The lag issue is blure for me, Almost every game I've play are laggy at some point. I'm more concerned about lack of gameplay. Aye PvP is centric but I'm not that guy running into enemy territories every time I log in. And is the world is to big to achive something in a few hours? But then again, it's skillbased so I wont be forced to level up to cach up with friends and guildies. And just to clear things up, Aventurine has simulated combat with good FPS. It doesn't mean that it will be like this in practice. Can only hope for it. And the lack of information about crafting is annoying.
With mounts I doubt getting to a killing spot in a reasonable amount of time will be an issue. There is supposed to be some form of public transportation to (or am I thinking of something else). I just don't know about that few hours thing. Given the choice between a MMORPG and FPS for quick kill action. I'd probably hop on Combat Arms, COD 4, or CounterStrike Source. Very interesting it's something that hadn't popped into my head until you mentioned it.
In War - Victory. In Peace - Vigilance. In Death - Sacrifice.
I think the massive battles with no lag to be the most ambitious here. Mainly because it's one of the only things that has not been implemented in another game before. That I know of. Never played SB or DAOC to the very tip top. Did play some.
They never said anything about lag, they said framerates. 'lag' normally refers to network latency, which is unavoidable. big difference.
DAOC had 200+ battles all the time, and that was back in 2001, 7 years ago. i should know, i played it for 4 years.
Cool. So you think it to be very possible for the FR to be what they claimed with that 200 battle? Was it in DAOC? Like I said in the post I didn't play it long enough to know.
Personally I think the mounted combat and ship combat are features that won't make it into the initial game. Their feature list is just far too ambicious and those two items alone take a large amount of design and testing, especially in the balancing part of testing.
As to the large battles, any game today has problems with that, I don't see this small group changing that at all. Technology just has not caught up with designs of these games in those areas yet.
The balancing is not such a big problem in a sandbox MMO. Everyone can do whatever thay want to.
Mounted combat and naval combat taking time to develop?? Maybe thats why its taking time for release compared to other MMOs? Remember, all other developers say its to much work making a MMO good. They could do it if they wanted to...but they decide not to do it since we dont care.
Personally I think the mounted combat and ship combat are features that won't make it into the initial game. Their feature list is just far too ambicious and those two items alone take a large amount of design and testing, especially in the balancing part of testing. As to the large battles, any game today has problems with that, I don't see this small group changing that at all. Technology just has not caught up with designs of these games in those areas yet.
I agree completely with the second part. I would still play and have no issue if there was lag in a 200 man battle. Just lends to some credibility issues maybe.
The mounted combat I have actually never been apart of. That's a feature I am truly unfamiliar with and would not know how complex or detailed it is. Or how hard it would be to do.
As far as the naval combat goes. Is it much more complex than like a UO system with cannons and boats with HPs that sink? Maybe boarding? Although some "unofficial" servers of old UO had boarding tactics. I dont know the complexity of the Naval system.
The balancing is another thing like you mentioned.
Personally I think the mounted combat and ship combat are features that won't make it into the initial game. Their feature list is just far too ambicious and those two items alone take a large amount of design and testing, especially in the balancing part of testing. As to the large battles, any game today has problems with that, I don't see this small group changing that at all. Technology just has not caught up with designs of these games in those areas yet.
that would make taso a lair and that would make the vids completly fake cause we have seen both of cours eship guns where speed up but heh.
I'm pretty sure Tasos has said the combat system is similar to Mount and Blade in many ways. If thats the case, mounted combat is not really that complicated. The way it works in MB, you have your horse which can charge through opponents (based upon a charge stat on the horse, along with armor, speed, hit points) and then you get a left and right swing plus a thrust if using a non polearm.
If using a polearm you get thrust and you can couch it to deliver massive extra damage (basically spearing them using the momentum of your horse vs. just poking it at them). The best part about MB combat is that you get a bonus to damage if you're moving quickly when you swing. Not how fast you swing, but say you gallop past a guy at full speed and swing your tempered sword of war at him, you'll get a big damage increase because you're going fast.
