How is this one minor issue? What is this one minor issue?
------ DISABLED SYSTEMS ------
- Housing (Houses, keeps, palisades and bridges)
- Guilds
- Thievery
- Line of sight checks for Magic temporarily turned off.
- Locking/Decreasing of Attributes and Skills.
none of that was broken, they just improving the systems for release, how is that a ploblem?, its like 100% chance of the same system being in or a improved version so theres nothing to fret about.
So whats this one minor issue?
Your own words not a minute ago list numerous issues.... Im confused?
Originally posted by ange10
the beta house system was taken out because the houses was only placeholders in the beta.
the beta guild system is getting a overhaul for release.
the skill system is bugged, but its not game breaking and it worked before and i think it be easy ploblem to address.
lag is only client side now, so if you suffer lag, it only appears on your screen while on everyone elses its fine and i can tell you this, i tried to play while downloading and uploading on utorrent and hte lag was not that bad, i was still able to play alright.
crashes happen in all games ,it depends on the person system but they fixed all the bugs that came around the last patch with the last client, for example you do not crash when you gather anymore or crash 10 mins into the game unless you got your settings to full in which you may get a virtual memory error
the AI is not as buggy as it was before, it doenst fly around no nomore, most of the AI are on the floor and run around and sometimes they do not attack you but its better then it was before when it did work but they flew around the world, and if i remember correctly that AI is only basic and sv have plans to enchance it so we see mobs raiding cities and so on.
when you see double npc's its because a node has crashed.
they know they are issues to the developers, but they have to prioritize things to do first.
A lie which is half a truth is ever the blackest of lies.
i didnt play the game (maybe never will) but its always funny to see players talk bad about this game..
it may be bad now but for me i dont care if a game is(was) in beta.
maybe at release the game is alot better and you found ur self the best game there is.
if nothing is fixed they will go bankrupt and youll never hear of mortal online again.
why this game has to be discussed 1 million times on a flaming unpositive way?..
Because they screwed a lot of people over pretty badly and produced a fairly shoddy title?
I've come to the realization that a large number of the MMO players who yearn for a Full loot, PVP, Sandbox type MMO will never be happy with anything that is released. The companies that could release the fully polished MMO that these players want are not interested in the small market that would be attracted to it. The small companies that are interested in the Full loot, PVP, Sandbox player base do not have the capital to spend the time developing these games for years on end with no cashflow until they are fully polished. So, we find ourselves in a quandary.
I have no interest in MO but I find it hilarious that everytime a small company tries to cater to the Sandbox fans, these same fans end up trying to destroy said company on boards like these. The shortsightedness is amazing and sad at the same time.
How very true.
Your quite right, if the main stream devs where interested in a Full loot PvP sandbox game we would have seen more than UO by now, even UO2 was canned, so this in itself tells you it's just not something that would earn the big boys the returns they want.
Let it stay as a niche market, the sheer amount of pressure these smaller companies have to put up with from their so called fans is unbelievable, and these fans wonder why there just aren't more games like this being made^^.
How is this one minor issue? What is this one minor issue?
------ DISABLED SYSTEMS ------
- Housing (Houses, keeps, palisades and bridges)
- Guilds
- Thievery
- Line of sight checks for Magic temporarily turned off.
- Locking/Decreasing of Attributes and Skills.
none of that was broken, they just improving the systems for release, how is that a ploblem?, its like 100% chance of the same system being in or a improved version so theres nothing to fret about.
So whats this one minor issue?
Your own words not a minute ago list numerous issues.... Im confused?
Originally posted by ange10
the beta house system was taken out because the houses was only placeholders in the beta.
the beta guild system is getting a overhaul for release.
the skill system is bugged, but its not game breaking and it worked before and i think it be easy ploblem to address.
lag is only client side now, so if you suffer lag, it only appears on your screen while on everyone elses its fine and i can tell you this, i tried to play while downloading and uploading on utorrent and hte lag was not that bad, i was still able to play alright.
crashes happen in all games ,it depends on the person system but they fixed all the bugs that came around the last patch with the last client, for example you do not crash when you gather anymore or crash 10 mins into the game unless you got your settings to full in which you may get a virtual memory error
the AI is not as buggy as it was before, it doenst fly around no nomore, most of the AI are on the floor and run around and sometimes they do not attack you but its better then it was before when it did work but they flew around the world, and if i remember correctly that AI is only basic and sv have plans to enchance it so we see mobs raiding cities and so on.
when you see double npc's its because a node has crashed.
they know they are issues to the developers, but they have to prioritize things to do first.
everyone look at this guys post, i told him the features that he tries to say are broken, are not and are just disabled for improvements (the guild system,houses and theivery and decreasting attributes)
he then lists some issues that he mentioned first and then i explained the ploblems in detail which he then goes on to say about im mentioning more then one issue when i was saying that all other issues are not game breaking and the only game breaking issue right now is the AI which is not even that bad anymore in the first place.
you mentioned all those other issues such as lag, crashes and npcs is related to server side when a node crash happens just like eve online which is broken up into nodes aswell but the difference is ccp has the most powerful server in the world.
so there are only 2 issues that need to be addressed and only one of them is game breaking which is the one i said and its not major its only minor but its still game breaking and im sure it can be addressed in 7 days and the other one is the skill attrubute being disbled.
please do not try to twist my words by adding different posts together and trying to say i said something in which i did not say when you first made that list and i just gave you feedback on them.
i told him the features that he tries to say are broken, are not and are just disabled for improvements (the guild system,houses and theivery and decreasting attributes)
With that logic couldnt SV have disabled everything months ago and called the game ready to go? Thats just silly!!!
A lie which is half a truth is ever the blackest of lies.
Where did you get that I haven't tried the beta?..................Go ahead and keep bashing the only companies trying to deliver the types of game you're interested in. Tear them down before they even get to market so that you run off half of the potential playerbase. That's a recipe for getting exactly what you want. Seems to be working well for you guys so far. And yes, I still find the self destructive thought process behind this to be sad but hilarious.
Why should fans of niche markets lower their standards just because there are fewer games in that category, or because the team developing it is a newcomer in the market? Garbage is garbage regardless of whether it's mainstream or niche, AAA or indie and there is no scenario I can think of where players should be happy about forking out premium prices for inferior products.
Besides, are you trying to imply that the reason the game is in such a mess is because people were vocal in criticising what a mess the game is in? That doesn't make sense to me. People criticise MO because the game is in a mess, not the other way around, and that is purely down to either the team's inability to handle the size of the project they set themselves, or flaws in their original design.
I'm not implying anything. I also am not just talking about MO. The same thing happened with DFO and has already started with Xyson.
Are you implying that rabid criticism of a game that has not been released yet does not lower the initial playerbase on launch? I would beg to differ. Now, this lower initial playerbase equates to less money available to the company to continue to develop the game. These small developers can't eat good will and rainbows. They have to have money to pay employees and continue improving the game. If they run out of money early, employees are laid off, development stops, your dream game never improves, and eventually it dies. Congratulations, you've just assisted in destroying a game that was actually trying to give you what you want.
Where did you get that I haven't tried the beta?..................Go ahead and keep bashing the only companies trying to deliver the types of game you're interested in. Tear them down before they even get to market so that you run off half of the potential playerbase. That's a recipe for getting exactly what you want. Seems to be working well for you guys so far. And yes, I still find the self destructive thought process behind this to be sad but hilarious.
