I have to disagree with this rating. In the review, it was mentioned that the game is basically in beta and people are paying to test. How can you rate a game that is still in such a state 6.9???? 6.9, that means solid to me. Good, solid gameplay, maybe with bugs (some are normal for newly-released products), not that much content and some shortcomings, but 6.9 means it is not in a beta state. Honestly, how does this score add up? I could understand everything between 5-6, but this is way too high. You can't rate a game on potential because if we were to buy the game now, it wouldn't be 6.9. You can't tell us "oh hey, this is 6.9. Yeah, it's buggy and there isn't much content beyond pvp, but in the future, this game will be awesome!" I will be the first to agree that this game can grow and become something special. But at the moment, it simply isn't. If the potential would be realized it could easily become a 7 or beyond, but at the moment, you have to look at the facts.
First - First person only view is the first big mistake of this game. PvP reasons be damned. If they had to limit a characters view they could have done what the developers of Mount and Blade did. Their system works awesome and still allows for players to sneak up on others to get a first strike from behind. People like to see their character in action and see what they look like. Having only first person view as they do to this game no doubt turns many potential players off from even trying it.
Second - to many polies and not enough optimization of textures has a huge effect on graphics and the speed at which your standard GPU can handle them. That is why you see outrageous instances of rubberbanding in this game. It is crazy mad rubber banding. Server engineering and optimization of data to and from the server to the client is of utmost importance in any multiplayer game that relies on server client coms. Being that the game is an FPS with collision detection...they need better server to client and vice versa optimization.
Third - is it to much to ask for the developers to use some decent motion capture for animations? This tech has been out for ever and is not that expensive any more. It would help make the games animations not look so clunky.
Fourth - Combat is so limited. In this day and age, games like DF, and MO, scream for a better combat system than they currently have. One that is more fluid and has multiple options for strikes and blocks - with different weapons having different strikes and blocks as well - on top of that. A single handed sword does not play like a hand and a half or a two handed sword, not does a pike handle the same as a spear or a halbred. If a 5 person developers team of indie game developers from Turkey can create the game we know as Mount and Blade with its awesome, fluid and multifaceted combat system...why can't these game developer houses with more people and more money do it?
Fifth - ....why do they do like other game companies and refuse to squash the bugs that hurt the game. They aren't Blizzard, they aren't Mythic, they aren't CCP...they are a small outfit and it is of utmost importance that they provide a game that is as bugless as possible. If a bug does crop up they need to get on it and fix it ASAP. The smallest game breaking bug can kill any chance an indie game can have ever making it past its first year. We saw games like APB crash and burn due to this kind of stuff. MO is no different.
Sixth - Customer service! If you are going to provide a service - your game - provide the support that is needed to your customers! Do whatever it takes to stay in constant contact with your customers and do not mislead them or promise them something you cannot deliver. Respond promptly to your customers concerns and do not take advantage of them - ever! Your customers are your bread and butter- especially for a game company that has not proven themselves. You screw your customers - you are screwing yourself.
With that being said...it is a shame that MO will probably never make it past another year. If it does - more power to the company for doing it. I just do not see it happening as it is the game is a mess and so is the company behind it.
Sorry to say this but this game fail because Starvault are crap programmers, they should hire more competent coders instead of sending the engine in Cina to Epic. Yes, pratically they haven't the control of the engine, when they need a change they send the client in Cina because they aren't capable to put the hand in the source unreal 3 code. This explain why the game is full of bugs, desync in combat, stucks, craft stations not work properly, crashes.
Yes this game has potential, is like a miracle UO in 3D, but the incompetence of the SV coders will be the the failure of this game in the long run.
