Lord of The Rings i think will have as good as chance of AoC or WAR the graphics are sweet in it plus the quest system looks terific in LotRO it will definatly be better then DDO Turbine has definatly learned from their mistakes and LotRO will be Turbines BIG Hit
Why? Just give me one solid reason why LoTR is looking to be a big game and I'll buy what your saying. But so far it's magor fanbase seems to be made of harcore Tolken Fans and looking through the LoTR message boards most of them look like asshats. If the game weren't based on LoTR, I doubt it would get any hype at all. "We're proud to present another Fantasy game! The biggest difference between our game and every other game out there is that you will be stalking around a main character! We are not going to involve PvP because we have heavily scripted lore of what battles are and aren't supposed to happen and absolutely no flexability what so ever! If you liked our DDO game, you're sure to love this!"
Personally I don't see how anyone could like either LOTRO (which is basically DDO with LOTR paint slapped on) or Age of Conan (if the first 20 levels are still all played offline).
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
If i compare AoC vs. WAR, i have to say WAR wins in almost all categories.
But in just one point AoC is superior in comprehension to WAR, and this is the combat system. Ok, granted, noone could play AoC uptodate, and it could be crap.
But i am just bored as hell with the old autotarget and press button combat system of the old mmorpgs, it is just time for something new, something more interactive, something with more action and "skill" in it. But well, it is just me.
And i like this little game called Mount&Blade, the combat system from Mount&Blade is just above all others, and i hope everyday i could see something similar in a mmorpg.
On the other side, i personally favor a underdog like Darkfall even more then both of those games, at least up to now. It is just more a sandbox game, with more freedom to do, whatever you want, and a good pvp system, too. But it has to prove if it really can deliver it. IMHO of course.
But however, i will certainly try all three games, because all of them could be fun, and at least one of them should offer it.
I just watched that AoC video from CES, and... WAR hasn't got much to worry about.
AoC has a very pretty world, but the character models, and animations are straight out of Shadowbane. Talk about godawful. And having played AO, I have my own doubts about FC's ability to create a compelling gameplay experience.
Lotro is definitely not the game that's going to stop WAR. I mean they don't even have real pvp, just some bogus monster play thing. It will only draw care bears and causal players.
Are you doubting that there is market for casual play? *raises eyebrow*
Dude, they're a majority. They outnumber the hardcore PvP hounds by far. AoC is going to be a niche game at best (one of the reasons I look forward to it so much) and WAR isn't likely to draw a massive mainstream audience either (though it will do better then AoC). Marketwise, casual is where it's at.
Are you doubting that there is market for casual play? *raises eyebrow*
Dude, they're a majority. They outnumber the hardcore PvP hounds by far. AoC is going to be a niche game at best (one of the reasons I look forward to it so much) and WAR isn't likely to draw a massive mainstream audience either (though it will do better then AoC). Marketwise, casual is where it's at.
Truly looking at it from a marketing standpoint, WAR is doing something similar to that of WoW. It has a big name behind it (Warhammer, WoW has Blizzard) and a very large following. This is all before the game even came out. Assuming they make a good game, people will tell their friends about it (which is by far the most effective type of advertising) and the game will grow even more. WAR also has the advantage of WoWs fanbase. Now, don't get me wrong, there are plenty of people who enjoy WoW, and many who eat, sleep and drink WoW, but there are also many who have gotten or are getting bored with WoW. Most of these people enjoy MMORPGs and would love to hop to a new game that offered completely new content.
The developers of WAR have also stated they are not just making an MMORPG but a hobby experience. Most people don't have time to be "hardcore" with their hobby, so it appears they know the market. It has been stated several times that players will be able to "jump right in" and play for 30 minutes and still have a good time. That would be the casual player.
Agreed that casuals is where the money lies though. It's more profitable to have someone who plays 10 hours per month as a subscriber than someone who plays 30 hours per week. They both pay the same amount, but the first person eats up less resources (such as bandwidth).
