I think there is need for "massive" its not really semantics, it sets it apart from a normal online game. I want to interact with hundreds of people in a world. Not a few people in a small instance I can do that in Diablo 2 or something I play for free. If this is a trend MMO's will die, just because its massive doesnt mean it has to have 40 man raids either, I thought the whole reason they did that was because the guilds who raided were some damn hardcore and eliteist, the casual gamer saw no endgame nothing to do with population. Infact I would say it increased population because it gave most players more to do.
No game ever allows you to interact with hundreds of people at the same time. You never group with more than 5-6. You never fight more than a few at a time. It is an illusion that you interact with hundred of people. The only exception is an auction house, which can be easily implemented into any instance game.
And this *is* the trend. And if you think MMO is going to die, just look at how WOW is expanding the market.
WOW actually made the player requirement of some dungeon goes DOWN so that it is easier to coordinate.
And look at how popular the 5-man heroics are. No one wants an open world dungeon where bunch of people are competing to camp the same boss. Instance is the future, whether you like it or not.
I agree,with the Op. The most part people who like games like AoC , aren't mmo players, they are more of a platform gamer. They like to pretend to be pc gamers cause they have a computer, but the end, they will shift back into something that is comfortable for them to play , easy and visually (not mentally) stimulating. The fact that games like these platform pc titles are becoming more popular is a sign more and more platform gamers are playing pc's . imo
Platform ish, perhaps. But to say no PC gamers are going to stay with it is false. I am a PC gamer only. I can’t even more around on a 360.
So, sorry – wrong.
Perhaps it is trying to bridge the gap, which from a sales perspective would be a very smart thing to do.
I just released this guy created a MMORPG.com account just for this thread. F*cking anti-advertiser.
One of the better ones, I have to give him credit.
Ya, you are right. I planned slamming AoC on the 7th of july 2003 (look up my join date), and to give myself credibility, I made an account almost 5 years ago. Im a very patient guy.
I think there is need for "massive" its not really semantics, it sets it apart from a normal online game. I want to interact with hundreds of people in a world. Not a few people in a small instance I can do that in Diablo 2 or something I play for free. If this is a trend MMO's will die, just because its massive doesnt mean it has to have 40 man raids either, I thought the whole reason they did that was because the guilds who raided were some damn hardcore and eliteist, the casual gamer saw no endgame nothing to do with population. Infact I would say it increased population because it gave most players more to do.
No game ever allows you to interact with hundreds of people at the same time.
LotrO Monster player
Showbane Shangrilla Sieges of 2007 US/EU vs KR/China
Both games I've participated in 200vs200 battles as the shadownbane battles reached 150 vs 400 (400 chinese players vs 150 NA/EU)
So you are wrong in your "assumption"
Two games don't make a genre, just like AoC isn't "unmaking" the genre. Dramatic stunts aside, instances were the response to the overloaded open-world mechanics of camping some site for hours on end waiting for some stupid monster to come up, only to see it go down to another group who was first in line, and so on. Like someone else said, instancing is where it's at for now, and until game developers find a balance, that's most of what we're gonna see for a while. Apparently, WAR is trying to achieve that, so maybe we won't have to wait much, but then again, it's still a little way from release.
AoC - is there any limit to the depth this genre can plummet to?
We had seamless worlds in 1997 with UO, in 2000'ish with AC, not long after with DAoC, and then the immense SWG.
Planetside with its up to 300 people in the same battle, I heard that Runescape can have 1000vs1000 (can that be true??) in the same battle. DAoC had easily several hundred in the same battle as well.
Now AoC has hit with such a huge success. What the hell is happening? How can the players accept the freedom being taken away from them? How can they accept being confined with technology more limiting than the singleplayer game Oblivion?
Battles confined to instanced battlegrounds chopped off from the world's reality? 48vs48 in each battle - slightly more than Battlefield2 and ALOT less than Joint Operations?
