, it will upset both camps, those who want to show of their loot will decry that loot is invisible (except for weapons) while those who want to mod their avatar like the Sims will want more control over their character, both looks and outfits will find the current offering to limitted. Add at least a dozen more faces, a few body sliders (breasts especially, some of us like them small and succilent)  and a hundred more hairstyles, combo hair especially.

While the clothes option add far more custimization then most MMO's, it still has miles to go. Star Wars Galaxies, for those who wore cloth, had far more options. And that is a very old game. Which also wasn't saved, but fondly remembered by many, for its luxorious avatars.

Crafting

What exist in the beta now seems lacking, there are no levels involved and the items created are pretty average and require so many resources that by the time you can make an item, you will have found better already.

It also lacks color. Literally, why are all the items represented with a black and white icon? 

Perhaps it will get better. At least it doesn't involve grinding. But again, this is bad. Those who hate craft grinding in other games tend not to bother with it creating work for those who do like it, so the haters are not affected by the lack of it and those who like traditional crafting will find this system lacking.

Think of it as a baby seal hamburger baked in kitten fat. The meat eaters will love it, the vegans hate it. Replace the hamburger with a tofu burger bit keep it the kitten fat and the meat eaters will hate and so will the vegans. The middle road ain't always the best travelled (paying happy customers).

Combat

Ah, the elefant in the room. Soom claim it is boring and some claim it has lot of hitten strategic depth. Both are right.

The game gives you two weapon/skill sets to equip at the same time from a choice of 9 and from those skill sets you can equip 7 active and 7 passive skills. You can change weapons easily and change which skillsets just as easily at no cost or penalty, so it is entire possible to do one mob with say blades/shotgun and the next mob with rifle/pistols. In dungeons this might almost become a requirement.

For instance with blades you got 2 builder (add points you can use for other attacks) skills that can self heal you when fighting. One, with a passive, gives 10 heal for every afflicted enemy you hit, another gives you 26 heal everytime you use it.

Fight single enemy mobs, the last one is obviously better, 26 heal everytime you hit is pretty good. Fight grouped mobs, some can easily be as large as 6-10 and you have the potential for far greater heals.

Of course, affiliction doesn't happen automatically BUT you might be fighting with some other player who causes it with their standard attack. Perfect synergy!

Lots of strategic thinking involved in creating your decks.

Pity the actual combat is so fucking boring then. Most MMORPG's give the player a long list of skills, each class their own set, to create unique roles on the battle field and unique game styles. Lord of the Rings Online does this very well, fairly early on, each class gets defined and a Loremaster playes very differently from a Guardian and knowing which skill to use at the right time for the right situation can make the difference between a good player and a bad one.

TSW simply lacks any such defining skills, you spend WAAAAY to much time simply hitting your builder skill, then your consumer for extra damage and build again. Shields from blood magic are barely worth it, they take so long to cast and take so little damage that in the cast time, you take damage you are going to heal. Just hit harder.

Recovery time after a fight is also painfully slow, slowing down the game. And I pity anyone who starts the game with a single target weapon, killing 4 zombies one at a time is the definition of boring.

The biggest problem is that the normal single enemies take to long to die, the fights outcome is never in doubt, you just need to keep hitten the same key over and over again to get their health down. It is the same problem AoC faced in its dungeons, the mobs just had a lot of health meaning it just took a long boring time to get them down with a group and lacked any of the quick action you had with solo mobs.

Mowing down groups of zombies is fun. Hitten builder attack 30 times on a single zombie is NOT fun.

Good move on the decks, now reduce all normal mobs by 2/3 health and instead give more grouped mobs.

How is this going to win and loose customers at the same time? Min-maxers who ask "what is best" are going to never get their head around the answer "it depends". There is no best deck, the best deck depends on what you are fighting and with whom. The tactical combat lovers are going to go spare over their 1 key being worn away.