Truly looking at it from a marketing standpoint, WAR is doing something similar to that of WoW. It has a big name behind it (Warhammer, WoW has Blizzard) and a very large following. This is all before the game even came out. Assuming they make a good game, people will tell their friends about it (which is by far the most effective type of advertising) and the game will grow even more. WAR also has the advantage of WoWs fanbase. Now, don't get me wrong, there are plenty of people who enjoy WoW, and many who eat, sleep and drink WoW, but there are also many who have gotten or are getting bored with WoW. Most of these people enjoy MMORPGs and would love to hop to a new game that offered completely new content. The developers of WAR have also stated they are not just making an MMORPG but a hobby experience. Most people don't have time to be "hardcore" with their hobby, so it appears they know the market. It has been stated several times that players will be able to "jump right in" and play for 30 minutes and still have a good time. That would be the casual player. Agreed that casuals is where the money lies though. It's more profitable to have someone who plays 10 hours per month as a subscriber than someone who plays 30 hours per week. They both pay the same amount, but the first person eats up less resources (such as bandwidth).
Perhaps you are right, and indeed, I hope you are right. So far WAR and AoC are the only next-gen games that I have any interest left in, so I'd be very happy if both succeed. If Mythic delivers on their concept, then maybe they will take their share of the market. Hell, if it can be enjoyed without a large time commitment then I may end up playing both!
Time will tell, I suppose. We still have to play the waiting game before we can all be Cassandras.
Well, WAR has a strong edge over AoC, no matter if they realize it or not.
AoC appeal almost exclusively to PvPers.
WAR appeals to many differents players, including the ultimate Care Bear that I am, which look with hope at a PvE-grouping experience that don't have to raid ever, maybe PvP a little, but rather avoid it, just as raiding...yet PvP is prolly the lesser of 2 evils...well...prolly, depend on how it is done.
PvEers are not looking in AoC direction much.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Well, WAR has a strong edge over AoC, no matter if they realize it or not.
AoC appeal almost exclusively to PvPers.
WAR appeals to many differents players, including the ultimate Care Bear that I am, which look with hope at a PvE-grouping experience that don't have to raid ever, maybe PvP a little, but rather avoid it, just as raiding...yet PvP is prolly the lesser of 2 evils...well...prolly, depend on how it is done.
PvEers are not looking in AoC direction much.
You'd think that, but AoC has raiding, crafting, player cities, and stuff like that. Granted they're not doing anything particularly well, but they are trying to offer everyone a little something.
Only problem is that the Player Cities are instanced areas, the Guild cities and PvP are all instanced areas, and the Raiding..... well I'm not going to even go there. I'll let Pantastic pick it up from there.
--------------------------------------------- I live to fight, and fight to live.
I hope WAR will have raiding, even though I play PvP the most. Raiding is a way to gain more weapons, and join fellow players. Even though you don't like raiding, other people do, and it will make more people join. Thereby founding for more content for development of PvP.
If WAR has both PvP and raiding, more people will join with different interests, which will result in a varity of what a game based on different things can manage to do. WoW also have different goals for attracting of more players, but WoW has already been explored by far too many players, and I hope WAR will have a lot more to accomplish.
Originally posted by Ignotika I hope WAR will have raiding, even though I play PvP the most. Raiding is a way to gain more weapons, and join fellow players. Even though you don't like raiding, other people do, and it will make more people join. Thereby founding for more content for development of PvP. If WAR has both PvP and raiding, more people will join with different interests, which will result in a varity of what a game based on different things can manage to do. WoW also have different goals for attracting of more players, but WoW has already been explored by far too many players, and I hope WAR will have a lot more to accomplish.
WAR has said no Raiding - except the city sieges.
why should they have it otherwise? hopefully, other companies learned from Blizzard's/whoever came first's mistake of making raid-parties so large(40 people), so they wouldnt even touch that kind of system..
Originally posted by Ignotika I hope WAR will have raiding, even though I play PvP the most. Raiding is a way to gain more weapons, and join fellow players. Even though you don't like raiding, other people do, and it will make more people join. Thereby founding for more content for development of PvP.
I'm not interested in another game where you get to raid or be second rate, I have 2 60s in WOW if I want that mechanic and WOW is turning down the overpowerdness of raid gear in the expansion. Raiders, meanwhile, are only attracted to raiding if it gives them a free ride in other content; only a tiny, tiny percentage of people would put up with the tedium of raids and the control-freak paradise of raid guilds if it wasn't for the loot.
WAR would either have to make raiding give better rewards than non-raiding (thus losing one of their biggest selling points over WOW or AOC), or would be spending resources to make content that wouldn't attract people. The fact that WAR is taking a philosophy of 'do what you enjoy, you'll get rewards from it' instead of 'do this and this or be second rate' is a big selling point.
