ok now WOW: it takes a minimum of 45 x 24 hours non-stop playing to get to max level. then you have to grind factions/instances to unlock instances. then you have to grind instance runs with idiots for pre-raid gear. then you have to grind raids to progress through scripted raid bosses in the specified progression order. all the time following the exact same sequences of levelling, faction-grinding, instance-grinding, and raid-grinding that every single other player has done.
in DF, you can be raiding cities, sailing ships, and doing high-end PVE content within hours of creating a new character. sure you need a clan that will take you along for this stuff but none of this is possible in WOW, or in any other level-based MMO.
You know, it's possible to get to max level in WoW within 5x24, and even new people do it in like 6-8x24.
Also, sure you can do "high-end PvE" in Darkfall within hours of creating a new character, because the bosses aren't even scripted to do anything. They're all just tank and spank.
And yes, it actually is very possible to bring 1 freshly dinged player into any raid instance in WoW, as long as the 9 or 24 others can carry him/her.
But WoW takes a lot more grinding to be on par with the best than DFO - you won't argue with this?
You can have full epic gear within the first 10 days, after having dinged 80 without any problems at all. The grind is way bigger in Darkfall, trust me.
I know, I levelled a toon to 65 just to max a craft, and did it between raids and during idle minutes every few days. Did not even notice it went to 65. As for epic gear, as I have maxed crafter of every kind, and lots of idle badges, I can fit out half 7.0 and 1 7.5 (bracer) right upon 80 ding.
DF is evidently a grind, just like levellling skills in morrowwinds. Run against a wall for 5 hours, maxed stamina or agility or what. Swimming against the wall for 1 day with fishbone earring (no drowning) in EQ and you maxed swimming. I have been thru all that, and sometimes I wonder, am I playing the game or it playing me?
I rather go thru those so called themeparks, well thought out ones, with lots of variety, and mix-max my alts to create my own gaming team. At least I got variety and different alts for different purposes. In those "skill" based games, everyone macroed to the end, and emerge the same super clone with same maxed "skills".
In games with limits to skills, people will interact and trade or complement each other, or as in my case, each alt complements each other. Meaningful economy (except me, as I mainly sell and occasionally buy mats I m too lazy to collect). In a game in which one can be everything maxed, there is no trade, just endless grind to the end, various branches and endless afk macroing one skill after another. With backstab and other dangers in trade, there is even less incentive to produce and sell. No market, no motivation to sell. So much for a MULTI-player game.
Just my own game style.
Very true. People argue that they want a more open system with more options. Then when they get one, most just end up following the same cookie-cutter template anyway. I've seen it in "theme-park" and "sandbox" MMOs. Some people just want to "get to the good stuff" and don't want to have to think or put too much effort into it; they find following some online guide to be the best way to go.
Then you have the few who do try new things, do the research, experiment with different builds or different tactics. They're the ones who will often find even better builds or better tactics.... which everyone else then copies.
Kinda reminds me of this image:
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
U gave it two months and didn't like. A determination everyone has to make. 2 months in, and I'm still enjoying it (Not the best game ever, not the worst). why ppl can't just let ppl enjoy or not enjoy is beyond me.
If we all liked the exact same thing, it would be a pretty boring world. enjoy whatever floats your boat and devil take the hindmost
Where is the OP not letting anyone else enjoy the game or not?
He came here to post his opinions of the game based on his 2 months playing it.
It's called "a discussion". It's what forums are intended for.
Don't be so paranoid.
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Hmm does anybody pay you for playing DFO for 2 months if you hate it so much?
Classic! If he only play a couple of days, or a week, then he hasn't played long enough to be entitled of an opinion. If he plays for two months then he is being badgered for playing too long in a game that he doesn't like.
You fanbots sure are pathetic.
To the OP: Great review!
I was thinking the same exact thing.
It doesn't matter how long he played, and that they even bring it up as an arguing point is disingenuous. The only thing fanbots care about is that he gave it a negative review. The "what", "why", "how" and "for how long" is irrelevant.
He's not praising DF, so he must be bashed for it.
It's not surprising though. The only thing the rabid fans will ever be consistent in is defending Darkfall and anything to do with it. To that end, they will (and do, frequently) contradict themselves all over the place.
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Farlic, good review and i actually agree with some of your points, although not most, and i am very much still enjoying the game. But a serious question, if Darkfall is such a bad game as you say and you hate it that much, then why would you still play if the sub was half the cost? (Sorry if i missed it, only had time to scan the thread.)