When they complete flash UI implementation and some PvE elements, I'll return back to the game. I am bored of standard MMORPG's, I am constantly trying LOTRO, AoC etc but they're not my type, I get bored in a few hours, with those games, what you do is really straightforward, get a quest, kill something, get your new gear as reward, equip it, level, your gear gets obsolete, rinse and start again.... Pfff
I honestly wonder what game the author was playing. I well understand the "potential", but so far all I've seen are broken patches, bugs, and unfinished features together with lack of content and extremely bad project management. Talk about biased review.
I also find it funny how fans at MO suddenly changed their opinion about mmorpg from "troll nest" to "those guys knows their shit". Hypocrites.
I honestly wonder what game the author was playing. I well understand the "potential", but so far all I've seen are broken patches, bugs, and unfinished features together with lack of content and extremely bad project management. Talk about biased review.
I also find it funny how fans at MO suddenly changed their opinion about mmorpg from "troll nest" to "those guys knows their shit". Hypocrites.
Ohh, the guys working on MMORPG aren´t the ones trolling the MO forums... Finally some1 wrote a honest and fair review of the state that MO is in right now.
"I have to disagree with this rating. In the review, it was mentioned that the game is basically in beta and people are paying to test. How can you rate a game that is still in such a state 6.9???? 6.9, that means solid to me. Good, solid gameplay, maybe with bugs (some are normal for newly-released products), not that much content and some shortcomings, but 6.9 means it is not in a beta state. Honestly, how does this score add up? I could understand everything between 5-6, but this is way too high. You can't rate a game on potential because if we were to buy the game now, it wouldn't be 6.9. You can't tell us "oh hey, this is 6.9. Yeah, it's buggy and there isn't much content beyond pvp, but in the future, this game will be awesome!" I will be the first to agree that this game can grow and become something special. But at the moment, it simply isn't. If the potential would be realized it could easily become a 7 or beyond, but at the moment, you have to look at the facts.
Very misleading score in my opinion".
I must disagree here as well. I do think the game desreves the "high" score that the reviewer gave it. It still IS tons of fun to play the game even with the bugs in it. And as I wrote before. Once they get more content into the game etc, the score will rise even more.
I honestly wonder what game the author was playing. I well understand the "potential", but so far all I've seen are broken patches, bugs, and unfinished features together with lack of content and extremely bad project management. Talk about biased review.
I also find it funny how fans at MO suddenly changed their opinion about mmorpg from "troll nest" to "those guys knows their shit". Hypocrites.
Now that I re-read my comment, it comes out to harsh to the author, which I apologize for. I take back the biased part, yet I still think that a 7 is to high for games current status. Potential alone doesn't cut it.
Ohh, the guys working on MMORPG aren´t the ones trolling the MO forums... Finally some1 wrote a honest and fair review of the state that MO is in right now.
Irrelevant. I seen enough cases of MO fans blaming both mods, owners and writers on MO, not just normal members.
I also find it interesting that the author does not seems to mention complete lack of content for the game, but keeps naggins about great ideals and potential. I dont do charity so some UO fans can make a game for themselves over time.
Ohh, the guys working on MMORPG aren´t the ones trolling the MO forums... Finally some1 wrote a honest and fair review of the state that MO is in right now.
Irrelevant. I seen enough cases of MO fans blaming both mods, owners and writers on MO, not just normal members.
And I´ve seen enough of MO-haters to last me a lifetime. It´s just gone so over the top with the hate towards MO and SV, that you just sit there with your jaw dropped, and wonder if these guys even played the game I´m playing now. Everything need to be put into context and that is what I thin this reviewer has done, and I he makes a fair judgement of the game and the state it´s in. It´s not like he hides the fact the the game is bug filled, and it´s not like he says you can´t enjoy it even as it is.
Also, all the talk about "Build your character the way you want" isn't completely true, if you dont roll certain "classes" you are useless, you can read more here:
I also find it interesting that the author does not seems to mention complete lack of content for the game, but keeps naggins about great ideals and potential. I dont do charity so some UO fans can make a game for themselves over time.