I was sold when i read there will be no raiding in this game. I'm not the one to spend 5 hours in a raid listening to everyone bitch and moan over vent about pulling an add or not getting the drop they wanted. War is definanetly going to be a great game for casuals.
I truly enjoyed WoW, for about the first 5 months after release. Than all hell broke loose, the only way to be worth a dam was through raiding. I started playing WoW with about 10-15 online friends from previous games. Most of us never experienced that type of "forced" content so we were intrigued after awhile.... Than eventually greed/need for better gear started to set in. Keep in mind these were guys/gals I had been gaming with for years 3-4 and I had never seen this type of behaviour before. The raiding aspect of WoW actually tore our friendship apart. Now you could most likely say that was a character flaw that never surfaced, but still, a lot of us would hang out ingame on New Years, and other holidays getting drunk and doing stupid things ingame. Anyway, everyone is slowly starting to get back together again now that a few years passed, especially since WoW really isn't in the picture for most of us anymore.
The biggest appeal to me about WAR is, I can jump on with 5-6 of my friends and ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO DO SOMETHING, no more spamming for such and such class cause it won't exactly be necessary. Screw the raiding, there may be a few people out there that actually enjoy it just for the fun of it, but I haven't met em.
I hope WAR will have raiding, even though I play PvP the most. Raiding is a way to gain more weapons, and join fellow players. Even though you don't like raiding, other people do, and it will make more people join. Thereby founding for more content for development of PvP. If WAR has both PvP and raiding, more people will join with different interests, which will result in a varity of what a game based on different things can manage to do. WoW also have different goals for attracting of more players, but WoW has already been explored by far too many players, and I hope WAR will have a lot more to accomplish.
I'd rather not have raiding exist whatsoever why cant all those carebears just go play EQ or something let us full blooded warriors fight together in peace. all a carebear will do is cry and bitch and moan as soon as they lose a fair fight anyway I'd just rather they go play something else entirely lol.
WAR has said the best gear will be from pillaging home cities. But if I know mythic I bet items will not be the step-up in quality that you're use to in WoW but just something to give you a small edge or look awesome (ToA is being ignored for the purposes of this post, though ToA is tame compared to WoW raid gear...)
and the Raiding..... well I'm not going to even go there. I'll let Pantastic pick it up from there.
Anofalye hates raiding more than I do, I doubt your really need me here
Ok then, since i hate raiding more then everybody here, i guess i'm the one that should pick it up from here
There's a "big fat" contradiction in a game that present itself as primarily focused around PvP, yet that ask you to do boring PvE raid on the other hand to be able to compete. Are developpers all complete idiot or what?! Ok, let me draw the line once and for all then!
If you're going to have a PvP oriented game, you need "crafted items" to be the "best" you can find in the game. Adding raiding content is just gravy, but certainly not a requirement in a PvP centric game. This also implies a dynamic economy, which means no rubbish bind on pick up or whatever stupid idea like that. "Everybody" needs to be able to access "somehow" the uber stuff.
If you are PvE oriented, "then" i could careless about crafting, because ultimately, PvE games is about e-peen competition of showing off your armor, and there's nothing great in showing off if it's a crafted items that everybody can have. So WoW is the "perfect" E-peen game so far and it's PvP and crafting sucks hard as well. (Mission accomplish, /golf clap Blizzard for not pushing yourself harder)
So ffs developpers, at least try to keep some consistency when you try to mix up gameplay elements... War seem to have nailed it so far, hence why for me, it should be the no1 MMO on the market not more then a year after it's release. (By true MMO gaming culture and high quality standards: not junk food McDonalds or Britney Spears WoW white trash standards)
Get it now?
Thanks.
What deserves to be done, deserves to be "well" done...
Originally posted by undiesusa One word is all thats needed-Darkfall
No thanks, I'm looking for a game with real PVP, not a gank-and-loot game where players spend more time in PVE grinds for gear (and time moving that gear to the right spots etc.) than in actual PVP fights.
No thanks, I'm looking for a game with real PVP, not a gank-and-loot game where players spend more time in PVE grinds for gear (and time moving that gear to the right spots etc.) than in actual PVP fights.
Its difficult to explain how wrong you are.