Why should fans of niche markets lower their standards just because there are fewer games in that category, or because the team developing it is a newcomer in the market? Garbage is garbage regardless of whether it's mainstream or niche, AAA or indie and there is no scenario I can think of where players should be happy about forking out premium prices for inferior products.
Besides, are you trying to imply that the reason the game is in such a mess is because people were vocal in criticising what a mess the game is in? That doesn't make sense to me. People criticise MO because the game is in a mess, not the other way around, and that is purely down to either the team's inability to handle the size of the project they set themselves, or flaws in their original design.
I'm not implying anything. I also am not just talking about MO. The same thing happened with DFO and has already started with Xyson.
Are you implying that rabid criticism of a game that has not been released yet does not lower the initial playerbase on launch? I would beg to differ. Now, this lower initial playerbase equates to less money available to the company to continue to develop the game. These small developers can't eat good will and rainbows. They have to have money to pay employees and continue improving the game. If they run out of money early, employees are laid off, development stops, your dream game never improves, and eventually it dies. Congratulations, you've just assisted in destroying a game that was actually trying to give you what you want.
You do realize that you make no sense, correct? No, that's a silly question.. you don't.
You are actually trying to convince someone that a game is bad because people say it's bad. So conversely, you are trying to convince someone that the company developing a game has no hand in whether their product is good or not.. It's the players that develop the game, right? You realize that Toyota didn't have a bunch of accelerator malfunctions because a few people said 'Toyota isn't safe', right? Just like I can't say that the sky is blue because I said it is, because that's the way it was since the beginning of time.
MO is in a horrible state for release because the development team either made bad decisions, or the decisions that were made were going to take way too long to implement correctly. They have a bad situation because of themselves. We don't have any hand in the development other than suggesting ideas and helping to fix bugs. I think there have been a lot of people doing that for quite a while now and there are still bugs right now that were in the game at beta launch.
Another thing. Anyone interested in the game had a chance to try it in the open beta. Why are most of the people trying the game saying that it's not ready and it's horrible? You still think it's a bad game because we gave bad reviews? Do you understand what a review is? Or are you actually going to use some logic and admit that perhaps the game is in a bad state because the developers haven't been able to do their job correctly to this point?
Rabid negetive criticism of a game wouldn't happen if the game was in a good state. Therefor, there wouldn't be a drop in player base. Isn't that a reasonable idea?
Yeah. The game is bad because I said it is, not because it's simply a bad product. /sarcasm
Where did you get that I haven't tried the beta?..................Go ahead and keep bashing the only companies trying to deliver the types of game you're interested in. Tear them down before they even get to market so that you run off half of the potential playerbase. That's a recipe for getting exactly what you want. Seems to be working well for you guys so far. And yes, I still find the self destructive thought process behind this to be sad but hilarious.
Why should fans of niche markets lower their standards just because there are fewer games in that category, or because the team developing it is a newcomer in the market? Garbage is garbage regardless of whether it's mainstream or niche, AAA or indie and there is no scenario I can think of where players should be happy about forking out premium prices for inferior products.
Besides, are you trying to imply that the reason the game is in such a mess is because people were vocal in criticising what a mess the game is in? That doesn't make sense to me. People criticise MO because the game is in a mess, not the other way around, and that is purely down to either the team's inability to handle the size of the project they set themselves, or flaws in their original design.
I'm not implying anything. I also am not just talking about MO. The same thing happened with DFO and has already started with Xyson.
Are you implying that rabid criticism of a game that has not been released yet does not lower the initial playerbase on launch? I would beg to differ. Now, this lower initial playerbase equates to less money available to the company to continue to develop the game. These small developers can't eat good will and rainbows. They have to have money to pay employees and continue improving the game. If they run out of money early, employees are laid off, development stops, your dream game never improves, and eventually it dies. Congratulations, you've just assisted in destroying a game that was actually trying to give you what you want.
You do realize that you make no sense, correct? No, that's a silly question.. you don't.
You are actually trying to convince someone that a game is bad because people say it's bad. So conversely, you are trying to convince someone that the company developing a game has no hand in whether their product is good or not.. It's the players that develop the game, right? You realize that Toyota didn't have a bunch of accelerator malfunctions because a few people said 'Toyota isn't safe', right? Just like I can't say that the sky is blue because I said it is, because that's the way it was since the beginning of time.
MO is in a horrible state for release because the development team either made bad decisions, or the decisions that were made were going to take way too long to implement correctly. They have a bad situation because of themselves. We don't have any hand in the development other than suggesting ideas and helping to fix bugs. I think there have been a lot of people doing that for quite a while now and there are still bugs right now that were in the game at beta launch.
Another thing. Anyone interested in the game had a chance to try it in the open beta. Why are most of the people trying the game saying that it's not ready and it's horrible? You still think it's a bad game because we gave bad reviews? Do you understand what a review is? Or are you actually going to use some logic and admit that perhaps the game is in a bad state because the developers haven't been able to do their job correctly to this point?
Rabid negetive criticism of a game wouldn't happen if the game was in a good state. Therefor, there wouldn't be a drop in player base. Isn't that a reasonable idea?
Yeah. The game is bad because I said it is, not because it's simply a bad product. /sarcasm
Your argument implies that rabid negative criticism is indicative of the objective truth, which in many cases, it is not. A lot of the "negative" criticism seen on this site for any game is more based on opinion than actual fact.
No, a lot of the rabid and unrelenting criticism on this forum and many others is indeed there for a single purpose - to create a negative perception of a game as the authors intend to "damage" the game. In this case, a negative word of mouth campaign that is puffed up by the volume of posts from a smallish number of people obsessed with the failure of a game, more than volume of posters.
No question, Mortal Online has a lot of issues, and many hurdles to clear, as they launch their game. But pointing to rabid critics as some compass of truth... that's not smart. Every single game represented on this web site has rabid critics. Are they all right?
Where did you get that I haven't tried the beta?..................Go ahead and keep bashing the only companies trying to deliver the types of game you're interested in. Tear them down before they even get to market so that you run off half of the potential playerbase. That's a recipe for getting exactly what you want. Seems to be working well for you guys so far. And yes, I still find the self destructive thought process behind this to be sad but hilarious.
Why should fans of niche markets lower their standards just because there are fewer games in that category, or because the team developing it is a newcomer in the market? Garbage is garbage regardless of whether it's mainstream or niche, AAA or indie and there is no scenario I can think of where players should be happy about forking out premium prices for inferior products.
Besides, are you trying to imply that the reason the game is in such a mess is because people were vocal in criticising what a mess the game is in? That doesn't make sense to me. People criticise MO because the game is in a mess, not the other way around, and that is purely down to either the team's inability to handle the size of the project they set themselves, or flaws in their original design.
I'm not implying anything. I also am not just talking about MO. The same thing happened with DFO and has already started with Xyson.
Are you implying that rabid criticism of a game that has not been released yet does not lower the initial playerbase on launch? I would beg to differ. Now, this lower initial playerbase equates to less money available to the company to continue to develop the game. These small developers can't eat good will and rainbows. They have to have money to pay employees and continue improving the game. If they run out of money early, employees are laid off, development stops, your dream game never improves, and eventually it dies. Congratulations, you've just assisted in destroying a game that was actually trying to give you what you want.