I might be jumping the gun on this one but i guess for the same reason that certain members of this forum have declared in the past that they would pay x2 the amount of money for Darkfall if the company had asked them to, because they thought that Darkfall's worth was that much. So it's my guess that this is the same reason the OP said the above but again that's only a guess on my behalf.
Thanks Captain Obvious, but you're missing the point. Yes, he thinks it's worth half the sub to play it or he wouldn't have said that.
My question is why does he think it's worth that much to play when, in his words, it's the worst game he's ever played? From the way he's described the game in this thread i couldn't imagine him paying anything to play it. If i hated a game as much as he hates this one...hell AV would have to pay me $15/month to play the thing and that still probably wouldn't be enough. Just curious why he would still play "the worst game he's every played" at $7 or $8/month...what does he find enjoyable about the game to pay that amount every month for it despite the many flaws he's pointed out and design aspects of the game that he doesn't like?
Oh terribly sorry didn't realise that it was a troll post. I thought you actually had a question to ask, my bad.............
Here's a couple games for you: Dark and Light, Roma Victor, Tabula Rasa, Vanguard. And believe me, i could list many more. If you truly believe this is the single worst launch in MMO history, how do you expect any of us to take anything you say seriously?
That's utter bollocks. I played TR at launch for a few months and it did not have a "bad" launch. Also, I'd say that even though Vanguard had a bad launch, it wasn't as bad as DF...despite the bugs, my PC was still able to handle the former. But random server dowtimes WITHOUT ANY WARNING in DF?? That takes the cake.
Here's a couple games for you: Dark and Light, Roma Victor, Tabula Rasa, Vanguard. And believe me, i could list many more. If you truly believe this is the single worst launch in MMO history, how do you expect any of us to take anything you say seriously?
That's utter bollocks. I played TR at launch for a few months and it did not have a "bad" launch. Also, I'd say that even though Vanguard had a bad launch, it wasn't as bad as DF...despite the bugs, my PC was still able to handle the former. But random server dowtimes WITHOUT ANY WARNING in DF?? That takes the cake.
I followed Vanguard for over a year before launch, played beta and played for over a year after launch. My experience with Darkfall was literally a 1000% better than the VG launch. Outside of some que times in Darkfall that were fixed within a week or so, i experienced almost no bugs. The game ran great on my machine (which is the same machine i played Vanguard with), the framerate was good at max settings, and the client was incredibly stable for a mmorpg launch imo. I never fell through the world, everything i encountered or tried worked as it should etc. I was actually never online during any random server shutdowns, which may have been a combination of luck and limited playtime for a while, but regardless i was never kicked a single time. The worst part of Darkfall's launch was just trying to buy the game. As far as the game itself goes though...i had a relatively good experience compared to other mmorpg launches i was a part of.
Compare to Vanguard: bad framerates which got almost completely unplayable in cities or with more than 6 or 7 other players on your screen (and still a problem to this day). Falling through the world numerous times. Buggy (and some of those initial bugs still, incredibly and unexplainably, exist today, along with a host of new ones that the incompetent dev team has introduced since launch). Random server downtimes. Many missing features (yes, believe it or not Darkfall is not the only game with missing features). it was a miserable launch, which is why the close to 200,000 people that bought the game in the first couple months quickly whittled down to about 20,000 give or take within a few months after launch.
VG had a completely miserable launch, and this coming from one of the biggest "Vanbois" out there - at least initially. Frankly i have a hard time believing any sane rational person can compare the two and say Darkfall's was worse.
Farlic, good review and i actually agree with some of your points, although not most, and i am very much still enjoying the game. But a serious question, if Darkfall is such a bad game as you say and you hate it that much, then why would you still play if the sub was half the cost? (Sorry if i missed it, only had time to scan the thread.)
I MIGHT be willing to play DFO if they cut the sub in half, but that's a pretty big might.
If they made it a F2P game, I would def. play it.
I can't justify it at the cost they charge now though.
It's not that I hate the game, I actually dislike the company behind it more then I dislike the game itself.
I just don't like it for what it is.
And that's not the FFA PvP, full loot, "sandbox" MMO, but what was released.
It's a very simple mmo.
It's actually got less depth then a lot of linear MMO's I've played.
The skill system is actually a lot like CoD 4 or World at War.
Here:
Pick a weapon, use that weapon, as you get better you unlock other things to use with that weapon. What game am I discribing?