I don't really see mounted combat and ship combat being all that hard to deliver. I have to agree with what most everyone else is saying and go with latency/fps issues. Hopefully they'll pull it off well
I've been playing M&B with my latest PC (which is high-end, built about a month ago), and getting 120+ fps in battles with ~80 mobs on screen; If the poly count of DF is similar to M&B (or only slightly larger), then the 30-60fps in 200 vs 200 battles with an older PC is certainly possible.
The biggest bet for me is how stable and seamless the world will feel, since its size is huge; and how it will be presented on screen (if they'll sacrifice long view distances in favor or performance, etc)...
Comments
With mounts I doubt getting to a killing spot in a reasonable amount of time will be an issue. There is supposed to be some form of public transportation to (or am I thinking of something else). I just don't know about that few hours thing. Given the choice between a MMORPG and FPS for quick kill action. I'd probably hop on Combat Arms, COD 4, or CounterStrike Source. Very interesting it's something that hadn't popped into my head until you mentioned it.
In War - Victory.
In Peace - Vigilance.
In Death - Sacrifice.
They never said anything about lag, they said framerates. 'lag' normally refers to network latency, which is unavoidable. big difference.
DAOC had 200+ battles all the time, and that was back in 2001, 7 years ago. i should know, i played it for 4 years.
Cool. So you think it to be very possible for the FR to be what they claimed with that 200 battle? Was it in DAOC? Like I said in the post I didn't play it long enough to know.
Yeay! Look at all the Network Architech's that frequent these forums. Geebas.
There are also many psychics, and far seers. Nostradumass's a plenty making guesses..err... predictions.
I suppose it is all a bit silly.
Thus trying to discuss the features, minus flaming. Although I did know it would get derailed.
Personally I think the mounted combat and ship combat are features that won't make it into the initial game. Their feature list is just far too ambicious and those two items alone take a large amount of design and testing, especially in the balancing part of testing.
As to the large battles, any game today has problems with that, I don't see this small group changing that at all. Technology just has not caught up with designs of these games in those areas yet.
The balancing is not such a big problem in a sandbox MMO. Everyone can do whatever thay want to.
Mounted combat and naval combat taking time to develop?? Maybe thats why its taking time for release compared to other MMOs? Remember, all other developers say its to much work making a MMO good. They could do it if they wanted to...but they decide not to do it since we dont care.
I agree completely with the second part. I would still play and have no issue if there was lag in a 200 man battle. Just lends to some credibility issues maybe.
The mounted combat I have actually never been apart of. That's a feature I am truly unfamiliar with and would not know how complex or detailed it is. Or how hard it would be to do.
As far as the naval combat goes. Is it much more complex than like a UO system with cannons and boats with HPs that sink? Maybe boarding? Although some "unofficial" servers of old UO had boarding tactics. I dont know the complexity of the Naval system.
The balancing is another thing like you mentioned.
that would make taso a lair and that would make the vids completly fake cause we have seen both of cours eship guns where speed up but heh.
Taso has also said the game is feature complete.
So who knows guess we will see
I'm pretty sure Tasos has said the combat system is similar to Mount and Blade in many ways. If thats the case, mounted combat is not really that complicated. The way it works in MB, you have your horse which can charge through opponents (based upon a charge stat on the horse, along with armor, speed, hit points) and then you get a left and right swing plus a thrust if using a non polearm.
If using a polearm you get thrust and you can couch it to deliver massive extra damage (basically spearing them using the momentum of your horse vs. just poking it at them). The best part about MB combat is that you get a bonus to damage if you're moving quickly when you swing. Not how fast you swing, but say you gallop past a guy at full speed and swing your tempered sword of war at him, you'll get a big damage increase because you're going fast.
I don't really see mounted combat and ship combat being all that hard to deliver. I have to agree with what most everyone else is saying and go with latency/fps issues. Hopefully they'll pull it off well
I've been playing M&B with my latest PC (which is high-end, built about a month ago), and getting 120+ fps in battles with ~80 mobs on screen; If the poly count of DF is similar to M&B (or only slightly larger), then the 30-60fps in 200 vs 200 battles with an older PC is certainly possible.
The biggest bet for me is how stable and seamless the world will feel, since its size is huge; and how it will be presented on screen (if they'll sacrifice long view distances in favor or performance, etc)...