Heavy instancing of the main world, making it totally inconsistent, and allowing for such artifacts as people fleeing combat by switching instance? Two people being at the same spot in the world, but cannot see each other? A nightmare of inconsistency and immersion-breaking, while at the same time crippling (supposedly) important elements like PvP. Proceeding in the world by talking to an NPC, so you can be transported to one of a number of instances of the next area instead of just simply walking there?
Are the players really willingly sitting there, as the developers chip pellet after pellet away on the very foundation of Massive Multiplayer?
The mainstreamification of this genre looks more and more like a curse.
I agree.
I do not, and will not, play/buy AoC.
Freedom is the most important feature for MMORPGs, and single-player RPGs do a better job of storytelling and fun than MMOs designed like single-players with PvP.
No game ever allows you to interact with hundreds of people at the same time. You never group with more than 5-6. You never fight more than a few at a time. It is an illusion that you interact with hundred of people.
What complete rubbish, you're gaming experience is obviously limited to WoW; guess what there is a whole list of other games that do different things than WoW!!! sheesh!
Here are some examples that I am personally familiar with;
Planetside - interact directly with hundreds of people during battles.
EvE - Interact directly with hundreds of people and large scale Corp fights can easily reach 150+ ships.
So don't bring other MMOs down to the lowly level of AoC because large numbers interacting directly IS done and HAS been done for many years before that excuse for an MMO was ever thought about.
With the growing MMOFPS trend I think it's becoming more and more legitimate to compare MMOs with games such as BF or Joint Operations.
However, an MMO with FPS-ish combat, opposed to a passive combat system, becomes much much more difficult to implement in large gameworlds such as the ones in EvE, VG or even WoW. Consequently we get more instancing to decrease the technical limitations.
If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe. - Carl Sagan
I think there is need for "massive" its not really semantics, it sets it apart from a normal online game. I want to interact with hundreds of people in a world. Not a few people in a small instance I can do that in Diablo 2 or something I play for free. If this is a trend MMO's will die, just because its massive doesnt mean it has to have 40 man raids either, I thought the whole reason they did that was because the guilds who raided were some damn hardcore and eliteist, the casual gamer saw no endgame nothing to do with population. Infact I would say it increased population because it gave most players more to do.
No game ever allows you to interact with hundreds of people at the same time. You never group with more than 5-6. You never fight more than a few at a time. It is an illusion that you interact with hundred of people. The only exception is an auction house, which can be easily implemented into any instance game.
just wanna correct ur last statement nariusseldon, there are plenty of games that allow you to interact with hundreds! of people, the one i am most familiar with is lineage2 where ya can easily siege 400vs400 on good servers (atleast ya could back in the day), sure if ur system wasnt good ya had some lag, but god there were plenty of people there
same for a number of the high end raids there (epic raids), they used to require hundred+ people to show to kill a dragon cause it simply wasnt doable with less at the time
and to slightly get back to get back to the op, i do agree seemless > instanced world
however, the game i am following now pretty much, and which will hopefully pull me right back into mmorpgs cause they are pretty much dead for me atm, aion some may have heard of it some of you may have not, is mostly non instanced aswell, i say mostly cause well it aint 100%, more like 90% open 10% closed i think, if you want a good mmorpg with unique and high quality content (which hopefully are points where aion will deliver) there is no other way as having it instanced... example:
quests:
everyone knows the fed-ex quests of whatever mmorpg or the go here, kill 10 WhoGivesA-_-Mobs and go back to town
however in singleplayer games ya wont see those quests alot less cause most (again in high quality games) quests rely on heavy scripts and the fun starts now, in a totally open mmorpgs its far to hard (the ammount of variables for every script action is mind boggling) to get quests anywhere near the complexity and depth of singleplayer games (if ya played the mainstory line of arcanum (i do love that game ) or a more recent mass effect (Which was well made of pure win, the mainstory line atleast, between freezes)) is flat out impossible or near impossible.