Both. Granted there is a little bit more to DFO then that, but not much.
As far as the launch goes.
I was in the early access for VG, played for about 6 months from release.
Between the two games it's really just a half dozen of one or the other. They both had issues, and dif. ones in fact. There really isn't much comparing unless you get into bugs and exploits (I play VG on the FFA server, exploits out the rear). Server stability honestly isn't much dif. between games, poor performance is poor performance and server downtime is downtime.
I can say that I never had a problem getting into VG, or playing when i wanted. Two things I had a lot of trouble with in DFO.
First getting the game, and then the Q's, and then the crashes. I had more trouble playing darkfall because of those things then I did in VG.
I wouldn't say one had a better launch the other. They were about even.
The big dif. is that VG, although missing some stuff, releaesed with a LOT more content then DFO did, and that content had a LOT more depth to it.
You can have full epic gear within the first 10 days, after having dinged 80 without any problems at all.
You say this like it is a GOOD thing.
Its good or bad depending on how you see it. You can deck out half epic in 10 days, that is a fact, is it good or bad, your opinion or mine. A fact does not imply a view.
Is it good? If you are a casual player who play for wardrobe, it is fun. The epic thing does not stop there. From T7 to T7.5 (lvl 200 and 213) to the new lvl 216 epic from 10man Uldar, to T8 (level 236?) there are many tiers. Even within the same tier there are many options for epics, which allows for mix-match tailoring to talent builds and play style.
Its not just 12xepic and game over. Furthermore, gearing is just part of the game. Not the only game, unlike DF, where the only game is to find a wall to afk macro, or find someone to beat each other silly.
For some people its not made for. For me it is. I just got out of like 5 sieges this last week, with some of the most skilled/rich mercs on the server( the mercs in afghan alliance) And they teamed up with Dusk to take my alliance (SB alliance) city erinthel, and man was it a battle of the beast, theres videos of it, im too lazy to get, but we held a choke point with like 60 people vs 120+, it was battle, and was hardly any naked zerging and no slide showing on my side. Lol it was fun when they went behind the clan stone and dropped like 8 canons, we rushed up the hill, and just held them off with like 20 vs 30 up on that hill, while the rest of the 50vs 100 battles was going on tier 4 of the city.
One of the greatest moments I had in any mmorpg, and I played Eves big battles and Swg battles as well.
I think the post was well written untill the 7th page, then it becomes unbareable for me to read. Comparing wow and darkfall, iv level 63 night elf preist and iv been playing that one character since launch. Tha priests dont get any luv..hmmmmmmmmmmmm welp i think this game still rools even though the mele does look herrendous as the op stated. Most of the vidoes iv seen of darkfall and i watched everyone of them made for the launch and 3 weeks after...most of the defenders are either not wearing anything or are afk witch isnt something that uncommon for a launch of this sorta game but its defenitly went past acceptable gameplay and a bit more. id say its on par with dark and light not to be to bold.
From what Iv read about the crafting its not very good. crafters losing there stuff all the time, hours of guilded work being thrown away by unfair seiges.
Comments
You know, it's possible to get to max level in WoW within 5x24, and even new people do it in like 6-8x24.
Also, sure you can do "high-end PvE" in Darkfall within hours of creating a new character, because the bosses aren't even scripted to do anything. They're all just tank and spank.
And yes, it actually is very possible to bring 1 freshly dinged player into any raid instance in WoW, as long as the 9 or 24 others can carry him/her.
But WoW takes a lot more grinding to be on par with the best than DFO - you won't argue with this?
You can have full epic gear within the first 10 days, after having dinged 80 without any problems at all. The grind is way bigger in Darkfall, trust me.
I know, I levelled a toon to 65 just to max a craft, and did it between raids and during idle minutes every few days. Did not even notice it went to 65. As for epic gear, as I have maxed crafter of every kind, and lots of idle badges, I can fit out half 7.0 and 1 7.5 (bracer) right upon 80 ding.
DF is evidently a grind, just like levellling skills in morrowwinds. Run against a wall for 5 hours, maxed stamina or agility or what. Swimming against the wall for 1 day with fishbone earring (no drowning) in EQ and you maxed swimming. I have been thru all that, and sometimes I wonder, am I playing the game or it playing me?
I rather go thru those so called themeparks, well thought out ones, with lots of variety, and mix-max my alts to create my own gaming team. At least I got variety and different alts for different purposes. In those "skill" based games, everyone macroed to the end, and emerge the same super clone with same maxed "skills".