I think you need a hug... And then the game is a sandbox game. You get a bucket and a shovel, then a big ass sandbox to play in. It´s just as fun as you make it. If you don´t have any friends, or any idea how to move around in the world, you prolly won´t enjoy it. And there IS more content coming soon if you for example read the interview with Henric that they did here as well.
Also, all the talk about "Build your character the way you want" isn't completely true, if you dont roll certain "classes" you are useless, you can read more here:
Also, all the talk about "Build your character the way you want" isn't completely true, if you dont roll certain "classes" you are useless, you can read more here:
Such skill based concept doesnt seems to work out well for MO.
Sry to say it. But the guy is wrong. It´s way better to have a guy with 112 in strength if you wanna use the best bows as a archer for example. Don´t link to posts if you don´t know how to relate to it...
Hey guys, just a little advice. If you have a lot to say please try and edit it into a previous post instead of posting right after yourself continuously. It keeps everything that you want to say in one spot .
Hey guys, just a little advice. If you have a lot to say please try and edit it into a previous post instead of posting right after yourself continuously. It keeps everything that you want to say in one spot .
I wanted to edit one of mine but couldn´t. I know I´m dumb, but where is the edit button for post that you´ve made?
I honestly wonder what game the author was playing. I well understand the "potential", but so far all I've seen are broken patches, bugs, and unfinished features together with lack of content and extremely bad project management. Talk about biased review.
I also find it funny how fans at MO suddenly changed their opinion about mmorpg from "troll nest" to "those guys knows their shit". Hypocrites.
Now that I re-read my comment, it comes out to harsh to the author, which I apologize for. I take back the biased part, yet I still think that a 7 is to high for games current status. Potential alone doesn't cut it.
In no part of the review did he say that the score is influenced by the potential MO has. IMO game scores arent usually acurate anyway. The best thing to do is just read hte review and base your opinion off of that. Scores dont mean anything.
there are 2 types of mmo, imitators and innovaters.
A 7/10 is an "average" game on MMORPG.com (think a C-), whereas a 5/10 is an unusually poor quality game (a straight up F). While you might disagree with this scale that is how games have traditionally been rated here, so it's not fair to accuse the reviewer of bias when he's simply following the standard given by the site.
Hey guys, just a little advice. If you have a lot to say please try and edit it into a previous post instead of posting right after yourself continuously. It keeps everything that you want to say in one spot .
I wanted to edit one of mine but couldn´t. I know I´m dumb, but where is the edit button for post that you´ve made?
It would probably be helpful if I point out for you that this discussion is actually happening in the forum itself where the full post editing options are displayed. If you make posts on this topic under the initial news post by Suzie then you only see the "comments" and not the actual forum thread posts with the full options. So click the " taking place in the forums" link under this original news post to get to the forum thread.
You aren't dumb, this comment system is dumb xD
"I'm not cheap I'm incredibly subconsciously financially optimized" "The worst part of censorship is ------------------"
I think on open world/sandbox like MO should have a few npcs...maybe hard to find..to make it challenging ..all of whom teach cartography. Then as a player uncovers more of the world ..he can use the cartography skill (with consumable inks papers..etc) to not only raise his skill...but make map copies of only areas he/she knows....then sell them on the auction house or hand them out for free if they desire. Eventually others could do this until all the globe is mapped out...either through one's own travels and cartographer skills (acquiring an entire map), by assembling together map pieces from many other travellers (purchased through trade) or waiting until some other patient slob starts selling entire maps . This could end up, initially, being a good means of revenue for the wandering entrepreneur.