Realism

In a lot of MMO's you are fighting the guard only a few meters away from his blissfully unaware comrade. Fantasy MMO's get away with this because modern man has no understanding of the range of a crowsbow and orcs are stupid. In SWTOR, it just seemed silly, snipers unaware of what is happening within spitting distance. 

TSW, at least in the areas so far, finally places enemies where it makes sense. The zombies especially are brilliant, they are doing something, eating corpses, kicking a wall, hunting. They are supposed to be brainless, so it makes sense they are not that aware of what is happening to other zombies. The distances, the world design, it all creates a more sensible layout. Roads are often clear as well, avoiding the "goddamn, how many times do I have to fight through the same mobs to get from A to B" syndrome.

To see drowned zombies pick up pods, carry them and drop them is also a welcome change from the usual randomly placed enemies.

On the whole a welcome change from the norm.

Story

You would think that the coming apocalypse would contain some Drama, you wouldn't know it from the story and quests. The worst offender is the closing dialog at the end of most quests. For some, your controller gives comments on what you have done but most just end with a reward and don't give closure. That is okay when you gutten some goblins but when you tracked down a missing person and found they killed themselves because their love had died... you need something more.

What story is there is decent, it just doesn't grip or move your soul. 

Bugs

SWTOR was praised for one of the smoothest launches ever. TSW runs no danger of that. There are a LOT of bugs. Nothing overly serious but the bar has been raised since the days of Everquest. If you are thinking of buying this, accept that some quests are broken, some skills have weird settings (shield with 65331 damage points in its description) and general unbalance.

Quests

The main reward for questing are action points you use to buy skills, you can buy all skills if you want to, so you need a LOT of action points. The game makes this possible by making virtually all quests repeatable on a timer. I got the distinct impression that repeating (or grinding) quests is the only way to properly advance as a single run through say Kingsmouth doesn't seem to prepare you entirely for the savage coast, and having done all quests of the savage coast, some mobs in remote corners were still red to me (white is on level, yellow a challenge, red means is that my kidney over there?)

The fact that not all quests are kill X quests is good but the investigation and sabotage quests are way to few. 2 of them, I could find in the savage coast and no investigation. That is just mean Funcom, you gave us taste but we want MORE now!

Mind you, general chat was filled with people wanting their hand held on locations and puzzles. Funcom has already added a rather ugly yellow outline to quest objects, they will probably add more handholding as the WoW kiddies are unable to find anything. Quests that require people to think just won't find mass market appeal I am afraid.

Overal

The Secret World departs in many ways from the traditional MMO path set by WoW. In some areas it succeeds in making it an intresting new game, in others, especially actual combat, it feels to simplistic, to boring. For me personally, the good outweighs the bad.

But I really suggest that they make combat a bit more fun, weaker enemies but more of them and less of just hitting one attack. Introduce maybe some skills for getting your ass out of a bad fight, something that now often just results in death if a respawn happens at the wrong time.

The game wil be intresting to play but mass market appeal will be limitted, its fanbase will be loyal enough but sooner or later any MMO needs new development and that costs hard money that can only be earned through subscriptions. And Funcom does not have SOE backing or long breath to do that I fear... or maybe they do. Anarchy Online is still going.

Nice game, pity it will bomb because of boring combat putting people off its more endearing and unique qualities.

Nice write up!

Just curious, how much was the lifetime?

  sfc1971

Hard Core Member

Joined: 10/05/08
Posts: 418

 
OP  6/18/12 4:24:04 AM#3

Total price 264.97 + 9.99 euro

Base pack, initiate pack, grandmaster pack + 1 name resevervation

Worth it? I play Lotro still with a lifetime subscription because I don't have to think, is it worth it for another month. I think this game will be the same, so I can just skip a month of playing if there are bugs or content is delayed or I am busy without feeling I am loosing money.

SWTOR was cancelled because of that. Do I want to pay anew? No.

Yeah, rationalizing spending 300 bucks on a game... I know I know. But hey, spend 1100 on a video card. Some people  got more money then sense. Why yes, I am intrested in buy a bridge!