For things like that to improve the depth and overall quality instances, sadly, are just a requirement almost, sure there are plenty of memories of good open areas, but often things dont go as planned (read griefing when ur having fun/people botting on ur favourite xp spot etc) and instances do offer some kind of relief there
in short :P
Instances are necesairy, and they are good, as long as they dont lower the overal immersion or quality of a game, but instead lift it to a higher level
UO, DAoC, SB, SWG, PS and probably many others have no instances, so I believe it is you who is confused.
Maybe I stroked-out, but I could've sworn that the Corvette and Geonosian Cave were instanced in SWG.
I agree Terranah, as much as I bitch and complain now ... SWG is still one of my favorite MMOs. The MMO genre has never seen, and most likely will never see again, a community like that game had.
Correlian Corvette was. Geonosian cave was not instanced, thus the "camping Acklay for bones". Yeah, i miss SWG. Best gaming years of my life. Hope to relive something close to that again.
Thus why I do not play AoC - Seamless worlds are a big thing to me, which is one thing that WoW did very well. I do not care for the super pretty graphics, I have a PS3 and an HDTV, that gives me my pretty graphics, in an MMO, I want to have a vast, open, great world.
http://www.warriornation.net Current MMO: LoTRO LForward: The Agency Played MMO: V:SoH, SWG, WoW, EVE, RFO, FFXI, LOTRO, EQ, AoC, EQII, AA, COH/V, D&D, LII, SL, DAoC, AL, PS, SB, CO, AO, TR.
One of the problems is that new players, who form the vast majority, never played anything except single player games with multiplayer options, or more and more the small multiplayer games.
They don't know or expect any different.
I think eventually they will start to want for more, because "worlds" just cry out for it. They get bored with the grind, and start thinking about how it could be.
What most likely to happen is that the game industry will see the falling sales and just drop out of it, instead of being bold and innovative.
One of the problems is that new players, who form the vast majority, never played anything except single player games with multiplayer options, or more and more the small multiplayer games. They don't know or expect any different.
Or, God forbid, they don't want any different.
I swear, I get sick of this condecending attitude of "players new to the genre aren't into virtual worlds because they don't know better yet".
Not everyone looks to the virtual world model as the "one true way" for MMORPGs. A lot of people just want a fun game they can play with others.
Well, for myself, after SWG was destroyed, I've been looking for that "virtual world", "sandbox" type of game (unsuccessfully) ever since. I almost hate to admit it, but I finally broke down and tried WoW, found a great guild on an RP server, and am enjoying it immensely. Still not a sandbox, but at least an MMO with a lot of fun and charm.
Just tried AoC and already I'm REALLY tired of Newbie island. OK, it doesn't "suck", I don't think, but it's just not a whole lot of fun. I agree with most of these posts. The instancing is WAY out of hand in AoC. Two weeks after launch and already they need to do a huge revamp of PvP (so much for the "M" rating...maybe it's NOT just the rabid-12-year-olds after all, and I apologize to all those under 18 who I've bashed for ganking in the past!). The quest-for-XP was a good idea, but it's pretty much grown all out of proporation as well. Yes, that's the single-player approach to levelling. Have to agree with the posters here on that one as well.
AoC is very nice graphically, but, goodness, I've got a relatively hi-end machine with a top-of-the-line graphics card (8800GTX), dual core processor and 2 gigs of ram. Still, I need to play on medium to get the game to run smoothly.
And the mobs aren't balanced really well either. This killone-rez-run-killone-rez-run-rinse-repeat-until-the-instance-is-cleared...what is UP with that? Unless I'm 6 levels above the mobs, I can't take the 3, 4, 5 or 6 that swamp me at nearly every turn. Granted, as a lvl 18 bear shaman, I'm still in the newbie zone, but yikes! Does kinda damp down the fun factor.