You do realize that you make no sense, correct? No, that's a silly question.. you don't.
You are actually trying to convince someone that a game is bad because people say it's bad. So conversely, you are trying to convince someone that the company developing a game has no hand in whether their product is good or not.. It's the players that develop the game, right? You realize that Toyota didn't have a bunch of accelerator malfunctions because a few people said 'Toyota isn't safe', right? Just like I can't say that the sky is blue because I said it is, because that's the way it was since the beginning of time.
MO is in a horrible state for release because the development team either made bad decisions, or the decisions that were made were going to take way too long to implement correctly. They have a bad situation because of themselves. We don't have any hand in the development other than suggesting ideas and helping to fix bugs. I think there have been a lot of people doing that for quite a while now and there are still bugs right now that were in the game at beta launch.
Another thing. Anyone interested in the game had a chance to try it in the open beta. Why are most of the people trying the game saying that it's not ready and it's horrible? You still think it's a bad game because we gave bad reviews? Do you understand what a review is? Or are you actually going to use some logic and admit that perhaps the game is in a bad state because the developers haven't been able to do their job correctly to this point?
Rabid negetive criticism of a game wouldn't happen if the game was in a good state. Therefor, there wouldn't be a drop in player base. Isn't that a reasonable idea?
Yeah. The game is bad because I said it is, not because it's simply a bad product. /sarcasm
Don't you find it wierd that people come along and disagree with that assertion? Please don't discount people simply by saying "dellusional fanboy", you have to realize that not everyone agrees that the game is in such a horrible state. Throughout most of open beta I enjoyed playing the game, as did countless other players. Despite what some people keep repeating, MO's gameworld has been well populated by people that obviously enjoyed the game enough to go through all the bugs.
So perhaps you shouldn't be so quick to throw around assertions as if they are objective fact. A month-long rough stretch does not warrant the kind of flaming that goes on; there were bugs in a beta, that is the purpose of a beta. Would you have recommended that SV update to the engine AFTER release? or never update?
TL;DR -- Please stop stating your opinion as if it were fact.
Don't you find it wierd that people come along and disagree with that assertion? Please don't discount people simply by saying "dellusional fanboy", you have to realize that not everyone agrees that the game is in such a horrible state. Throughout most of open beta I enjoyed playing the game, as did countless other players. Despite what some people keep repeating, MO's gameworld has been well populated by people that obviously enjoyed the game enough to go through all the bugs.
So perhaps you shouldn't be so quick to throw around assertions as if they are objective fact. A month-long rough stretch does not warrant the kind of flaming that goes on; there were bugs in a beta, that is the purpose of a beta. Would you have recommended that SV update to the engine AFTER release? or never update?
TL;DR -- Please stop stating your opinion as if it were fact.
I'm fully aware that some people like the game and feel that it isn't in a terrible state. My point is that there is no smoke without fire; if a significant number of people are claiming that the game is garbage, and yet more people are staying away from the game as a result of this negative PR even though the game was recently free to try out, the strong chance is that the game is in fact garbage.
There is no conspiracy, there are no hooded figures meeting in dark alleyways plotting the downfall of Mortal Online. It is simply a case where the game lacks the quality to answer its detractors. This is why games like WoW are successful: people can claim it sucks all they like, but the polish and quality of the product speaks for itself and therefore nobody listens to them.
And if the game is garbage, why should fans of niche markets just accept and be happy about it just because there are few alternatives? They have just as much right to be pissed off about a shoddy game as fans of mainstream franchises.
Don't you find it wierd that people come along and disagree with that assertion? Please don't discount people simply by saying "dellusional fanboy", you have to realize that not everyone agrees that the game is in such a horrible state. Throughout most of open beta I enjoyed playing the game, as did countless other players. Despite what some people keep repeating, MO's gameworld has been well populated by people that obviously enjoyed the game enough to go through all the bugs.
So perhaps you shouldn't be so quick to throw around assertions as if they are objective fact. A month-long rough stretch does not warrant the kind of flaming that goes on; there were bugs in a beta, that is the purpose of a beta. Would you have recommended that SV update to the engine AFTER release? or never update?
TL;DR -- Please stop stating your opinion as if it were fact.
I'm fully aware that some people like the game and feel that it isn't in a terrible state. My point is that there is no smoke without fire; if a significant number of people are claiming that the game is garbage, and yet more people are staying away from the game as a result of this negative PR even though the game was recently free to try out, the strong chance is that the game is in fact garbage.
There is no conspiracy, there are no hooded figures meeting in dark alleyways plotting the downfall of Mortal Online. It is simply a case where the game lacks the quality to answer its detractors. This is why games like WoW are successful: people can claim it sucks all they like, but the polish and quality of the product speaks for itself and therefore nobody listens to them.
And if the game is garbage, why should fans of niche markets just accept and be happy about it just because there are few alternatives? They have just as much right to be pissed off about a shoddy game as fans of mainstream franchises.
You're right, where there's smoke there's fire. MO has thousands of active players, what is THAT indicitive of? Your logic cuts both ways; people just keep restating the same lines over and over until it's just taken for granted that everyone that tries it hates it. (Hence my Rove reference)
And about the 'hooded figures' conspiricy thing; they're hooded by internet anonymity, but they're not subtle. I don't really wanna talk about specific members or anything pertaining to pending forum moderation, so I'll leave that there.
"And if the game is garbage"? Do you see how you're setting up your arguments?
Niche game = smaller, more focused demographic
small demographic = less people per capita who like that gamestyle
What we have here is a few people who fail to realize that just because MO is not THEIR niche game, it's crap. It's the same "I don't like it, therefore it's garbage". And make no mistake, that's what your doing. You said "garbage" 3 times in that post in reference to MO. Again, don't think you can dismiss my opinion of MO just because I'm a fanboy, either of the game or the niche.
The fact is, you're repeatedly calling MO garbage in the MO forum of MMORPG.com. When people disagree, you continue restate your opinion as fact and dismiss us as push-overs, sycophants, or morons.
Don't you find it wierd that people come along and disagree with that assertion? Please don't discount people simply by saying "dellusional fanboy", you have to realize that not everyone agrees that the game is in such a horrible state. Throughout most of open beta I enjoyed playing the game, as did countless other players. Despite what some people keep repeating, MO's gameworld has been well populated by people that obviously enjoyed the game enough to go through all the bugs.
So perhaps you shouldn't be so quick to throw around assertions as if they are objective fact. A month-long rough stretch does not warrant the kind of flaming that goes on; there were bugs in a beta, that is the purpose of a beta. Would you have recommended that SV update to the engine AFTER release? or never update?
TL;DR -- Please stop stating your opinion as if it were fact.
I'm fully aware that some people like the game and feel that it isn't in a terrible state. My point is that there is no smoke without fire; if a significant number of people are claiming that the game is garbage, and yet more people are staying away from the game as a result of this negative PR even though the game was recently free to try out, the strong chance is that the game is in fact garbage.