  Aeolron

Apprentice Member

Joined: 3/24/11
Posts: 664

Everyones a mmo vet these days :P

6/18/12 4:28:51 AM#4
Originally posted by sfc1971

Total price 264.97 + 9.99 euro

Base pack, initiate pack, grandmaster pack + 1 name resevervation

Worth it? I play Lotro still with a lifetime subscription because I don't have to think, is it worth it for another month. I think this game will be the same, so I can just skip a month of playing if there are bugs or content is delayed or I am busy without feeling I am loosing money.

SWTOR was cancelled because of that. Do I want to pay anew? No.

Yeah, rationalizing spending 300 bucks on a game... I know I know. But hey, spend 1100 on a video card. Some people  got more money then sense. Why yes, I am intrested in buy a bridge!

haha nono it's not stupid , I was asking because I might buy two life times, one for myself and the other for my wife, ok it's not too bad.

if you think spending 300 bucks on a game is costly, spend 250-300 maybe even 600 bucks on stuff in the D3 AH haha to me thats just stupid LOL but what you did is actualy saving money in the long run!

  Caldrin

Hard Core Member

Joined: 10/02/04
Posts: 3868

6/18/12 4:33:32 AM#5

@OP odd you had those performacne issues..

 

I have an 2 x  ATI 6850s and basically maxed everything out and the game run fine.. maybe there are some driver issues with the 690 fo somthing

My 3D models
http://dragon3d.webs.com/

  marcust

Existentialist

Joined: 12/12/03
Posts: 413

6/18/12 4:44:41 AM#6

Thank you OP, genuinely enjoyed reading that well thought out post.

I think I could have been happy playing TSW if Tera and Darkfall hadn't come along.

I now expect more from my ingame combat mechanics.

If TSW had Tera's combat mechanics I would sub. As it currently stands I'll stick with Tera.

Playing: ESO
Also played/worth mentioning: UO, WoW, Lineage2, Lotro, Darkfall, TSW

  DanitaKusor

Advanced Member

Joined: 6/17/09
Posts: 501

6/18/12 6:09:39 AM#7

I found killing enemies to be fairly quick in the Savage Coast.  I eventually settled on a build that had a lot of synergy between attacks.  My main attack was a spammable aoe chaos attack that also applied a weakness debuff and at the same time I had a passive that had a 33% chance to do ~90 extra damage when attacking a weakened foe.  I also had two channelled finishers (one chaos, one blade) that each hit 5 times with each hit having a chance to do extra damage because of the passive, a charge, and 2 defensive moves to help me survive. 

You get a lot of tool to make a build that works well together.  For example, for my build my build was gauranteed to put weakness on a foe, so I wanted passives and abilities that did extra damage when hitting weakened opponents.  I also previously made a build that used affliction and one that used penetration and both worked well (I just preferred the look of the claw attack from chaos :)).

The Enlightened take things Lightly

  Irus

Novice Member

Joined: 1/11/11
Posts: 780

6/18/12 9:05:15 AM#8
Originally posted by sfc1971

I love it... but I also got a GTX 690 and it barely does 30 frames with all settings maxed. Gorgeous BUT how many can play it at it most beautifull?

This point alone... I can barely run it on the lowest settings... I was never into hi-tech graphics and still ain't.

  Iced0ver

Apprentice Member

Joined: 5/17/12
Posts: 49

6/18/12 9:25:46 AM#9
Originally posted by Irus
Originally posted by sfc1971

I love it... but I also got a GTX 690 and it barely does 30 frames with all settings maxed. Gorgeous BUT how many can play it at it most beautifull?

This point alone... I can barely run it on the lowest settings... I was never into hi-tech graphics and still ain't.

You don't have to be in to high end graphics in order to enjoy games now days though. You will spend more constantly upgrading your low end graphics card because it can't keep up, over just purchasing a mid range or higher card and you will be a lot happier in the long run. I have two 5850's in crossfire still, and there really isn't any fantastic reason for me to upgrade, and i would be okay with one of them if it wasn't for my Eyefinity. There is a point of diminishing return, however. The OP is just having driver or system issues, as a 690 should be doing just fine and we have to remember that this is still in beta.