At the least..I've always thought the map should not be whole at the beginning of a game. Have it dark or otherwise obscurred , only showing you the topography as you discover each new area. I believe many games already use this technique. Although I have used quest systems and game maps..I've always found it more immersive and fun to discover things on my own. In a game like MO...fully formed maps and quest helpers should not even come into the design...except in the manner I suggested
I think on open world/sandbox like MO should have a few npcs...maybe hard to find..to make it challenging ..all of whom teach cartography. Then as a player uncovers more of the world ..he can use the cartography skill (with consumable inks papers..etc) to not only raise his skill...but make map copies of only areas he/she knows....then sell them on the auction house or hand them out for free if they desire. Eventually others could do this until all the globe is mapped out...either through one's own travels and cartographer skills (acquiring an entire map), by assembling together map pieces from many other travellers (purchased through trade) or waiting until some other patient slob starts selling entire maps . This could end up, initialy, being a good means of revenue for the wandering entrepreneur. Any opinions?
nobody would buy them because you can get a free map online already. the world is also too small to be needing a map. once you'v played for a month or so you know it all by heart.
MO's problem is not maps, it's the endlessly broken basics mechanics like combat, functions, weappons, enviroment, structures, npcs, etc.
It would probably be helpful if I point out for you that this discussion is actually happening in the forum itself where the full post editing options are displayed.
Ah, thanks, I didn't figured it out, though comments were taking place at the article or something.
Its a very informative review. At first i was runnin to go buy the game but then i read comments and im kind of torn.
It looks and sounds great, but if comments from the actual players of the game are any indication of whats to come i dont wanna buy the game. The game itself sounds fine but the way people talk about SV makes me not want to get it.
Jeremiah 8:21 I weep for the hurt of my people; I stand amazed, silent, dumb with grief. Join me on TwitchFacebook Twitter
Comments
I have to disagree with this rating. In the review, it was mentioned that the game is basically in beta and people are paying to test. How can you rate a game that is still in such a state 6.9???? 6.9, that means solid to me. Good, solid gameplay, maybe with bugs (some are normal for newly-released products), not that much content and some shortcomings, but 6.9 means it is not in a beta state. Honestly, how does this score add up? I could understand everything between 5-6, but this is way too high. You can't rate a game on potential because if we were to buy the game now, it wouldn't be 6.9. You can't tell us "oh hey, this is 6.9. Yeah, it's buggy and there isn't much content beyond pvp, but in the future, this game will be awesome!" I will be the first to agree that this game can grow and become something special. But at the moment, it simply isn't. If the potential would be realized it could easily become a 7 or beyond, but at the moment, you have to look at the facts.
Very misleading score in my opinion.
First - First person only view is the first big mistake of this game. PvP reasons be damned. If they had to limit a characters view they could have done what the developers of Mount and Blade did. Their system works awesome and still allows for players to sneak up on others to get a first strike from behind. People like to see their character in action and see what they look like. Having only first person view as they do to this game no doubt turns many potential players off from even trying it.
Second - to many polies and not enough optimization of textures has a huge effect on graphics and the speed at which your standard GPU can handle them. That is why you see outrageous instances of rubberbanding in this game. It is crazy mad rubber banding. Server engineering and optimization of data to and from the server to the client is of utmost importance in any multiplayer game that relies on server client coms. Being that the game is an FPS with collision detection...they need better server to client and vice versa optimization.
Third - is it to much to ask for the developers to use some decent motion capture for animations? This tech has been out for ever and is not that expensive any more. It would help make the games animations not look so clunky.
Fourth - Combat is so limited. In this day and age, games like DF, and MO, scream for a better combat system than they currently have. One that is more fluid and has multiple options for strikes and blocks - with different weapons having different strikes and blocks as well - on top of that. A single handed sword does not play like a hand and a half or a two handed sword, not does a pike handle the same as a spear or a halbred. If a 5 person developers team of indie game developers from Turkey can create the game we know as Mount and Blade with its awesome, fluid and multifaceted combat system...why can't these game developer houses with more people and more money do it?