There is no conspiracy, there are no hooded figures meeting in dark alleyways plotting the downfall of Mortal Online. It is simply a case where the game lacks the quality to answer its detractors. This is why games like WoW are successful: people can claim it sucks all they like, but the polish and quality of the product speaks for itself and therefore nobody listens to them.
And if the game is garbage, why should fans of niche markets just accept and be happy about it just because there are few alternatives? They have just as much right to be pissed off about a shoddy game as fans of mainstream franchises.
You're right, where there's smoke there's fire. MO has thousands of active players, what is THAT indicitive of? Your logic cuts both ways; people just keep restating the same lines over and over until it's just taken for granted that everyone that tries it hates it. (Hence my Rove reference)
And about the 'hooded figures' conspiricy thing; they're hooded by internet anonymity, but they're not subtle. I don't really wanna talk about specific members or anything pertaining to pending forum moderation, so I'll leave that there.
"And if the game is garbage"? Do you see how you're setting up your arguments?
Niche game = smaller, more focused demographic
small demographic = less people per capita who like that gamestyle
What we have here is a few people who fail to realize that just because MO is not THEIR niche game, it's crap. It's the same "I don't like it, therefore it's garbage". And make no mistake, that's what your doing. You said "garbage" 3 times in that post in reference to MO. Again, don't think you can dismiss my opinion of MO just because I'm a fanboy, either of the game or the niche.
The fact is, you're repeatedly calling MO garbage in the MO forum of MMORPG.com. When people disagree, you continue restate your opinion as fact and dismiss us as push-overs, sycophants, or morons.
When I was talking about garbage, I wasn't actually talking about MO specifically there, hence why I chose not to reference it directly in those paragraphs. That was more of a general thing and could apply to any game in development or already released. True, I do think that Mortal Online is one of the worst MMOs I've ever had the misfortune of playing, and it has nothing to do with the fact that it's full-loot FFA PvP. I would never try to pass that off as fact, however, since it's not conducive to good discussion which is the point of this forum.
In terms of a game's principles and overall design, there is never any way of defining whether it is officially good or bad. I didn't like Halo as I felt it was repetitive and dull, but it was a huge hit with the masses and is widely considered a "good" game. However, I do think you can judge the *quality* of a game, that is to say how well made and put together it is and how well it achieves its goals, by its reception from the wider public.
This is where I think Mortal Online suffers. There has been a lot of criticism of Starvault's approach to developing the title, and problems inherent in the game in terms of bugs and design flaws. That doesn't sound to me like people just complaining because they don't like the first person view, or the combat system. Personally, if a game is attracting an unusual amount of negative press, whether it's official or viral, I'm inclined to believe there is obviously something wrong there. WoW isn't to everyone's liking, but you don't see dozens of videos being put up highlighting how broken the game is, or posts being made about how they're trying to get their money back because the game is close to unplayable.
Still, the proof is in the pudding isn't it? As you said there are people playing it right now and some people do like it. If Mortal Online manages to retain enough subscriptions to keep itself alive and grow then mission accomplished. I, however, am of the opinion that Mortal Online is going to be widely considered a bad game because of what I and many others consider game-breaking issues, and will most likely fizzle out due to lack of popularity. Still, I could be wrong and I will happily admit it if MO manages to net itself a solid fanbase.
In this case, a negative word of mouth campaign that is puffed up by the volume of posts from a smallish number of people obsessed with the failure of a game, more than volume of posters.
No question, Mortal Online has a lot of issues, and many hurdles to clear, as they launch their game. But pointing to rabid critics as some compass of truth... that's not smart. Every single game represented on this web site has rabid critics. Are they all right?
I keep hearing people say that there are a few critics.. or a handful.. or 3...
Please... simply look at the poll on this forum.. or better yet the latest ones they have on the official MO BETA forum:
Posted Friday June 3rd so it's as current as you can get.
View Poll Results: Are you happy with the current combat system?
Yes. It is ok.
24.00%
No.
40.00%
No. I like the theory Shara posted.
31.00%
No, I hate you. (counts as "you like this idea.")
5.00%
Or this one from a few days ago:
View Poll Results: How do you feel about the games current state?
The game is in good condition and I consider it to be launch ready
2.60%
The game has a few bugs that need to be ironed out before release
11.26%
The game could be ready if they devs manage to fix most of the major bugs within the next week~
35.93%
The game will not be ready in time for scheduled release, simply too much to fix
50.22%
These are the polls from the Beta Forums where the people who actually bought the game and are still testing it post and contribute. Poll after poll has shown that the vast majority of people who tried the open beta did not like the game. Whether or not that translates into the game failing at release remains to be seen, but it's indisputable that there are a lot more than a handful of people who didn't care for the game.
We should know soon as the game releases Weds!
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Originally posted by Slapshot1188 Whether or not that translates into the game failing at release remains to be seen, but it's indisputable that there are a lot more than a handful of people who didn't care for the game.
We should know soon as the game releases Weds!
But.. but.. the MO Zealot Brigade who registered onto MMORPG.com a couple months ago said the game is doing just fine..
Game has a great concept, I wouldn't be wasting my time here posting if I didn't like the game. Just needs more dev time but I don't want to pay for an alpha/beta of the concept in question.
You do realize that you make no sense, correct? No, that's a silly question.. you don't.
You are actually trying to convince someone that a game is bad because people say it's bad. So conversely, you are trying to convince someone that the company developing a game has no hand in whether their product is good or not.. It's the players that develop the game, right? You realize that Toyota didn't have a bunch of accelerator malfunctions because a few people said 'Toyota isn't safe', right? Just like I can't say that the sky is blue because I said it is, because that's the way it was since the beginning of time.
MO is in a horrible state for release because the development team either made bad decisions, or the decisions that were made were going to take way too long to implement correctly. They have a bad situation because of themselves. We don't have any hand in the development other than suggesting ideas and helping to fix bugs. I think there have been a lot of people doing that for quite a while now and there are still bugs right now that were in the game at beta launch.
Another thing. Anyone interested in the game had a chance to try it in the open beta. Why are most of the people trying the game saying that it's not ready and it's horrible? You still think it's a bad game because we gave bad reviews? Do you understand what a review is? Or are you actually going to use some logic and admit that perhaps the game is in a bad state because the developers haven't been able to do their job correctly to this point?
Rabid negetive criticism of a game wouldn't happen if the game was in a good state. Therefor, there wouldn't be a drop in player base. Isn't that a reasonable idea?
Yeah. The game is bad because I said it is, not because it's simply a bad product. /sarcasm
Your argument implies that rabid negative criticism is indicative of the objective truth, which in many cases, it is not. A lot of the "negative" criticism seen on this site for any game is more based on opinion than actual fact.
No, a lot of the rabid and unrelenting criticism on this forum and many others is indeed there for a single purpose - to create a negative perception of a game as the authors intend to "damage" the game. In this case, a negative word of mouth campaign that is puffed up by the volume of posts from a smallish number of people obsessed with the failure of a game, more than volume of posters.
No question, Mortal Online has a lot of issues, and many hurdles to clear, as they launch their game. But pointing to rabid critics as some compass of truth... that's not smart. Every single game represented on this web site has rabid critics. Are they all right?