Yes, Darkfall is FFA pvp, but it wont be Gank and Loot, nor will it have much of a PVE grind at all.
First off, it will have sieges of player cities. IE massive GvG warfare, something neither of these other games will have.
Two, It will have all player crafted weapons and items, so there wont be a pve grind for gear.
Three, PVP fights? I want you to explain to me how RvR is better then Gvg, NvN, FvF, pvp for small cities, large cities, npc cities, resource points, mines. The amount of options you are talking about for Warhammer is pitiful.
Oh yeah, much less the fact darkfall will both be Skill based for your character, and a skill based combat system like an FPS.
Yes, you go ahead and play your "real pvp" game lol.
Comments
Personally I don't see how anyone could like either LOTRO (which is basically DDO with LOTR paint slapped on) or Age of Conan (if the first 20 levels are still all played offline).
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
But in just one point AoC is superior in comprehension to WAR, and this is the combat system. Ok, granted, noone could play AoC uptodate, and it could be crap.
But i am just bored as hell with the old autotarget and press button combat system of the old mmorpgs, it is just time for something new, something more interactive, something with more action and "skill" in it. But well, it is just me.
And i like this little game called Mount&Blade, the combat system from Mount&Blade is just above all others, and i hope everyday i could see something similar in a mmorpg.
On the other side, i personally favor a underdog like Darkfall even more then both of those games, at least up to now. It is just more a sandbox game, with more freedom to do, whatever you want, and a good pvp system, too. But it has to prove if it really can deliver it. IMHO of course.
But however, i will certainly try all three games, because all of them could be fun, and at least one of them should offer it.
I just watched that AoC video from CES, and... WAR hasn't got much to worry about.
AoC has a very pretty world, but the character models, and animations are straight out of Shadowbane. Talk about godawful. And having played AO, I have my own doubts about FC's ability to create a compelling gameplay experience.
Dude, they're a majority. They outnumber the hardcore PvP hounds by far. AoC is going to be a niche game at best (one of the reasons I look forward to it so much) and WAR isn't likely to draw a massive mainstream audience either (though it will do better then AoC). Marketwise, casual is where it's at.
How do you kill that which has no life?
Truly looking at it from a marketing standpoint, WAR is doing something similar to that of WoW. It has a big name behind it (Warhammer, WoW has Blizzard) and a very large following. This is all before the game even came out. Assuming they make a good game, people will tell their friends about it (which is by far the most effective type of advertising) and the game will grow even more. WAR also has the advantage of WoWs fanbase. Now, don't get me wrong, there are plenty of people who enjoy WoW, and many who eat, sleep and drink WoW, but there are also many who have gotten or are getting bored with WoW. Most of these people enjoy MMORPGs and would love to hop to a new game that offered completely new content.
The developers of WAR have also stated they are not just making an MMORPG but a hobby experience. Most people don't have time to be "hardcore" with their hobby, so it appears they know the market. It has been stated several times that players will be able to "jump right in" and play for 30 minutes and still have a good time. That would be the casual player.
Agreed that casuals is where the money lies though. It's more profitable to have someone who plays 10 hours per month as a subscriber than someone who plays 30 hours per week. They both pay the same amount, but the first person eats up less resources (such as bandwidth).
Time will tell, I suppose. We still have to play the waiting game before we can all be Cassandras.
How do you kill that which has no life?
Well, WAR has a strong edge over AoC, no matter if they realize it or not.
AoC appeal almost exclusively to PvPers.
WAR appeals to many differents players, including the ultimate Care Bear that I am, which look with hope at a PvE-grouping experience that don't have to raid ever, maybe PvP a little, but rather avoid it, just as raiding...yet PvP is prolly the lesser of 2 evils...well...prolly, depend on how it is done.
PvEers are not looking in AoC direction much.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Only problem is that the Player Cities are instanced areas, the Guild cities and PvP are all instanced areas, and the Raiding..... well I'm not going to even go there. I'll let Pantastic pick it up from there.
---------------------------------------------
I live to fight, and fight to live.
Anofalye hates raiding more than I do, I doubt your really need me here
I hope WAR will have raiding, even though I play PvP the most. Raiding is a way to gain more weapons, and join fellow players. Even though you don't like raiding, other people do, and it will make more people join. Thereby founding for more content for development of PvP.