Another gripe...OK, I like voice acting as much as the next guy. But let's have a little consistency. I'm still trying to figure out which accent fits which race, if there's any plan at all to that. Spanish, Scottish, East European, noble-speak, pirate-speak all jumbled up together? OK, I know it's a polyglot city, but I still can't figure out which is which. Part of the great fun of WoW in that regard is that you KNOW how the different races are gonna sound. Every time I have to interact with a troll, for example, I just have to smile as I know I'm gonna be hearing that wonderful Jamaican accent. Also makes rping that race REALLY easy and a lot of fun. A troll herbalist? WooT! "Ya mon! I be seein' the herb! Give me a minute, Mon, I be back!"
Once again, I have to give Funcom props for trying something a little different with the combat system. I don't like it much, because I'm not really good at it yet, I suppose, but at least it's a little different. Problem is that the "gritty" feel just comes out "depressing" instead, so I don't think I'll be playing long enough to GET good at it. As most good writers know, if you don't throw in a bit of change-of-pace (humor?), your audience is going to get weighed down pretty fast. (I never liked Battlestar Galactica for just that reason...it's ALL doom-and-gloom! I wound up rooting for the cylons in BOTH versions of the show!) And, as an altaholic, I REALLY don't like the fact that everybody starts out in the same place with the same quests over and over. I didn't enjoy the newbie island the first time around. I'm not looking forward to going through it all again!
AoC doesn't "suck", but it's just not "fun" enough for me. I MUCH preferred Auto Assault and miss that one too. So it's back to waiting and hoping that Mythic will hit with Warhammer. The concept of the game has the humor built in, and we KNOW (from DAoC) that they know how to do PvP and make it fun. And as for the crafting sandbox of UO and SWG...well...maybe next lifetime.
-- Xix "I know what you're thinking: 'Why, oh WHY, didn't I take the BLUE pill?'"
The game will be on multiple servers or "worlds," but players will not be bound to a world and may therefore change worlds as they would districts, except that they encompass the entire game, instead of just an outpost.
There will be changes to the instancing system used. Persistent areas, similar to those traditionally used in other online multiplayer games, will be introduced to Guild Wars which may allow players to meet and interact while exploring.
Instances will still be used for missions and dungeons.
An "Event System" will be used to notify players of big events in the world: the return of a dragon, for instance.
That doesn't sound like AoC to me.
Sounds exactly like aoc except better and cheaper.
Such a tired old argument. It's boring, really. UO, AC, DAoC, and SWG were not seamless. Please go review your nostalgic memories against the realities of those games. They were much more seamless than an instanced, zoned game...yes. But the claim is false...and it simply murders the argument.
how could you have such a huge post count and not know the difference between an instance-fest versus Seamless world? I've just lost a gang of respect for you with that post. Please dont post misinformation just to prove your point
One of the problems is that new players, who form the vast majority, never played anything except single player games with multiplayer options, or more and more the small multiplayer games. They don't know or expect any different.
Or, God forbid, they don't want any different.
I swear, I get sick of this condecending attitude of "players new to the genre aren't into virtual worlds because they don't know better yet".
Not everyone looks to the virtual world model as the "one true way" for MMORPGs. A lot of people just want a fun game they can play with others.
Well the vast majority of gamers are indeed familiar with instances or small servers (see GTA IV, Halo 3, CoD 4, Counterstrike, etc). The vast majority seriously doesn't know any better that's all there is to it. The vast majority of gamers are still playing casual online games, console, and other less time demanding types of games. Any chart will tell you that. I see nothing wrong with that post you captioned its plain common sense too me
How is AoC any different from current mmos;- WoW instances it's battlegrounds, Everquest 2 has multiple instances of the same area. Admittedly haven't tried AoC yet but doesn't sound like any bigger travesty to the genre than already achieved by other mmos.
The reason they have small instances and 48v48 sieges Is obvious. Because its going to be on the Xbox360.
