Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
I give this game a 33% chance of not being rubbish
Nerubian
Member Posts: 32
Were dealing with Mythic here. I had the misfortune to play DAoC for just over a year at its release and I havent had a more foul taste in my mouth after leaving a game before or since.
The only hope is that Mythic actually learned something about game design and game balance in the last 5 years and that Games Workshop is keeping them under a microscope to make sure they dont screw it up. Maybe they already have since the time I left.
I do hope they pull it off as I played tabletop wh in my teens and I would give it a go for that reason.
The only hope is that Mythic actually learned something about game design and game balance in the last 5 years and that Games Workshop is keeping them under a microscope to make sure they dont screw it up. Maybe they already have since the time I left.
I do hope they pull it off as I played tabletop wh in my teens and I would give it a go for that reason.
Comments
...It took you 3 years to figure out you didn't like DAOC?? I figured out I didn't like EQ2 before my free first month was up.
I am a very new player of Dark Age of Camelot, so I cannot offer a completely full-fledged opinion of the game; I will say, however, that except for a couple of very minor issues, I am having an absolutely great time with the game, despite its age. If Warhammer Online solves some of the minor issues and builds itself as a kind of 'update' to the Dark Age of Camelot system, then I will likely be extremely pleased with the upcoming title.
We will just have to wait and see---it's really far too early to 'call' this game with any sort of rationality.
You don't give arguments or feedback to your post as to why you didn't liked DAoC. In fact, to me, you don't really constructive post as to why you think it is a failure. Don't take me wrong, I'm not a fanboy, for neither you or I have played the game. Yes, I'm anticipating the game, but judging it as a possible failure so soon is rubbish and almost sounds like a hate-post.
Really, before you post that it's likely to become a failure, show us why you think so. Not because you found DAoC rubbish, it's a different game, although based on the same kind of code, and didn't told why that was rubbish to you.
I agreed with Gorthuk. There is no any solid information about you judgement about this matter. Please try to make a post where you backup you argument about a 33% score.
Suffice to say back then Mythic had practically no idea how to dev a mmorpg.
The game had the worst flavour of the month overpowered class sydrome of any mmo I have played. The patches brought utterly arbitrary nerfs and buffs all over the place without a shred of cohesive thought behind them.
Anyone who played in the first year cannot refute the game was a disaster of balance and mechanics of the highest order.
I assume they have actually learned something since then as the game is still going which it would not be otherwise but its undoubtedly been a long road.
As for flavour of the month classes yes this happened, but im my exp it was a fotm group set up that depicted this, not that one class was better than all the rest.
for a skill based mmo I still think DAoC is the best choice for PvP action. (and by skill based i mean a good player or good group of players can beat far greater numbers if they know what they are doing)
imo WaR will be fantastic.
Er if you played in the first your then hello?, smite clerics?, as someone said earlier Theurgist bombers, Thane nukers, Skalds, 1 shot kill scouts with 9 second melee stuns, it goes on and on.
/end rant of a time years in the past.
When DAOC came out MMO's were still relatively new especially ones trying to do what DAoC does, sure there was Ultima Online and the original Everquest but still the genre as such was still fledgling infact one would say its only reaching those troubled 'teen' years now. Mythic made mistakes like any other company I think pre judging a game based on what company's name is on it is completely ridiculous. Development teams change alot over long periods of time and especially from game to game. Be patient and save your judgements on the game for when betas start ramping up.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
I'd have to agree about DAoC. It was a big bite for the first shot out there. It had/has some innovative features. Mythic never seemed to be so concerned about class balance and neither am I. Each class has it's place if it's programmed right. Methinks DAoC and WAR are both intended to be group games when it's player versus player (in whatever rendition) and not one on one.
I think ppl talking about 'overpowered this' and 'one-shot that' have unfortunately seen an indirect problem stemming from DAoC's biggest failure and one that I've seen a few other MMO's repeat. That is, the overall graphic/server load, content level and subscription levels. DAoC was intended to be played with MUCH higher subscription and player levels. It was meant to be a true army versus army. What happened was ppl too spread out or subscription levels too low to make it work like it should and people ended up in small or solo combat against other players. That's where the class differences were too great to bear 'meaningful' or 'enjoyable' combat for everyone.
I give WAR about a 90% chance of being a flood victim of the crybabies screaming class balance based on it's perceived intent.
I see EQ2 and possibly VGSOH going down the same road but for different causes. EQ2 has such a demand on graphics and the server (per player) that it can't put enough players on one server to make the group-required quests achievable in all the different level ranges and racial areas. VGSOH seems to have stemmed it a bit by make things more solo-able which actually ends up helping retain subscribers, but it's so easy to wander off and lose 15~20 minutes trying get your way back to anything more meaningful than pretty scenery.
You have to be impressed by WoW. It has been so cleverly designed (below ~45, only) that it boggles the mind. The pace, group levels, number of questing towns, speed to get from town to town, overall size of the map, number of players each server can support, etc. They have all been designed to keep people together to get stuff done, socialize and move along. The map sizes are just large enough to have some nice variety without getting too big and letting people thin out and slow their progress. What they were thinking with the content above 50 or so is all about cold hard cash, though, and that's why I don't play the game.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
Right, I mentioned the group issues with EQ2.
Call it negative or positive, Blizz made a very clever play for a common denominator game. Stop trying to interpret every comment of a successful (I didn't even say it was good!) feature of Wow and a fanboy comment.
I don't like WoW nor do I like EQ2 for the stated reasons. I am just saying that WoW's move seems quite calculated and EQ2's is just a failure; plain and simple. Once a certain game has below a range of players online most of the time, it becomes quite ineffective in the way it was intended and server population/subscription falls of fast. EQ2 has that problem. DAoC has that problem. VGSOH seems to have that problem. WoW doesn't have that problem until higher.
Look, you can all argue back and forth on wether WoW was a very well built game or just really shallow game with a good market but i think we can agree that there's definitely room for improvement:
-WoW had no RvR
-Most of the factions had very shallow reasons to oppose each other especially compared to WAR.
-The Races played pretty much the same way if you could select the same class for that race as for others.
-The detials could use some work and the recycled models and lack of variaty between characters definitely wasn't fun.
There's others too but it would take me a while to list all of them. Basically though, WAR accepts that it advances from WoW making it the truest next gen MMO. I mean, WoW had to accept that it came from games like Everquest and fix their problems, that's basically what WAR is doing to WoW. WoW's PvP sucked, WAR will try to fix that. WoW had too many Fed-ex and Kill-x quests, WAR will try to have more depth. PvP in MMOs has always been an extra, out of the way thing, WAR will make it core content.
The point is PvP wise WoW is heading in the right direction and in truth was never what it claimed to be at the begining.