You are arguing a completely different point that has nothing to do with what I was talking about. The topic I responded to was a poster attempting to tell us that we(the players) are destroying a game just by saying we do not like it. You are trying to make yourself look good by arguing something slightly off topic. My crazed ex-gf employed these tactics quite often. I no longer date her because I couldn't stand her stupidity. That and she was a drug addict and alcoholic... but that's not the point =P
To address your point. There is no negativity campaign being waged against Mortal Online. This is a MMO forum where posters are here to discuss everything about MMO's. One of those things would be if they like something or not. Starvault allowed us to try the game ourselves. The vast majority of us do not like the game. We are being vocal about it. That's what the forum is for. The thing is, this isn't just a couple people being stupid. This is an amount that I don't believe a company can ignore. When most of the people who have tried your game do not like, then chances are.. it's not good.
You do realize that you make no sense, correct? No, that's a silly question.. you don't.
You are actually trying to convince someone that a game is bad because people say it's bad. So conversely, you are trying to convince someone that the company developing a game has no hand in whether their product is good or not.. It's the players that develop the game, right? You realize that Toyota didn't have a bunch of accelerator malfunctions because a few people said 'Toyota isn't safe', right? Just like I can't say that the sky is blue because I said it is, because that's the way it was since the beginning of time.
MO is in a horrible state for release because the development team either made bad decisions, or the decisions that were made were going to take way too long to implement correctly. They have a bad situation because of themselves. We don't have any hand in the development other than suggesting ideas and helping to fix bugs. I think there have been a lot of people doing that for quite a while now and there are still bugs right now that were in the game at beta launch.
Another thing. Anyone interested in the game had a chance to try it in the open beta. Why are most of the people trying the game saying that it's not ready and it's horrible? You still think it's a bad game because we gave bad reviews? Do you understand what a review is? Or are you actually going to use some logic and admit that perhaps the game is in a bad state because the developers haven't been able to do their job correctly to this point?
Rabid negetive criticism of a game wouldn't happen if the game was in a good state. Therefor, there wouldn't be a drop in player base. Isn't that a reasonable idea?
Yeah. The game is bad because I said it is, not because it's simply a bad product. /sarcasm
Your argument implies that rabid negative criticism is indicative of the objective truth, which in many cases, it is not. A lot of the "negative" criticism seen on this site for any game is more based on opinion than actual fact.
No, a lot of the rabid and unrelenting criticism on this forum and many others is indeed there for a single purpose - to create a negative perception of a game as the authors intend to "damage" the game. In this case, a negative word of mouth campaign that is puffed up by the volume of posts from a smallish number of people obsessed with the failure of a game, more than volume of posters.
No question, Mortal Online has a lot of issues, and many hurdles to clear, as they launch their game. But pointing to rabid critics as some compass of truth... that's not smart. Every single game represented on this web site has rabid critics. Are they all right?
You are arguing a completely different point that has nothing to do with what I was talking about. The topic I responded to was a poster attempting to tell us that we(the players) are destroying a game just by saying we do not like it. You are trying to make yourself look good by arguing something slightly off topic. My crazed ex-gf employed these tactics quite often. I no longer date her because I couldn't stand her stupidity. That and she was a drug addict and alcoholic... but that's not the point =P
To address your point. There is no negativity campaign being waged against Mortal Online. This is a MMO forum where posters are here to discuss everything about MMO's. One of those things would be if they like something or not. Starvault allowed us to try the game ourselves. The vast majority of us do not like the game. We are being vocal about it. That's what the forum is for. The thing is, this isn't just a couple people being stupid. This is an amount that I don't believe a company can ignore. When most of the people who have tried your game do not like, then chances are.. it's not good.
Stop making excuses for a bad game.
Niche game. Niche means smaller audience.
Smaller audience means larger percent of the greater population that DOESN'T like the game.
So a lot of people don't like the game. Understandable, I know. But why the repeated rage against the game? It's a common misconception: "I don't like it, therefore it's not a good game". Even coming to that false conclusion, why are certain people spend so much time on these forums (and in the case of slapshot, in the MO forums) spinning as much negative as possible. There's hundreds of MMO's out there that do not appeal to me, for any number of reasons. I do NOT spend time on those forums, least of all actually POST so feverishly.
The fact is people's ego's lead them to simply assume that they're opinions are facts, and then feel it's their right and/or responsibility to spread this truth to the dellusional fanboys who have no right to be here.
You do realize that you make no sense, correct? No, that's a silly question.. you don't.
You are actually trying to convince someone that a game is bad because people say it's bad. So conversely, you are trying to convince someone that the company developing a game has no hand in whether their product is good or not.. It's the players that develop the game, right? You realize that Toyota didn't have a bunch of accelerator malfunctions because a few people said 'Toyota isn't safe', right? Just like I can't say that the sky is blue because I said it is, because that's the way it was since the beginning of time.
MO is in a horrible state for release because the development team either made bad decisions, or the decisions that were made were going to take way too long to implement correctly. They have a bad situation because of themselves. We don't have any hand in the development other than suggesting ideas and helping to fix bugs. I think there have been a lot of people doing that for quite a while now and there are still bugs right now that were in the game at beta launch.
Another thing. Anyone interested in the game had a chance to try it in the open beta. Why are most of the people trying the game saying that it's not ready and it's horrible? You still think it's a bad game because we gave bad reviews? Do you understand what a review is? Or are you actually going to use some logic and admit that perhaps the game is in a bad state because the developers haven't been able to do their job correctly to this point?
Rabid negetive criticism of a game wouldn't happen if the game was in a good state. Therefor, there wouldn't be a drop in player base. Isn't that a reasonable idea?
Yeah. The game is bad because I said it is, not because it's simply a bad product. /sarcasm
Don't you find it wierd that people come along and disagree with that assertion? Please don't discount people simply by saying "dellusional fanboy", you have to realize that not everyone agrees that the game is in such a horrible state. Throughout most of open beta I enjoyed playing the game, as did countless other players. Despite what some people keep repeating, MO's gameworld has been well populated by people that obviously enjoyed the game enough to go through all the bugs.
So perhaps you shouldn't be so quick to throw around assertions as if they are objective fact. A month-long rough stretch does not warrant the kind of flaming that goes on; there were bugs in a beta, that is the purpose of a beta. Would you have recommended that SV update to the engine AFTER release? or never update?
TL;DR -- Please stop stating your opinion as if it were fact.
No, I don't find it weird... because most people are agreeing with me. That's the whole point. No one is discounting the 20% of the people who like the game. it's the 80% of the people who believe it is in a horrible state that is the big deal here. I also never used the term 'delusional fanboy'. you did, so don't put it in quotes.
I don't throw around opinions and claim them as facts. I throw around information that is based on reality. I use logic and reason. I've concluded that Mortal Online is not in a proper state to be released to the public, and the vast majority agrees with me. Month long rough stretch? The game has been a mess from day one of pre-order beta, I know.. I pre-ordered it. There are bugs still in the game that were present on day 1. I would have recommended that they were competant enough as programmers to not need to update before launch without the ability to properly test. There's going to be a whole new slew of problems because of it.
Smaller audience means larger percent of the greater population that DOESN'T like the game.
So a lot of people don't like the game. Understandable, I know. But why the repeated rage against the game? It's a common misconception: "I don't like it, therefore it's not a good game". Even coming to that false conclusion, why are certain people spend so much time on these forums (and in the case of slapshot, in the MO forums) spinning as much negative as possible. There's hundreds of MMO's out there that do not appeal to me, for any number of reasons. I do NOT spend time on those forums, least of all actually POST so feverishly.