As for TSW, it's fun a game. I can't help but feel a little overwhelmed when it comes to weapons and the skill wheel. I think it's all cool, but I just don't know exactly what path I should take for the most enjoyment. I wish there was a way for me to see it all at higher levels because it's not quite as straight forward as SWTOR or Tera. I could spend all my points on things that just really aren't compatible. I choose the dual pistols for the beta, and honestly they sucked. I spent all my points in that section of the wheel though, so maybe I need to branch out. Ah well..

 

 

  Blackbrrd

Novice Member

Joined: 2/24/09
Posts: 812

6/18/12 9:30:31 AM#10
Originally posted by Irus
Originally posted by sfc1971

I love it... but I also got a GTX 690 and it barely does 30 frames with all settings maxed. Gorgeous BUT how many can play it at it most beautifull?

This point alone... I can barely run it on the lowest settings... I was never into hi-tech graphics and still ain't.

I get 25 FPS on a 560ti on my otherwise 6 year old machine with everything maxed including tesselation, ssao, fxaa and so on, so yeah, the OP's problems with FPS is a bug - hopefully fixed by next weekend.

.. my point being you can get by on a 100$ graphics card. ;)

  AdamTM

Novice Member

Joined: 5/05/05
Posts: 1395

I'M PUNCHING YOUR SALAD!!!!

6/18/12 9:48:01 AM#11

I played this game on a 9800gtx on Medium (tweaked) @~30 FPS just fine, there is hardly any visual difference between high and ultra in the first place.

Seriously if not turning AA on disturbs you to the point of not playing a game Id suggest to either upgrade your rig, or just step away from gaming.

 

Yes I enjoy great graphics but I'm not bothered that i cant set AA x16 (which is essentially your main hog of GFX processing power bar shadow-quality).

Anyone that can't play this game on low needs to quickly stop using tech from 2003, i mean upgrading your box every ~10 years seems like a good deal even if you arent that big into high-end gfx.

  Aerowyn

Apprentice Member

Joined: 2/20/12
Posts: 7969

6/18/12 11:07:17 AM#12
Originally posted by Blackbrrd
Originally posted by Irus
Originally posted by sfc1971

I love it... but I also got a GTX 690 and it barely does 30 frames with all settings maxed. Gorgeous BUT how many can play it at it most beautifull?

This point alone... I can barely run it on the lowest settings... I was never into hi-tech graphics and still ain't.

I get 25 FPS on a 560ti on my otherwise 6 year old machine with everything maxed including tesselation, ssao, fxaa and so on, so yeah, the OP's problems with FPS is a bug - hopefully fixed by next weekend.

.. my point being you can get by on a 100$ graphics card. ;)

560 ti isn't a $100 card cheapest I see is still 200. You guys are probably having cpu bottlenecks. I have a 560 ti and I can get about 50 or so fps with most things on ultra had to tweak a couple down to manage a better framerate but im also running a 2600k cpu OCed to 4.7 ghz. Hoping nvidia puts out SLI profile soon so I can take advantage of my second 560 ti 

I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg

  Rightlov

Novice Member

Joined: 3/24/11
Posts: 72

6/18/12 11:12:53 AM#13
Originally posted by Aerowyn
Originally posted by Blackbrrd
Originally posted by Irus
Originally posted by sfc1971

I love it... but I also got a GTX 690 and it barely does 30 frames with all settings maxed. Gorgeous BUT how many can play it at it most beautifull?

This point alone... I can barely run it on the lowest settings... I was never into hi-tech graphics and still ain't.

I get 25 FPS on a 560ti on my otherwise 6 year old machine with everything maxed including tesselation, ssao, fxaa and so on, so yeah, the OP's problems with FPS is a bug - hopefully fixed by next weekend.