If WAR has both PvP and raiding, more people will join with different interests, which will result in a varity of what a game based on different things can manage to do. WoW also have different goals for attracting of more players, but WoW has already been explored by far too many players, and I hope WAR will have a lot more to accomplish.
WAR has said no Raiding - except the city sieges.
why should they have it otherwise? hopefully, other companies learned from Blizzard's/whoever came first's mistake of making raid-parties so large(40 people), so they wouldnt even touch that kind of system..
I'm not interested in another game where you get to raid or be second rate, I have 2 60s in WOW if I want that mechanic and WOW is turning down the overpowerdness of raid gear in the expansion. Raiders, meanwhile, are only attracted to raiding if it gives them a free ride in other content; only a tiny, tiny percentage of people would put up with the tedium of raids and the control-freak paradise of raid guilds if it wasn't for the loot.
WAR would either have to make raiding give better rewards than non-raiding (thus losing one of their biggest selling points over WOW or AOC), or would be spending resources to make content that wouldn't attract people. The fact that WAR is taking a philosophy of 'do what you enjoy, you'll get rewards from it' instead of 'do this and this or be second rate' is a big selling point.
The biggest appeal to me about WAR is, I can jump on with 5-6 of my friends and ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO DO SOMETHING, no more spamming for such and such class cause it won't exactly be necessary. Screw the raiding, there may be a few people out there that actually enjoy it just for the fun of it, but I haven't met em.
Anofalye hates raiding more than I do, I doubt your really need me here
Ok then, since i hate raiding more then everybody here, i guess i'm the one that should pick it up from here
There's a "big fat" contradiction in a game that present itself as primarily focused around PvP, yet that ask you to do boring PvE raid on the other hand to be able to compete. Are developpers all complete idiot or what?! Ok, let me draw the line once and for all then!
If you're going to have a PvP oriented game, you need "crafted items" to be the "best" you can find in the game. Adding raiding content is just gravy, but certainly not a requirement in a PvP centric game. This also implies a dynamic economy, which means no rubbish bind on pick up or whatever stupid idea like that. "Everybody" needs to be able to access "somehow" the uber stuff.
If you are PvE oriented, "then" i could careless about crafting, because ultimately, PvE games is about e-peen competition of showing off your armor, and there's nothing great in showing off if it's a crafted items that everybody can have. So WoW is the "perfect" E-peen game so far and it's PvP and crafting sucks hard as well. (Mission accomplish, /golf clap Blizzard for not pushing yourself harder)
So ffs developpers, at least try to keep some consistency when you try to mix up gameplay elements... War seem to have nailed it so far, hence why for me, it should be the no1 MMO on the market not more then a year after it's release. (By true MMO gaming culture and high quality standards: not junk food McDonalds or Britney Spears WoW white trash standards)
Get it now?
Thanks.
What deserves to be done, deserves to be "well" done...
WoW is only one of many games.
Raiding doesen't necessarily mean 40 people, 8 hour dungeon crawl.
PVP FTW!
Darkfall
Hate to do this to another game with great potential, but I think most of us here are looking for a game to enjoy this decade.
Its gonna happen this year, or next, and it will still beat the socks off either of these games.
Once you read Darkfall's FAQ its kinda hard to settle for playing these lesser games.
No thanks, I'm looking for a game with real PVP, not a gank-and-loot game where players spend more time in PVE grinds for gear (and time moving that gear to the right spots etc.) than in actual PVP fights.
No thanks, I'm looking for a game with real PVP, not a gank-and-loot game where players spend more time in PVE grinds for gear (and time moving that gear to the right spots etc.) than in actual PVP fights.
Its difficult to explain how wrong you are.
Yes, Darkfall is FFA pvp, but it wont be Gank and Loot, nor will it have much of a PVE grind at all.
First off, it will have sieges of player cities. IE massive GvG warfare, something neither of these other games will have.
Two, It will have all player crafted weapons and items, so there wont be a pve grind for gear.
Three, PVP fights? I want you to explain to me how RvR is better then Gvg, NvN, FvF, pvp for small cities, large cities, npc cities, resource points, mines. The amount of options you are talking about for Warhammer is pitiful.
Oh yeah, much less the fact darkfall will both be Skill based for your character, and a skill based combat system like an FPS.
Yes, you go ahead and play your "real pvp" game lol.
nublet.