The fact is people's ego's lead them to simply assume that they're opinions are facts, and then feel it's their right and/or responsibility to spread this truth to the dellusional fanboys who have no right to be here.
It's a niche game because it's a bad game. Smaller audience? Perhaps. Using the word niche makes it seem like 3% of the gaming population would be interested, and that's just an overblown misconception. Tell me why EVE has 300k subscriptions when it's a sandbox just like this one, AND it's in a less popular setting(space).
People post on forums because they have an opinion. That's what a forum is for. I post here because I care about the game. I don't post about bad games that I don't care about. I have a deep interest in sandbox games, there are only two that are playable and worth mentioning. Darkfall and EVE. The developers and I have differing opinions. The interesting thing is, the majority of people here share my opinion. It's not in a state that is conducive to a successful launch.
There's no ego here. There's no negativity compaign. It doesn't matter whether you like the game or not. You don't have to love the game to be able to accept that it's not ready. It needs proper testing. It needs to completely fix the de-sync. It needs to have all the features that were said to be in at launch.. that aren't. You're doing the same thing as some others. You're defending your game. In a keep siege, 20 people defending against 100 generally end up dying....
I'm actually on your side. I want the game to succeed. I gave them my $75. I'm sure the game will arrive shortly. The problem is.. the game really isn't ready. It needs a lot more time. I don't know why its so hard to admit the obvious.
You do realize that you make no sense, correct? No, that's a silly question.. you don't.
You are actually trying to convince someone that a game is bad because people say it's bad. So conversely, you are trying to convince someone that the company developing a game has no hand in whether their product is good or not.. It's the players that develop the game, right? You realize that Toyota didn't have a bunch of accelerator malfunctions because a few people said 'Toyota isn't safe', right? Just like I can't say that the sky is blue because I said it is, because that's the way it was since the beginning of time.
MO is in a horrible state for release because the development team either made bad decisions, or the decisions that were made were going to take way too long to implement correctly. They have a bad situation because of themselves. We don't have any hand in the development other than suggesting ideas and helping to fix bugs. I think there have been a lot of people doing that for quite a while now and there are still bugs right now that were in the game at beta launch.
Another thing. Anyone interested in the game had a chance to try it in the open beta. Why are most of the people trying the game saying that it's not ready and it's horrible? You still think it's a bad game because we gave bad reviews? Do you understand what a review is? Or are you actually going to use some logic and admit that perhaps the game is in a bad state because the developers haven't been able to do their job correctly to this point?
Rabid negetive criticism of a game wouldn't happen if the game was in a good state. Therefor, there wouldn't be a drop in player base. Isn't that a reasonable idea?
Yeah. The game is bad because I said it is, not because it's simply a bad product. /sarcasm
Don't you find it wierd that people come along and disagree with that assertion? Please don't discount people simply by saying "dellusional fanboy", you have to realize that not everyone agrees that the game is in such a horrible state. Throughout most of open beta I enjoyed playing the game, as did countless other players. Despite what some people keep repeating, MO's gameworld has been well populated by people that obviously enjoyed the game enough to go through all the bugs.
So perhaps you shouldn't be so quick to throw around assertions as if they are objective fact. A month-long rough stretch does not warrant the kind of flaming that goes on; there were bugs in a beta, that is the purpose of a beta. Would you have recommended that SV update to the engine AFTER release? or never update?
TL;DR -- Please stop stating your opinion as if it were fact.
No, I don't find it weird... because most people are agreeing with me. That's the whole point. No one is discounting the 20% of the people who like the game. it's the 80% of the people who believe it is in a horrible state that is the big deal here. I also never used the term 'delusional fanboy'. you did, so don't put it in quotes.
I don't throw around opinions and claim them as facts. I throw around information that is based on reality. I use logic and reason. I've concluded that Mortal Online is not in a proper state to be released to the public, and the vast majority agrees with me. Month long rough stretch? The game has been a mess from day one of pre-order beta, I know.. I pre-ordered it. There are bugs still in the game that were present on day 1. I would have recommended that they were competant enough as programmers to not need to update before launch without the ability to properly test. There's going to be a whole new slew of problems because of it.
No need to insult, I know that's typically what people do when they can't have an intelligent comversation though. It's usually used as a last resort.
I agree, no need to insult. Keep in mind you just compared me to your 'crazed and stupid ex-gf'. You're right, you didn't say the word "dellusional", but you speak of your observations based on reality; what are you implying my observations are based on?
Also, a man of logic should really reconsider the "most people are agreeing with me" line.
This isn't going anywhere, but the point remains, you call Mortal a 'bad game', then literally state that this is an objective fact. Let me repeat that: You claim a GAME of being "bad" as a statement of fact. Do you not see how that doesn't pan out?
I agree, no need to insult. Keep in mind you just compared me to your 'crazed and stupid ex-gf'. You're right, you didn't say the word "dellusional", but you speak of your observations based on reality; what are you implying my observations are based on?
Also, a man of logic should really reconsider the "most people are agreeing with me" line.
This isn't going anywhere, but the point remains, you call Mortal a 'bad game', then literally state that this is an objective fact. Let me repeat that: You claim a GAME of being "bad" as a statement of fact. Do you not see how that doesn't pan out?
Just like there are BAD movies.. there are BAD games.
Let's take a look at a movie called Battlefield Earth. This movie released in the year 2000 and is roundly considered one of (if not THE) worst movies of all time. Here is an example of a worst 100 list: http://www.everyonesacritic.net/movie_rank.asp?list=bottom
Now.. did EVERYONE who saw that movie think it was the worst movie ever? Nope.. I am sure a few thought it was OK and some probably thought it was a GREAT movie. It received a 3% at Rottten Tomatoes. This means that 3% of the critics actually gave it a favorable review.
The fact that these 3% may have liked the movie does not change the fact that it is on just about every WORST movie list. As a result of 97% of the people thinking it was a bad movie, it did not make money.. and lost a bundle. It had a budget of $75,000,000 and only grossed $29,000,000.
What this has to do with Mortal Online is as follows:
Starvault is a business company. MO is their product. The product needs to earn money. If not enough people like it enough to pay for it.. they will not make money and they will go out of business. If enough people like the game.. they will pay for it, and Starvault will earn a profit. The test starts in 3 days.. or actually a month and 3 days when subscriptions start to get collected. Time will tell.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
What this has to do with Mortal Online is as follows:
Starvault is a business company. MO is their product. The product needs to earn money. If not enough people like it enough to pay for it.. they will not make money and they will go out of business. If enough people like the game.. they will pay for it, and Starvault will earn a profit. The test starts in 3 days.. or actually a month and 3 days when subscriptions start to get collected. Time will tell.
Comments
So whats this one minor issue?
Your own words not a minute ago list numerous issues.... Im confused?
A lie which is half a truth is ever the blackest of lies.
How very true.
Your quite right, if the main stream devs where interested in a Full loot PvP sandbox game we would have seen more than UO by now, even UO2 was canned, so this in itself tells you it's just not something that would earn the big boys the returns they want.