And 48 is quite enough. How often you see more than 20+ people on screen all at once anyway?
Do you even know what an MMO is?
By your logic you would be fine in BF2.
I started with UO beta so I played MMOs from the beginning.
BF2 is fine, if it is done in a fantasy setting. A game is a game. Why cling to the past? A dungeon is more fun with a group of 5 than 50 people camping the same boss so more people != better.
So if I only need to play with 5 people in a dungeon zone, why care about whether the instance can support more people?
Why pay a subscription to just party with 5 people (for my type of gamer)? I can boot up my xbox 360 and play GTA 4 with more then that. And I promise you I will have much more fun and get better value for my dollar then squabbling over who gets what in the pit of a dark dungeon.
Dungeons are teh suck. I enjoy interacting with a huge volume of players. I like to see their gear, maybe socialize, and I want to do events with my *entire* guild. I dont want to tell people they cant come because the dungeon instance only allows 5 players
Maybe that's an MMO to you. That is fine. Nothing wrong with that. But that is not what I find ideal. I like doing things with all my friends. Not just 5 of them
Why pay a subscription to just party with 5 people (for my type of gamer)? I can boot up my xbox 360 and play GTA 4 with more then that. And I promise you I will have much more fun and get better value for my dollar then squabbling over who gets what in the pit of a dark dungeon. Dungeons are teh suck. I enjoy interacting with a huge volume of players. I like to see their gear, maybe socialize, and I want to do events with my *entire* guild. I dont want to tell people they cant come because the dungeon instance only allows 5 players Maybe that's an MMO to you. That is fine. Nothing wrong with that. But that is not what I find ideal. I like doing things with all my friends. Not just 5 of them [edit] fixed grammar
Because there is no other multiplayer fantasy game with the amount of content of WOW. GTA is not fantasy. There is no levels, no class, no loot. Now Diablo 1/2 come close and I also play that .. but the amount of content there is much more limited.
I also like to see other's gear and do AH. There is no AH in any of the other games. $15 is less than a decent lunch. I have no problem paying $15 a month for something I enjoy. Any event beyond 5 people is a bitch to coordinate. I am not averse to playing with more .. but working to do it is too much. Battleground has more than 5 on each side and that is fine.
Comments
"Freedom is just another name for nothing left to lose" - Janis Joplin
.jpg)
No game ever allows you to interact with hundreds of people at the same time. You never group with more than 5-6. You never fight more than a few at a time. It is an illusion that you interact with hundred of people. The only exception is an auction house, which can be easily implemented into any instance game.
And this *is* the trend. And if you think MMO is going to die, just look at how WOW is expanding the market.
WOW actually made the player requirement of some dungeon goes DOWN so that it is easier to coordinate.
And look at how popular the 5-man heroics are. No one wants an open world dungeon where bunch of people are competing to camp the same boss. Instance is the future, whether you like it or not.
Platform ish, perhaps. But to say no PC gamers are going to stay with it is false. I am a PC gamer only. I can’t even more around on a 360.
So, sorry – wrong.
Perhaps it is trying to bridge the gap, which from a sales perspective would be a very smart thing to do.
"Freedom is just another name for nothing left to lose" - Janis Joplin
.jpg)
"Freedom is just another name for nothing left to lose" - Janis Joplin
.jpg)
Ya, you are right. I planned slamming AoC on the 7th of july 2003 (look up my join date), and to give myself credibility, I made an account almost 5 years ago. Im a very patient guy.
No game ever allows you to interact with hundreds of people at the same time.
LotrO Monster playerShowbane Shangrilla Sieges of 2007 US/EU vs KR/China
Both games I've participated in 200vs200 battles as the shadownbane battles reached 150 vs 400 (400 chinese players vs 150 NA/EU)
So you are wrong in your "assumption"
Two games don't make a genre, just like AoC isn't "unmaking" the genre. Dramatic stunts aside, instances were the response to the overloaded open-world mechanics of camping some site for hours on end waiting for some stupid monster to come up, only to see it go down to another group who was first in line, and so on. Like someone else said, instancing is where it's at for now, and until game developers find a balance, that's most of what we're gonna see for a while. Apparently, WAR is trying to achieve that, so maybe we won't have to wait much, but then again, it's still a little way from release.