In games with limits to skills, people will interact and trade or complement each other, or as in my case, each alt complements each other. Meaningful economy (except me, as I mainly sell and occasionally buy mats I m too lazy to collect). In a game in which one can be everything maxed, there is no trade, just endless grind to the end, various branches and endless afk macroing one skill after another. With backstab and other dangers in trade, there is even less incentive to produce and sell. No market, no motivation to sell. So much for a MULTI-player game.
Just my own game style.
Very true. People argue that they want a more open system with more options. Then when they get one, most just end up following the same cookie-cutter template anyway. I've seen it in "theme-park" and "sandbox" MMOs. Some people just want to "get to the good stuff" and don't want to have to think or put too much effort into it; they find following some online guide to be the best way to go.
Then you have the few who do try new things, do the research, experiment with different builds or different tactics. They're the ones who will often find even better builds or better tactics.... which everyone else then copies.
Kinda reminds me of this image:
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Where is the OP not letting anyone else enjoy the game or not?
He came here to post his opinions of the game based on his 2 months playing it.
It's called "a discussion". It's what forums are intended for.
Don't be so paranoid.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Hmm does anybody pay you for playing DFO for 2 months if you hate it so much?
Classic! If he only play a couple of days, or a week, then he hasn't played long enough to be entitled of an opinion. If he plays for two months then he is being badgered for playing too long in a game that he doesn't like.
You fanbots sure are pathetic.
To the OP: Great review!
I was thinking the same exact thing.
It doesn't matter how long he played, and that they even bring it up as an arguing point is disingenuous. The only thing fanbots care about is that he gave it a negative review. The "what", "why", "how" and "for how long" is irrelevant.
He's not praising DF, so he must be bashed for it.
It's not surprising though. The only thing the rabid fans will ever be consistent in is defending Darkfall and anything to do with it. To that end, they will (and do, frequently) contradict themselves all over the place.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
I might be jumping the gun on this one but i guess for the same reason that certain members of this forum have declared in the past that they would pay x2 the amount of money for Darkfall if the company had asked them to, because they thought that Darkfall's worth was that much. So it's my guess that this is the same reason the OP said the above but again that's only a guess on my behalf.
Thanks Captain Obvious, but you're missing the point. Yes, he thinks it's worth half the sub to play it or he wouldn't have said that.
My question is why does he think it's worth that much to play when, in his words, it's the worst game he's ever played? From the way he's described the game in this thread i couldn't imagine him paying anything to play it. If i hated a game as much as he hates this one...hell AV would have to pay me $15/month to play the thing and that still probably wouldn't be enough. Just curious why he would still play "the worst game he's every played" at $7 or $8/month...what does he find enjoyable about the game to pay that amount every month for it despite the many flaws he's pointed out and design aspects of the game that he doesn't like?
Oh terribly sorry didn't realise that it was a troll post. I thought you actually had a question to ask, my bad.............
Iiii-iiiiiit's.... me!!! *Hooray*
That's utter bollocks. I played TR at launch for a few months and it did not have a "bad" launch. Also, I'd say that even though Vanguard had a bad launch, it wasn't as bad as DF...despite the bugs, my PC was still able to handle the former. But random server dowtimes WITHOUT ANY WARNING in DF?? That takes the cake.
You say this like it is a GOOD thing.
That's utter bollocks. I played TR at launch for a few months and it did not have a "bad" launch. Also, I'd say that even though Vanguard had a bad launch, it wasn't as bad as DF...despite the bugs, my PC was still able to handle the former. But random server dowtimes WITHOUT ANY WARNING in DF?? That takes the cake.
I followed Vanguard for over a year before launch, played beta and played for over a year after launch. My experience with Darkfall was literally a 1000% better than the VG launch. Outside of some que times in Darkfall that were fixed within a week or so, i experienced almost no bugs. The game ran great on my machine (which is the same machine i played Vanguard with), the framerate was good at max settings, and the client was incredibly stable for a mmorpg launch imo. I never fell through the world, everything i encountered or tried worked as it should etc. I was actually never online during any random server shutdowns, which may have been a combination of luck and limited playtime for a while, but regardless i was never kicked a single time. The worst part of Darkfall's launch was just trying to buy the game. As far as the game itself goes though...i had a relatively good experience compared to other mmorpg launches i was a part of.