Let it stay as a niche market, the sheer amount of pressure these smaller companies have to put up with from their so called fans is unbelievable, and these fans wonder why there just aren't more games like this being made^^.
everyone look at this guys post, i told him the features that he tries to say are broken, are not and are just disabled for improvements (the guild system,houses and theivery and decreasting attributes)
he then lists some issues that he mentioned first and then i explained the ploblems in detail which he then goes on to say about im mentioning more then one issue when i was saying that all other issues are not game breaking and the only game breaking issue right now is the AI which is not even that bad anymore in the first place.
you mentioned all those other issues such as lag, crashes and npcs is related to server side when a node crash happens just like eve online which is broken up into nodes aswell but the difference is ccp has the most powerful server in the world.
so there are only 2 issues that need to be addressed and only one of them is game breaking which is the one i said and its not major its only minor but its still game breaking and im sure it can be addressed in 7 days and the other one is the skill attrubute being disbled.
please do not try to twist my words by adding different posts together and trying to say i said something in which i did not say when you first made that list and i just gave you feedback on them.
With that logic couldnt SV have disabled everything months ago and called the game ready to go? Thats just silly!!!
A lie which is half a truth is ever the blackest of lies.
I'm not implying anything. I also am not just talking about MO. The same thing happened with DFO and has already started with Xyson.
Are you implying that rabid criticism of a game that has not been released yet does not lower the initial playerbase on launch? I would beg to differ. Now, this lower initial playerbase equates to less money available to the company to continue to develop the game. These small developers can't eat good will and rainbows. They have to have money to pay employees and continue improving the game. If they run out of money early, employees are laid off, development stops, your dream game never improves, and eventually it dies. Congratulations, you've just assisted in destroying a game that was actually trying to give you what you want.
You do realize that you make no sense, correct? No, that's a silly question.. you don't.
You are actually trying to convince someone that a game is bad because people say it's bad. So conversely, you are trying to convince someone that the company developing a game has no hand in whether their product is good or not.. It's the players that develop the game, right? You realize that Toyota didn't have a bunch of accelerator malfunctions because a few people said 'Toyota isn't safe', right? Just like I can't say that the sky is blue because I said it is, because that's the way it was since the beginning of time.
MO is in a horrible state for release because the development team either made bad decisions, or the decisions that were made were going to take way too long to implement correctly. They have a bad situation because of themselves. We don't have any hand in the development other than suggesting ideas and helping to fix bugs. I think there have been a lot of people doing that for quite a while now and there are still bugs right now that were in the game at beta launch.
Another thing. Anyone interested in the game had a chance to try it in the open beta. Why are most of the people trying the game saying that it's not ready and it's horrible? You still think it's a bad game because we gave bad reviews? Do you understand what a review is? Or are you actually going to use some logic and admit that perhaps the game is in a bad state because the developers haven't been able to do their job correctly to this point?
Rabid negetive criticism of a game wouldn't happen if the game was in a good state. Therefor, there wouldn't be a drop in player base. Isn't that a reasonable idea?
Yeah. The game is bad because I said it is, not because it's simply a bad product. /sarcasm
Your argument implies that rabid negative criticism is indicative of the objective truth, which in many cases, it is not. A lot of the "negative" criticism seen on this site for any game is more based on opinion than actual fact.
No, a lot of the rabid and unrelenting criticism on this forum and many others is indeed there for a single purpose - to create a negative perception of a game as the authors intend to "damage" the game. In this case, a negative word of mouth campaign that is puffed up by the volume of posts from a smallish number of people obsessed with the failure of a game, more than volume of posters.
No question, Mortal Online has a lot of issues, and many hurdles to clear, as they launch their game. But pointing to rabid critics as some compass of truth... that's not smart. Every single game represented on this web site has rabid critics. Are they all right?
Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.
Don't you find it wierd that people come along and disagree with that assertion? Please don't discount people simply by saying "dellusional fanboy", you have to realize that not everyone agrees that the game is in such a horrible state. Throughout most of open beta I enjoyed playing the game, as did countless other players. Despite what some people keep repeating, MO's gameworld has been well populated by people that obviously enjoyed the game enough to go through all the bugs.
So perhaps you shouldn't be so quick to throw around assertions as if they are objective fact. A month-long rough stretch does not warrant the kind of flaming that goes on; there were bugs in a beta, that is the purpose of a beta. Would you have recommended that SV update to the engine AFTER release? or never update?
TL;DR -- Please stop stating your opinion as if it were fact.
lawl
I'm fully aware that some people like the game and feel that it isn't in a terrible state. My point is that there is no smoke without fire; if a significant number of people are claiming that the game is garbage, and yet more people are staying away from the game as a result of this negative PR even though the game was recently free to try out, the strong chance is that the game is in fact garbage.
There is no conspiracy, there are no hooded figures meeting in dark alleyways plotting the downfall of Mortal Online. It is simply a case where the game lacks the quality to answer its detractors. This is why games like WoW are successful: people can claim it sucks all they like, but the polish and quality of the product speaks for itself and therefore nobody listens to them.
And if the game is garbage, why should fans of niche markets just accept and be happy about it just because there are few alternatives? They have just as much right to be pissed off about a shoddy game as fans of mainstream franchises.
You're right, where there's smoke there's fire. MO has thousands of active players, what is THAT indicitive of? Your logic cuts both ways; people just keep restating the same lines over and over until it's just taken for granted that everyone that tries it hates it. (Hence my Rove reference)
And about the 'hooded figures' conspiricy thing; they're hooded by internet anonymity, but they're not subtle. I don't really wanna talk about specific members or anything pertaining to pending forum moderation, so I'll leave that there.
"And if the game is garbage"? Do you see how you're setting up your arguments?
Niche game = smaller, more focused demographic
small demographic = less people per capita who like that gamestyle
What we have here is a few people who fail to realize that just because MO is not THEIR niche game, it's crap. It's the same "I don't like it, therefore it's garbage". And make no mistake, that's what your doing. You said "garbage" 3 times in that post in reference to MO. Again, don't think you can dismiss my opinion of MO just because I'm a fanboy, either of the game or the niche.
The fact is, you're repeatedly calling MO garbage in the MO forum of MMORPG.com. When people disagree, you continue restate your opinion as fact and dismiss us as push-overs, sycophants, or morons.
When I was talking about garbage, I wasn't actually talking about MO specifically there, hence why I chose not to reference it directly in those paragraphs. That was more of a general thing and could apply to any game in development or already released. True, I do think that Mortal Online is one of the worst MMOs I've ever had the misfortune of playing, and it has nothing to do with the fact that it's full-loot FFA PvP. I would never try to pass that off as fact, however, since it's not conducive to good discussion which is the point of this forum.
In terms of a game's principles and overall design, there is never any way of defining whether it is officially good or bad. I didn't like Halo as I felt it was repetitive and dull, but it was a huge hit with the masses and is widely considered a "good" game. However, I do think you can judge the *quality* of a game, that is to say how well made and put together it is and how well it achieves its goals, by its reception from the wider public.
This is where I think Mortal Online suffers. There has been a lot of criticism of Starvault's approach to developing the title, and problems inherent in the game in terms of bugs and design flaws. That doesn't sound to me like people just complaining because they don't like the first person view, or the combat system. Personally, if a game is attracting an unusual amount of negative press, whether it's official or viral, I'm inclined to believe there is obviously something wrong there. WoW isn't to everyone's liking, but you don't see dozens of videos being put up highlighting how broken the game is, or posts being made about how they're trying to get their money back because the game is close to unplayable.