I do not, and will not, play/buy AoC.
Freedom is the most important feature for MMORPGs, and single-player RPGs do a better job of storytelling and fun than MMOs designed like single-players with PvP.
Here are some examples that I am personally familiar with;
Planetside - interact directly with hundreds of people during battles.
EvE - Interact directly with hundreds of people and large scale Corp fights can easily reach 150+ ships.
So don't bring other MMOs down to the lowly level of AoC because large numbers interacting directly IS done and HAS been done for many years before that excuse for an MMO was ever thought about.
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
With the growing MMOFPS trend I think it's becoming more and more legitimate to compare MMOs with games such as BF or Joint Operations.
However, an MMO with FPS-ish combat, opposed to a passive combat system, becomes much much more difficult to implement in large gameworlds such as the ones in EvE, VG or even WoW. Consequently we get more instancing to decrease the technical limitations.
If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe. - Carl Sagan
No game ever allows you to interact with hundreds of people at the same time. You never group with more than 5-6. You never fight more than a few at a time. It is an illusion that you interact with hundred of people. The only exception is an auction house, which can be easily implemented into any instance game.
just wanna correct ur last statement nariusseldon, there are plenty of games that allow you to interact with hundreds! of people, the one i am most familiar with is lineage2 where ya can easily siege 400vs400 on good servers (atleast ya could back in the day), sure if ur system wasnt good ya had some lag, but god there were plenty of people there
same for a number of the high end raids there (epic raids), they used to require hundred+ people to show to kill a dragon cause it simply wasnt doable with less at the time
and to slightly get back to get back to the op, i do agree seemless > instanced world
however, the game i am following now pretty much, and which will hopefully pull me right back into mmorpgs cause they are pretty much dead for me atm, aion some may have heard of it some of you may have not, is mostly non instanced aswell, i say mostly cause well it aint 100%, more like 90% open 10% closed i think, if you want a good mmorpg with unique and high quality content (which hopefully are points where aion will deliver) there is no other way as having it instanced... example:
quests:
everyone knows the fed-ex quests of whatever mmorpg or the go here, kill 10 WhoGivesA-_-Mobs and go back to town
however in singleplayer games ya wont see those quests alot less cause most (again in high quality games) quests rely on heavy scripts and the fun starts now, in a totally open mmorpgs its far to hard (the ammount of variables for every script action is mind boggling) to get quests anywhere near the complexity and depth of singleplayer games (if ya played the mainstory line of arcanum (i do love that game
) or a more recent mass effect (Which was well made of pure win, the mainstory line atleast, between freezes)) is flat out impossible or near impossible.
For things like that to improve the depth and overall quality instances, sadly, are just a requirement almost, sure there are plenty of memories of good open areas, but often things dont go as planned (read griefing when ur having fun/people botting on ur favourite xp spot etc) and instances do offer some kind of relief there
in short :P
Instances are necesairy, and they are good, as long as they dont lower the overal immersion or quality of a game, but instead lift it to a higher level
Clicky for Rift trial
Maybe I stroked-out, but I could've sworn that the Corvette and Geonosian Cave were instanced in SWG.
I agree Terranah, as much as I bitch and complain now ... SWG is still one of my favorite MMOs. The MMO genre has never seen, and most likely will never see again, a community like that game had.
Correlian Corvette was. Geonosian cave was not instanced, thus the "camping Acklay for bones". Yeah, i miss SWG. Best gaming years of my life. Hope to relive something close to that again.