Compare to Vanguard: bad framerates which got almost completely unplayable in cities or with more than 6 or 7 other players on your screen (and still a problem to this day). Falling through the world numerous times. Buggy (and some of those initial bugs still, incredibly and unexplainably, exist today, along with a host of new ones that the incompetent dev team has introduced since launch). Random server downtimes. Many missing features (yes, believe it or not Darkfall is not the only game with missing features). it was a miserable launch, which is why the close to 200,000 people that bought the game in the first couple months quickly whittled down to about 20,000 give or take within a few months after launch.
VG had a completely miserable launch, and this coming from one of the biggest "Vanbois" out there - at least initially. Frankly i have a hard time believing any sane rational person can compare the two and say Darkfall's was worse.
I MIGHT be willing to play DFO if they cut the sub in half, but that's a pretty big might.
If they made it a F2P game, I would def. play it.
I can't justify it at the cost they charge now though.
It's not that I hate the game, I actually dislike the company behind it more then I dislike the game itself.
I just don't like it for what it is.
And that's not the FFA PvP, full loot, "sandbox" MMO, but what was released.
It's a very simple mmo.
It's actually got less depth then a lot of linear MMO's I've played.
The skill system is actually a lot like CoD 4 or World at War.
Here:
Pick a weapon, use that weapon, as you get better you unlock other things to use with that weapon. What game am I discribing?
Both. Granted there is a little bit more to DFO then that, but not much.
As far as the launch goes.
I was in the early access for VG, played for about 6 months from release.
Between the two games it's really just a half dozen of one or the other. They both had issues, and dif. ones in fact. There really isn't much comparing unless you get into bugs and exploits (I play VG on the FFA server, exploits out the rear). Server stability honestly isn't much dif. between games, poor performance is poor performance and server downtime is downtime.
I can say that I never had a problem getting into VG, or playing when i wanted. Two things I had a lot of trouble with in DFO.
First getting the game, and then the Q's, and then the crashes. I had more trouble playing darkfall because of those things then I did in VG.
I wouldn't say one had a better launch the other. They were about even.
The big dif. is that VG, although missing some stuff, releaesed with a LOT more content then DFO did, and that content had a LOT more depth to it.
Nice write up OP. I don't see things the same way but it's nice to have reasons behind an opinion.
-----
The person who is certain, and who claims divine warrant for his certainty, belongs now to the infancy of our species.
You say this like it is a GOOD thing.
Its good or bad depending on how you see it. You can deck out half epic in 10 days, that is a fact, is it good or bad, your opinion or mine. A fact does not imply a view.
Is it good? If you are a casual player who play for wardrobe, it is fun. The epic thing does not stop there. From T7 to T7.5 (lvl 200 and 213) to the new lvl 216 epic from 10man Uldar, to T8 (level 236?) there are many tiers. Even within the same tier there are many options for epics, which allows for mix-match tailoring to talent builds and play style.
Its not just 12xepic and game over. Furthermore, gearing is just part of the game. Not the only game, unlike DF, where the only game is to find a wall to afk macro, or find someone to beat each other silly.
Nice post, author. I totally agree with your review of darkfall.
For some people its not made for. For me it is. I just got out of like 5 sieges this last week, with some of the most skilled/rich mercs on the server( the mercs in afghan alliance) And they teamed up with Dusk to take my alliance (SB alliance) city erinthel, and man was it a battle of the beast, theres videos of it, im too lazy to get, but we held a choke point with like 60 people vs 120+, it was battle, and was hardly any naked zerging and no slide showing on my side. Lol it was fun when they went behind the clan stone and dropped like 8 canons, we rushed up the hill, and just held them off with like 20 vs 30 up on that hill, while the rest of the 50vs 100 battles was going on tier 4 of the city.
One of the greatest moments I had in any mmorpg, and I played Eves big battles and Swg battles as well.
Ty dfo.
I think the post was well written untill the 7th page, then it becomes unbareable for me to read. Comparing wow and darkfall, iv level 63 night elf preist and iv been playing that one character since launch. Tha priests dont get any luv..hmmmmmmmmmmmm welp i think this game still rools even though the mele does look herrendous as the op stated. Most of the vidoes iv seen of darkfall and i watched everyone of them made for the launch and 3 weeks after...most of the defenders are either not wearing anything or are afk witch isnt something that uncommon for a launch of this sorta game but its defenitly went past acceptable gameplay and a bit more. id say its on par with dark and light not to be to bold.
From what Iv read about the crafting its not very good. crafters losing there stuff all the time, hours of guilded work being thrown away by unfair seiges.