.. my point being you can get by on a 100$ graphics card. ;)

560 ti isn't a $100 card cheapest I see is still 200. You guys are probably having cpu bottlenecks. I have a 560 ti and can get about 50 or so fps with most things on ultra had to tweak a couple down to manage a better framerate but im also running a 2600k cpu OCed to 4.7 ghz. Hoping nvidia puts out SLI profile soon so I can take advantage of my second 560 ti 

Funcom has said that the SLI and Crossfire should be ready for launch, and hopefully before that.

  Aerowyn

Apprentice Member

Joined: 2/20/12
Posts: 7969

6/18/12 11:15:10 AM#14
Originally posted by Rightlov
Originally posted by Aerowyn
Originally posted by Blackbrrd
Originally posted by Irus
Originally posted by sfc1971

I love it... but I also got a GTX 690 and it barely does 30 frames with all settings maxed. Gorgeous BUT how many can play it at it most beautifull?

This point alone... I can barely run it on the lowest settings... I was never into hi-tech graphics and still ain't.

I get 25 FPS on a 560ti on my otherwise 6 year old machine with everything maxed including tesselation, ssao, fxaa and so on, so yeah, the OP's problems with FPS is a bug - hopefully fixed by next weekend.

.. my point being you can get by on a 100$ graphics card. ;)

560 ti isn't a $100 card cheapest I see is still 200. You guys are probably having cpu bottlenecks. I have a 560 ti and can get about 50 or so fps with most things on ultra had to tweak a couple down to manage a better framerate but im also running a 2600k cpu OCed to 4.7 ghz. Hoping nvidia puts out SLI profile soon so I can take advantage of my second 560 ti 

Funcom has said that the SLI and Crossfire should be ready for launch, and hopefully before that.

im sure it will be considering the partnership funcom has with nvidia

I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg

  jdnyc

Apprentice Member

Joined: 4/10/12
Posts: 1729

6/18/12 11:20:57 AM#15
Originally posted by Aerowyn
Originally posted by Rightlov
Originally posted by Aerowyn
Originally posted by Blackbrrd
Originally posted by Irus
Originally posted by sfc1971

I love it... but I also got a GTX 690 and it barely does 30 frames with all settings maxed. Gorgeous BUT how many can play it at it most beautifull?

This point alone... I can barely run it on the lowest settings... I was never into hi-tech graphics and still ain't.

I get 25 FPS on a 560ti on my otherwise 6 year old machine with everything maxed including tesselation, ssao, fxaa and so on, so yeah, the OP's problems with FPS is a bug - hopefully fixed by next weekend.

.. my point being you can get by on a 100$ graphics card. ;)

560 ti isn't a $100 card cheapest I see is still 200. You guys are probably having cpu bottlenecks. I have a 560 ti and can get about 50 or so fps with most things on ultra had to tweak a couple down to manage a better framerate but im also running a 2600k cpu OCed to 4.7 ghz. Hoping nvidia puts out SLI profile soon so I can take advantage of my second 560 ti 

Funcom has said that the SLI and Crossfire should be ready for launch, and hopefully before that.

im sure it will be considering the partnership funcom has with nvidia

that is a very good point.

  User Deleted
6/18/12 11:22:14 AM#16

6gb ram, i7 2.7 quad, and an old gtx260 i get 38fps on ultra steady. that little card is the gift that keeps on giving.

  Harafnir

Advanced Member

Joined: 2/18/04
Posts: 1355

6/18/12 11:28:13 AM#17

Played the beta on a really cheap, if I remember correctly second cheapest, laptop I bought to use for Word files to and from work. The game looks perfectly fine and no real hickups. Then.... it will be a failed game for a very small niche audience because of its system performance? Did you ever try the EQ II beta?! This is nothing!

"This is not a game to be tossed aside lightly.
It should be thrown with great force"

  sfc1971

Hard Core Member

Joined: 10/05/08
Posts: 418

 
OP  6/19/12 2:31:35 AM#18
Originally posted by Harafnir

Played the beta on a really cheap, if I remember correctly second cheapest, laptop I bought to use for Word files to and from work. The game looks perfectly fine and no real hickups. Then.... it will be a failed game for a very small niche audience because of its system performance? Did you ever try the EQ II beta?! This is nothing!