Thus why I do not play AoC - Seamless worlds are a big thing to me, which is one thing that WoW did very well. I do not care for the super pretty graphics, I have a PS3 and an HDTV, that gives me my pretty graphics, in an MMO, I want to have a vast, open, great world.
http://www.warriornation.net
Current MMO: LoTRO
LForward: The Agency
Played MMO: V:SoH, SWG, WoW, EVE, RFO, FFXI, LOTRO, EQ, AoC, EQII, AA, COH/V, D&D, LII, SL, DAoC, AL, PS, SB, CO, AO, TR.
That’s not a FedEx quest. A fed Ex quest is one that asks you to play delivery boy. They are “take this MacGuffin to that guy standing over there”
One of the problems is that new players, who form the vast majority, never played anything except single player games with multiplayer options, or more and more the small multiplayer games.
They don't know or expect any different.
I think eventually they will start to want for more, because "worlds" just cry out for it. They get bored with the grind, and start thinking about how it could be.
What most likely to happen is that the game industry will see the falling sales and just drop out of it, instead of being bold and innovative.
Once upon a time....
Or, God forbid, they don't want any different.
I swear, I get sick of this condecending attitude of "players new to the genre aren't into virtual worlds because they don't know better yet".
Not everyone looks to the virtual world model as the "one true way" for MMORPGs. A lot of people just want a fun game they can play with others.
Well, for myself, after SWG was destroyed, I've been looking for that "virtual world", "sandbox" type of game (unsuccessfully) ever since. I almost hate to admit it, but I finally broke down and tried WoW, found a great guild on an RP server, and am enjoying it immensely. Still not a sandbox, but at least an MMO with a lot of fun and charm.
Just tried AoC and already I'm REALLY tired of Newbie island. OK, it doesn't "suck", I don't think, but it's just not a whole lot of fun. I agree with most of these posts. The instancing is WAY out of hand in AoC. Two weeks after launch and already they need to do a huge revamp of PvP (so much for the "M" rating...maybe it's NOT just the rabid-12-year-olds after all, and I apologize to all those under 18 who I've bashed for ganking in the past!). The quest-for-XP was a good idea, but it's pretty much grown all out of proporation as well. Yes, that's the single-player approach to levelling. Have to agree with the posters here on that one as well.
AoC is very nice graphically, but, goodness, I've got a relatively hi-end machine with a top-of-the-line graphics card (8800GTX), dual core processor and 2 gigs of ram. Still, I need to play on medium to get the game to run smoothly.
And the mobs aren't balanced really well either. This killone-rez-run-killone-rez-run-rinse-repeat-until-the-instance-is-cleared...what is UP with that? Unless I'm 6 levels above the mobs, I can't take the 3, 4, 5 or 6 that swamp me at nearly every turn. Granted, as a lvl 18 bear shaman, I'm still in the newbie zone, but yikes! Does kinda damp down the fun factor.
Another gripe...OK, I like voice acting as much as the next guy. But let's have a little consistency. I'm still trying to figure out which accent fits which race, if there's any plan at all to that. Spanish, Scottish, East European, noble-speak, pirate-speak all jumbled up together? OK, I know it's a polyglot city, but I still can't figure out which is which. Part of the great fun of WoW in that regard is that you KNOW how the different races are gonna sound. Every time I have to interact with a troll, for example, I just have to smile as I know I'm gonna be hearing that wonderful Jamaican accent. Also makes rping that race REALLY easy and a lot of fun. A troll herbalist? WooT! "Ya mon! I be seein' the herb! Give me a minute, Mon, I be back!"
Once again, I have to give Funcom props for trying something a little different with the combat system. I don't like it much, because I'm not really good at it yet, I suppose, but at least it's a little different. Problem is that the "gritty" feel just comes out "depressing" instead, so I don't think I'll be playing long enough to GET good at it. As most good writers know, if you don't throw in a bit of change-of-pace (humor?), your audience is going to get weighed down pretty fast. (I never liked Battlestar Galactica for just that reason...it's ALL doom-and-gloom! I wound up rooting for the cylons in BOTH versions of the show!) And, as an altaholic, I REALLY don't like the fact that everybody starts out in the same place with the same quests over and over. I didn't enjoy the newbie island the first time around. I'm not looking forward to going through it all again!