Still, the proof is in the pudding isn't it? As you said there are people playing it right now and some people do like it. If Mortal Online manages to retain enough subscriptions to keep itself alive and grow then mission accomplished. I, however, am of the opinion that Mortal Online is going to be widely considered a bad game because of what I and many others consider game-breaking issues, and will most likely fizzle out due to lack of popularity. Still, I could be wrong and I will happily admit it if MO manages to net itself a solid fanbase.
I keep hearing people say that there are a few critics.. or a handful.. or 3...
Please... simply look at the poll on this forum.. or better yet the latest ones they have on the official MO BETA forum:
Posted Friday June 3rd so it's as current as you can get.
View Poll Results: Are you happy with the current combat system?
Yes. It is ok.
24.00%
No.
40.00%
No. I like the theory Shara posted.
31.00%
No, I hate you. (counts as "you like this idea.")
5.00%
Or this one from a few days ago:
View Poll Results: How do you feel about the games current state?
The game is in good condition and I consider it to be launch ready
2.60%
The game has a few bugs that need to be ironed out before release
11.26%
The game could be ready if they devs manage to fix most of the major bugs within the next week~
35.93%
The game will not be ready in time for scheduled release, simply too much to fix
50.22%
These are the polls from the Beta Forums where the people who actually bought the game and are still testing it post and contribute. Poll after poll has shown that the vast majority of people who tried the open beta did not like the game. Whether or not that translates into the game failing at release remains to be seen, but it's indisputable that there are a lot more than a handful of people who didn't care for the game.
We should know soon as the game releases Weds!
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
But.. but.. the MO Zealot Brigade who registered onto MMORPG.com a couple months ago said the game is doing just fine..
Game has a great concept, I wouldn't be wasting my time here posting if I didn't like the game. Just needs more dev time but I don't want to pay for an alpha/beta of the concept in question.
You are arguing a completely different point that has nothing to do with what I was talking about. The topic I responded to was a poster attempting to tell us that we(the players) are destroying a game just by saying we do not like it. You are trying to make yourself look good by arguing something slightly off topic. My crazed ex-gf employed these tactics quite often. I no longer date her because I couldn't stand her stupidity. That and she was a drug addict and alcoholic... but that's not the point =P
To address your point. There is no negativity campaign being waged against Mortal Online. This is a MMO forum where posters are here to discuss everything about MMO's. One of those things would be if they like something or not. Starvault allowed us to try the game ourselves. The vast majority of us do not like the game. We are being vocal about it. That's what the forum is for. The thing is, this isn't just a couple people being stupid. This is an amount that I don't believe a company can ignore. When most of the people who have tried your game do not like, then chances are.. it's not good.
Stop making excuses for a bad game.
Niche game. Niche means smaller audience.
Smaller audience means larger percent of the greater population that DOESN'T like the game.
So a lot of people don't like the game. Understandable, I know. But why the repeated rage against the game? It's a common misconception: "I don't like it, therefore it's not a good game". Even coming to that false conclusion, why are certain people spend so much time on these forums (and in the case of slapshot, in the MO forums) spinning as much negative as possible. There's hundreds of MMO's out there that do not appeal to me, for any number of reasons. I do NOT spend time on those forums, least of all actually POST so feverishly.
The fact is people's ego's lead them to simply assume that they're opinions are facts, and then feel it's their right and/or responsibility to spread this truth to the dellusional fanboys who have no right to be here.
No, I don't find it weird... because most people are agreeing with me. That's the whole point. No one is discounting the 20% of the people who like the game. it's the 80% of the people who believe it is in a horrible state that is the big deal here. I also never used the term 'delusional fanboy'. you did, so don't put it in quotes.
I don't throw around opinions and claim them as facts. I throw around information that is based on reality. I use logic and reason. I've concluded that Mortal Online is not in a proper state to be released to the public, and the vast majority agrees with me. Month long rough stretch? The game has been a mess from day one of pre-order beta, I know.. I pre-ordered it. There are bugs still in the game that were present on day 1. I would have recommended that they were competant enough as programmers to not need to update before launch without the ability to properly test. There's going to be a whole new slew of problems because of it.
[Mod Edit]
It's a niche game because it's a bad game. Smaller audience? Perhaps. Using the word niche makes it seem like 3% of the gaming population would be interested, and that's just an overblown misconception. Tell me why EVE has 300k subscriptions when it's a sandbox just like this one, AND it's in a less popular setting(space).
People post on forums because they have an opinion. That's what a forum is for. I post here because I care about the game. I don't post about bad games that I don't care about. I have a deep interest in sandbox games, there are only two that are playable and worth mentioning. Darkfall and EVE. The developers and I have differing opinions. The interesting thing is, the majority of people here share my opinion. It's not in a state that is conducive to a successful launch.
There's no ego here. There's no negativity compaign. It doesn't matter whether you like the game or not. You don't have to love the game to be able to accept that it's not ready. It needs proper testing. It needs to completely fix the de-sync. It needs to have all the features that were said to be in at launch.. that aren't. You're doing the same thing as some others. You're defending your game. In a keep siege, 20 people defending against 100 generally end up dying....
I'm actually on your side. I want the game to succeed. I gave them my $75. I'm sure the game will arrive shortly. The problem is.. the game really isn't ready. It needs a lot more time. I don't know why its so hard to admit the obvious.
I agree, no need to insult. Keep in mind you just compared me to your 'crazed and stupid ex-gf'. You're right, you didn't say the word "dellusional", but you speak of your observations based on reality; what are you implying my observations are based on?
Also, a man of logic should really reconsider the "most people are agreeing with me" line.
This isn't going anywhere, but the point remains, you call Mortal a 'bad game', then literally state that this is an objective fact. Let me repeat that: You claim a GAME of being "bad" as a statement of fact. Do you not see how that doesn't pan out?
Just like there are BAD movies.. there are BAD games.
Let's take a look at a movie called Battlefield Earth. This movie released in the year 2000 and is roundly considered one of (if not THE) worst movies of all time. Here is an example of a worst 100 list: http://www.everyonesacritic.net/movie_rank.asp?list=bottom
Now.. did EVERYONE who saw that movie think it was the worst movie ever? Nope.. I am sure a few thought it was OK and some probably thought it was a GREAT movie. It received a 3% at Rottten Tomatoes. This means that 3% of the critics actually gave it a favorable review.
The fact that these 3% may have liked the movie does not change the fact that it is on just about every WORST movie list. As a result of 97% of the people thinking it was a bad movie, it did not make money.. and lost a bundle. It had a budget of $75,000,000 and only grossed $29,000,000.
What this has to do with Mortal Online is as follows:
Starvault is a business company. MO is their product. The product needs to earn money. If not enough people like it enough to pay for it.. they will not make money and they will go out of business. If enough people like the game.. they will pay for it, and Starvault will earn a profit. The test starts in 3 days.. or actually a month and 3 days when subscriptions start to get collected. Time will tell.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
This part we agree on.
Leave personal attacks out of the discussion please.