Not exactly what I meant. I meant to say that while the game looks good for people with good hardware, for those who don't (and reality is that outside the west, many have PC's that struggle with WoW) that won't help. SWG had amazing graphics for its time, so did AoC. 

So I am saying I love the graphics BUT they won't help the game make it judging by how the biggest game in history has poor graphics and all the graphic wonders that came before.

It is similar to how having a fantastic report from school and still unable to land a job.

You can a lot about this game on the forum posts, just the counter. It is dreadfully low compared to other game with a similar hype score.

The game seems very popular with its fans, of which I am one, but it is a small fanbase. Now for the future, is Funcom trying for a niche game that might actually do the only model that works (start small, then grow big) OR did they plan their finances on a instant WoW beater?

SWTOR had the latter plan and suffered for it. Lotro aimed for the middle and did okay. Eve Online aimed for the first and thrives.

I want this game to thrive. Due to bugs I was at time on an empty server and the game died a little, at crowded times you could see a dozen if not more players. Tackle a to though enemy and someone would help. That is what MMO's are about for me. Not chat, just people fighting for a common cause, helping each other out. And you need lots of players for that.

  User Deleted
6/19/12 2:42:11 AM#19

I didnt read the entire post but will say TSW is a very niche game and alot will not like it.  I think Funcom is ok with this because they are making a game for a certain subset of the MMO population that have grown tired of the usual WoW clone and I am ok with this.  As long as they remain profitable then I am happy.  I will be playing TSW because the game and all its intricies appeal to me greatly.

  Skuz

Novice Member

Joined: 12/25/08
Posts: 1038

"If you can''t laugh at yourself there''s always someone around to show you how it''s done!"

6/19/12 2:45:53 AM#20
Originally posted by sfc1971
Originally posted by Harafnir

Played the beta on a really cheap, if I remember correctly second cheapest, laptop I bought to use for Word files to and from work. The game looks perfectly fine and no real hickups. Then.... it will be a failed game for a very small niche audience because of its system performance? Did you ever try the EQ II beta?! This is nothing!

Not exactly what I meant. I meant to say that while the game looks good for people with good hardware, for those who don't (and reality is that outside the west, many have PC's that struggle with WoW) that won't help. SWG had amazing graphics for its time, so did AoC. 

So I am saying I love the graphics BUT they won't help the game make it judging by how the biggest game in history has poor graphics and all the graphic wonders that came before.

It is similar to how having a fantastic report from school and still unable to land a job.

You can a lot about this game on the forum posts, just the counter. It is dreadfully low compared to other game with a similar hype score.

The game seems very popular with its fans, of which I am one, but it is a small fanbase. Now for the future, is Funcom trying for a niche game that might actually do the only model that works (start small, then grow big) OR did they plan their finances on a instant WoW beater?

SWTOR had the latter plan and suffered for it. Lotro aimed for the middle and did okay. Eve Online aimed for the first and thrives.

I want this game to thrive. Due to bugs I was at time on an empty server and the game died a little, at crowded times you could see a dozen if not more players. Tackle a to though enemy and someone would help. That is what MMO's are about for me. Not chat, just people fighting for a common cause, helping each other out. And you need lots of players for that.

The Funcom quarterly financial reports are a pretty easy to locate source for the kind of info you are after, they have projected a good & worst case scenario, aiming for 500k players retained or at worst 280k (referred to as "Age of Conan scenario" lol) & with those they expect to be profitable with a percentage of players also buying into the cosmetics (clothes etc) cash shop.

I think they have planned for 1.0 to 1.5 million at launch/box sales & just under 40% of that sticking around which seems a fairly realistic goal given how the "wandering nomadic game tourist" demographic plays out.

2 Pages 1 2 » Search