AoC doesn't "suck", but it's just not "fun" enough for me. I MUCH preferred Auto Assault and miss that one too. So it's back to waiting and hoping that Mythic will hit with Warhammer. The concept of the game has the humor built in, and we KNOW (from DAoC) that they know how to do PvP and make it fun. And as for the crafting sandbox of UO and SWG...well...maybe next lifetime.
-- Xix
"I know what you're thinking: 'Why, oh WHY, didn't I take the BLUE pill?'"
Info we have on GW2 is at this site: http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Guild_Wars_2
That doesn't sound like AoC to me.
Sounds exactly like aoc except better and cheaper.
----ITS A TRAP!!!----
That’s not a FedEx quest. A fed Ex quest is one that asks you to play delivery boy. They are “take this MacGuffin to that guy standing over there”
way to not read the entire sentence, do you see the "OR"?–conjunction
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/or
Clicky for Rift trial
how could you have such a huge post count and not know the difference between an instance-fest versus Seamless world? I've just lost a gang of respect for you with that post. Please dont post misinformation just to prove your point
I just logged into AoC, and logged out realizing there is absolutely no reason to level...
Or, God forbid, they don't want any different.
I swear, I get sick of this condecending attitude of "players new to the genre aren't into virtual worlds because they don't know better yet".
Not everyone looks to the virtual world model as the "one true way" for MMORPGs. A lot of people just want a fun game they can play with others.
Well the vast majority of gamers are indeed familiar with instances or small servers (see GTA IV, Halo 3, CoD 4, Counterstrike, etc). The vast majority seriously doesn't know any better that's all there is to it. The vast majority of gamers are still playing casual online games, console, and other less time demanding types of games. Any chart will tell you that. I see nothing wrong with that post you captioned its plain common sense too me
How is AoC any different from current mmos;- WoW instances it's battlegrounds, Everquest 2 has multiple instances of the same area. Admittedly haven't tried AoC yet but doesn't sound like any bigger travesty to the genre than already achieved by other mmos.
And 48 is quite enough. How often you see more than 20+ people on screen all at once anyway?
Do you even know what an MMO is?
By your logic you would be fine in BF2.
I started with UO beta so I played MMOs from the beginning.
BF2 is fine, if it is done in a fantasy setting. A game is a game. Why cling to the past? A dungeon is more fun with a group of 5 than 50 people camping the same boss so more people != better.
So if I only need to play with 5 people in a dungeon zone, why care about whether the instance can support more people?
Why pay a subscription to just party with 5 people (for my type of gamer)? I can boot up my xbox 360 and play GTA 4 with more then that. And I promise you I will have much more fun and get better value for my dollar then squabbling over who gets what in the pit of a dark dungeon.
Dungeons are teh suck. I enjoy interacting with a huge volume of players. I like to see their gear, maybe socialize, and I want to do events with my *entire* guild. I dont want to tell people they cant come because the dungeon instance only allows 5 players
Maybe that's an MMO to you. That is fine. Nothing wrong with that. But that is not what I find ideal. I like doing things with all my friends. Not just 5 of them
[edit] fixed grammar
Because there is no other multiplayer fantasy game with the amount of content of WOW. GTA is not fantasy. There is no levels, no class, no loot. Now Diablo 1/2 come close and I also play that .. but the amount of content there is much more limited.
I also like to see other's gear and do AH. There is no AH in any of the other games. $15 is less than a decent lunch. I have no problem paying $15 a month for something I enjoy. Any event beyond 5 people is a bitch to coordinate. I am not averse to playing with more .. but working to do it is too much. Battleground has more than 5 on each side and that is fine.