Fifth - ....why do they do like other game companies and refuse to squash the bugs that hurt the game. They aren't Blizzard, they aren't Mythic, they aren't CCP...they are a small outfit and it is of utmost importance that they provide a game that is as bugless as possible. If a bug does crop up they need to get on it and fix it ASAP. The smallest game breaking bug can kill any chance an indie game can have ever making it past its first year. We saw games like APB crash and burn due to this kind of stuff. MO is no different.
Sixth - Customer service! If you are going to provide a service - your game - provide the support that is needed to your customers! Do whatever it takes to stay in constant contact with your customers and do not mislead them or promise them something you cannot deliver. Respond promptly to your customers concerns and do not take advantage of them - ever! Your customers are your bread and butter- especially for a game company that has not proven themselves. You screw your customers - you are screwing yourself.
With that being said...it is a shame that MO will probably never make it past another year. If it does - more power to the company for doing it. I just do not see it happening as it is the game is a mess and so is the company behind it.
Sorry to say this but this game fail because Starvault are crap programmers, they should hire more competent coders instead of sending the engine in Cina to Epic. Yes, pratically they haven't the control of the engine, when they need a change they send the client in Cina because they aren't capable to put the hand in the source unreal 3 code. This explain why the game is full of bugs, desync in combat, stucks, craft stations not work properly, crashes.
Yes this game has potential, is like a miracle UO in 3D, but the incompetence of the SV coders will be the the failure of this game in the long run.
When they complete flash UI implementation and some PvE elements, I'll return back to the game. I am bored of standard MMORPG's, I am constantly trying LOTRO, AoC etc but they're not my type, I get bored in a few hours, with those games, what you do is really straightforward, get a quest, kill something, get your new gear as reward, equip it, level, your gear gets obsolete, rinse and start again.... Pfff
I honestly wonder what game the author was playing. I well understand the "potential", but so far all I've seen are broken patches, bugs, and unfinished features together with lack of content and extremely bad project management. Talk about biased review.
I also find it funny how fans at MO suddenly changed their opinion about mmorpg from "troll nest" to "those guys knows their shit". Hypocrites.
Ohh, the guys working on MMORPG aren´t the ones trolling the MO forums... Finally some1 wrote a honest and fair review of the state that MO is in right now.
reijan writes:
"I have to disagree with this rating. In the review, it was mentioned that the game is basically in beta and people are paying to test. How can you rate a game that is still in such a state 6.9???? 6.9, that means solid to me. Good, solid gameplay, maybe with bugs (some are normal for newly-released products), not that much content and some shortcomings, but 6.9 means it is not in a beta state. Honestly, how does this score add up? I could understand everything between 5-6, but this is way too high. You can't rate a game on potential because if we were to buy the game now, it wouldn't be 6.9. You can't tell us "oh hey, this is 6.9. Yeah, it's buggy and there isn't much content beyond pvp, but in the future, this game will be awesome!" I will be the first to agree that this game can grow and become something special. But at the moment, it simply isn't. If the potential would be realized it could easily become a 7 or beyond, but at the moment, you have to look at the facts.
Very misleading score in my opinion".
I must disagree here as well. I do think the game desreves the "high" score that the reviewer gave it. It still IS tons of fun to play the game even with the bugs in it. And as I wrote before. Once they get more content into the game etc, the score will rise even more.
Now that I re-read my comment, it comes out to harsh to the author, which I apologize for. I take back the biased part, yet I still think that a 7 is to high for games current status. Potential alone doesn't cut it.
Irrelevant. I seen enough cases of MO fans blaming both mods, owners and writers on MO, not just normal members.
I also find it interesting that the author does not seems to mention complete lack of content for the game, but keeps naggins about great ideals and potential. I dont do charity so some UO fans can make a game for themselves over time.
And I´ve seen enough of MO-haters to last me a lifetime. It´s just gone so over the top with the hate towards MO and SV, that you just sit there with your jaw dropped, and wonder if these guys even played the game I´m playing now. Everything need to be put into context and that is what I thin this reviewer has done, and I he makes a fair judgement of the game and the state it´s in. It´s not like he hides the fact the the game is bug filled, and it´s not like he says you can´t enjoy it even as it is.
Also, all the talk about "Build your character the way you want" isn't completely true, if you dont roll certain "classes" you are useless, you can read more here:
http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/361/view/forums/thread/299221/The-Classes-in-MO-What-race-to-pick.html
Such skill based concept doesnt seems to work out well for MO.
I think you need a hug... And then the game is a sandbox game. You get a bucket and a shovel, then a big ass sandbox to play in. It´s just as fun as you make it. If you don´t have any friends, or any idea how to move around in the world, you prolly won´t enjoy it. And there IS more content coming soon if you for example read the interview with Henric that they did here as well.
Sry to say it. But the guy is wrong. It´s way better to have a guy with 112 in strength if you wanna use the best bows as a archer for example. Don´t link to posts if you don´t know how to relate to it...
He covered this in the article.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Hey guys, just a little advice. If you have a lot to say please try and edit it into a previous post instead of posting right after yourself continuously. It keeps everything that you want to say in one spot
.
I wanted to edit one of mine but couldn´t. I know I´m dumb, but where is the edit button for post that you´ve made?
In no part of the review did he say that the score is influenced by the potential MO has. IMO game scores arent usually acurate anyway. The best thing to do is just read hte review and base your opinion off of that. Scores dont mean anything.
there are 2 types of mmo, imitators and innovaters.
A 7/10 is an "average" game on MMORPG.com (think a C-), whereas a 5/10 is an unusually poor quality game (a straight up F). While you might disagree with this scale that is how games have traditionally been rated here, so it's not fair to accuse the reviewer of bias when he's simply following the standard given by the site.
It would probably be helpful if I point out for you that this discussion is actually happening in the forum itself where the full post editing options are displayed. If you make posts on this topic under the initial news post by Suzie then you only see the "comments" and not the actual forum thread posts with the full options. So click the " taking place in the forums" link under this original news post to get to the forum thread.
You aren't dumb, this comment system is dumb xD
"I'm not cheap I'm incredibly subconsciously financially optimized"
"The worst part of censorship is ------------------"
I think on open world/sandbox like MO should have a few npcs...maybe hard to find..to make it challenging ..all of whom teach cartography. Then as a player uncovers more of the world ..he can use the cartography skill (with consumable inks papers..etc) to not only raise his skill...but make map copies of only areas he/she knows....then sell them on the auction house or hand them out for free if they desire. Eventually others could do this until all the globe is mapped out...either through one's own travels and cartographer skills (acquiring an entire map), by assembling together map pieces from many other travellers (purchased through trade) or waiting until some other patient slob starts selling entire maps . This could end up, initially, being a good means of revenue for the wandering entrepreneur.
At the least..I've always thought the map should not be whole at the beginning of a game. Have it dark or otherwise obscurred , only showing you the topography as you discover each new area. I believe many games already use this technique. Although I have used quest systems and game maps..I've always found it more immersive and fun to discover things on my own. In a game like MO...fully formed maps and quest helpers should not even come into the design...except in the manner I suggested
Any opinions ?
Thanks, I may check it out then.
nobody would buy them because you can get a free map online already. the world is also too small to be needing a map. once you'v played for a month or so you know it all by heart.
MO's problem is not maps, it's the endlessly broken basics mechanics like combat, functions, weappons, enviroment, structures, npcs, etc.
Ah, thanks, I didn't figured it out, though comments were taking place at the article or something.
Its a very informative review. At first i was runnin to go buy the game but then i read comments and im kind of torn.
It looks and sounds great, but if comments from the actual players of the game are any indication of whats to come i dont wanna buy the game. The game itself sounds fine but the way people talk about SV makes me not want to get it.
Jeremiah 8:21 I weep for the hurt of my people; I stand amazed, silent, dumb with grief.
Join me on Twitch Facebook Twitter