The world is very small. Its going to be a problem due to the fact that you are such a linear trail all the way up the ladder. Players will exhaust the content in game in a month for the core and maybe 2 for casual. This is going to be a WAR type release all over especially considering how much it feels and sometimes looks like it. Shame as I was hoping for so much out of this dev team. You know what they say about expectations though.
From what I gathered - but I will do some tests myself with the next beta - from north edge to south edge the world is 30 minutes straight-line traveling distance large, and from the west tip to the coast also 30 minutes.
To compare, WoW's Kalimdor from north to south and Lotro Ered Luin to Rivendell are both about 45 minutes straight-line distance, with Kalimdor from west to east coast being 15-18 minutes traveling distance.
That would make Rift's surface area something like roughly 1.5 times a WoW continent, or Kalimdor and the southern part of Eastern Kingdoms bunched up together in one mass.
About the content, hmm, most players exhaust the content of most MMORPG's in 1 or 2 months, except for raid dungeons and such, and hey, people can play those for years. Bit hard to tell how long it takes Rift right now, it's all just vague gut feeling speculation anyway.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
I think it depends a lot more on what they do with the zones than how big the zones are physically. You are on a pretty linear quest track, so once you're done with a zone you're not going back. They are big enough to hold the quests you need to get through the areas and that's enough. Anything more is really just wasted space.
I would much rather they built a decent base for the game and released a game that actually worked, and then went back and added new starter areas, new mid level quest areas, etc.
Large half empty zones for exploration is not wasted space. But I agree that the important thing is to release a working game right now, more content can be added later but you can't patch in a broken game later, LOTRO had very little content at launch while VG had a lot but were broken.
I have to agree with Loke, I prefer being in a world not a very measured and tracked space where every square foot is eithe for a purpose or leading one to a purpose.
But then we start getting back into the whole fast travel argument and not taking to long to do anything.
From what Iv'e seen it just comes down to different types of people wanting different things.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
From what I gathered - but I will do some tests myself with the next beta - from north edge to south edge the world is 30 minutes straight-line traveling distance large, and from the west tip to the coast also 30 minutes.
To compare, WoW's Kalimdor from north to south and Lotro Ered Luin to Rivendell are both about 45 minutes straight-line distance, with Kalimdor from west to east coast being 15-18 minutes traveling distance.
That would make Rift's surface area something like roughly 1.5 times a WoW continent, or Kalimdor and the southern part of Eastern Kingdoms bunched up together in one mass.
It takes 45 minutes to run from say Winterspring to the Gates of AQ? I thought it would have taken much longer, always seemed longer. I might test this.
I found a map in google images of the Rift world, which I'd seen before. It looks smallish still, not as tiny as I'd imagined though, but not sure if it's a genuine map. Only thing I did pick out is the starter zones look wider than the zones on their left. So Gloamwood, Scarlet Gorge and Stonefield might appear even more narrow and linear and make the world feel small.
With what is out and whats coming Rift is nothing special. Has the "path" that leads you to every place you need to go. You can stand there and see the mobs you need to get..you could toss a rock and hit them. Sure in the beginning the maps are really small. Most mmo's are. But when you got to 19..maps were? Lol small. Now duh the fans going to love the game no matter what. This is one of those mmos you HAVE to try before you buy or you will be upset. If they have a open beta try it. For me the start was a blast but 12-20.. pffft you still feel your doing the same thing. It really goes down hill. Just read the Rift forums. Weed through it and get an idea of the game. Rifts are fun but lol WARHAMMER anyone. Yep the one that does most the work gets the best loot..so far. It is nice to see the rift open and what comes out sometimes keeps going and killing until you stop it.. that I LOVED! But as of now it really lacks something and this has been said by way to many.
Yeah but the exact opposite has been said in the beta forums by even more.
It takes 45 minutes to run from say Winterspring to the Gates of AQ? I thought it would have taken much longer, always seemed longer. I might test this.
When you actually travel, it might take longer, because you hardly ever travel in a straight line with no obstacles all the time.
The best and most accurate tests that are done for actual measuring, is travel in a straight line between recognisable points for a minute or so, look at the distance you've crossed on the map, and then extrapolate that distance using the larger worldmap. This will give you the actual traveling distances of a region, continent or world size, when you'd be able to cross those distance in a straight line, as a bird would fly with no terrain obstacles to hinder you.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Originally posted by Sovrath Originally posted by Loke666
Originally posted by lizardbones
I think it depends a lot more on what they do with the zones than how big the zones are physically. You are on a pretty linear quest track, so once you're done with a zone you're not going back. They are big enough to hold the quests you need to get through the areas and that's enough. Anything more is really just wasted space. I would much rather they built a decent base for the game and released a game that actually worked, and then went back and added new starter areas, new mid level quest areas, etc.
Large half empty zones for exploration is not wasted space. But I agree that the important thing is to release a working game right now, more content can be added later but you can't patch in a broken game later, LOTRO had very little content at launch while VG had a lot but were broken. I have to agree with Loke, I prefer being in a world not a very measured and tracked space where every square foot is eithe for a purpose or leading one to a purpose. But then we start getting back into the whole fast travel argument and not taking to long to do anything. From what Iv'e seen it just comes down to different types of people wanting different things.
Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm all for large spaces and exploration (got the Explorer title in WoW), but when a game releases, you often have to choose between things to put in a game. If each zone keeps me occupied until I leave it, then that's "good enough". If there is content there that keeps me occupied until I leave it in addition to extra space to explore or more content to discover, that's definitely better.
We'll have to see what they do with the game's future content. They own the world, it's not like they can't add stuff. Now, if they add nothing, then yeah, that's going to be a big issue. It would be a bonehead move though and they don't strike me as stupid people.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
so in comparison to WoW is it atleast half the size or atleast the same size as one of the continents.
does each race have its own starting area?
I'd say it is about the size of one WoW continent, though I can not judge the size of the other zones very accurately, as I did not play them.
I'm just looking at the map.
Defiants have a starting area and Guardians have a starting area, races don't matter (except for the racial bonuses which are sometimes very powerful). You also start in a small tutorial zone which is different for both factions.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
The heroes journey relies on a world thats bigger than the player, it needs to smother the lvl 1 player in how "epic" it is... thus the player is able to appreciate the journey to end game by rising above the epic world and finding their place. If the world is small, underwhelming, the appreciation of character progression in a world thats trying to be epic, will be for naught.
In Rift, you cannot take 2 steps without bumping into mobs. Theres rarely a spot on a map not scattered by red things that will attack you...and thats silly. It shows you how cramped the zones are.
very well put Raben, and very true.
part of my core issue with Rift right now is how ordinary it feels, and this that you say is a big part of that.
The only 'wow' moment I have had in Rift up to this point is seeing each rift for the first time, but even now I just past them without a second glance if I am in to a quest or something.
I also am not a fan of the safari park, thats a bunch of mobs standing around in fields, approach that this game has taken. Not the next gen dynamic evolution I was hoping for.
Are all of these people complaining about a small world the same ones that want insta-porting and fast travel? The people that say "seen it once, dont need to see it again"? The long walks in the "old" MMOs were a detriment, not something positive and people that say otherwise are using rose-colored glass? Is it those people? The same people that say I only have an hour to play, I dont want to spend it walking from "A" to "B" and not getting anything done? Is it those people? Because it looks like to me that nobody is happy with whatever comes out . . . too small of a world, too big of a world, too much travel, not enough travel. Are these the same people that realize only a couple of zones have been made available during the beta testing, not the whole world? Is it those people? Like the poster that said it only takes a couple of minutes to travel across the whole world and mentioned to points that weren't even released for beta testing?
These forums are littered with people full of contradiction.
Are all of these people complaining about a small world the same ones that want insta-porting and fast travel? The people that say "seen it once, dont need to see it again"? The long walks in the "old" MMOs were a detriment, not something positive and people that say otherwise are using rose-colored glass? Is it those people? The same people that say I only have an hour to play, I dont want to spend it walking from "A" to "B" and not getting anything done? Is it those people? Because it looks like to me that nobody is happy with whatever comes out . . . too small of a world, too big of a world, too much travel, not enough travel. Are these the same people that realize only a couple of zones have been made available during the beta testing, not the whole world? Is it those people? Like the poster that said it only takes a couple of minutes to travel across the whole world and mentioned to points that weren't even released for beta testing?
These forums are littered with people full of contradiction.
thats the world of fanboys for you, mmo ones are the worst though since they hate on everything and love nothing.
Apparently stating the truth in my sig is "trolling" Sig typo fixed thanks to an observant stragen001.
Are all of these people complaining about a small world the same ones that want insta-porting and fast travel? The people that say "seen it once, dont need to see it again"? The long walks in the "old" MMOs were a detriment, not something positive and people that say otherwise are using rose-colored glass? Is it those people? The same people that say I only have an hour to play, I dont want to spend it walking from "A" to "B" and not getting anything done? Is it those people?
Are all of these people complaining about a small world the same ones that want insta-porting and fast travel? The people that say "seen it once, dont need to see it again"? The long walks in the "old" MMOs were a detriment, not something positive and people that say otherwise are using rose-colored glass? Is it those people? The same people that say I only have an hour to play, I dont want to spend it walking from "A" to "B" and not getting anything done? Is it those people? Because it looks like to me that nobody is happy with whatever comes out . . . too small of a world, too big of a world, too much travel, not enough travel. Are these the same people that realize only a couple of zones have been made available during the beta testing, not the whole world? Is it those people? Like the poster that said it only takes a couple of minutes to travel across the whole world and mentioned to points that weren't even released for beta testing?
These forums are littered with people full of contradiction.
people who want fast travel does not mean they want a small world with small zones that are crammed pack with mobs, it means they want a large world with easy acess. those are very different things.
personaly I always found wows flight system to be ok for me. I am never in that much of a hurry.
Just wandering but how are you guys getting to see the whole world?
I played in both betas so far and only got to see the 1 - 20 areas of each faction, which lets be honest was only designed to be a weeks content at most.
i would love to be able to see it all like you guys so i could comment too
Biggest problem for me is that rolling an alt is a real pita in Rift because you have to run exactly the same quests again.
ON the bright side, you only ever need to have 4 characters, to be able to play all 32 souls. If you do 2 on each side, that means you'll only ever need to do same s**t twice. Still much better than many games out there.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall Currently Playing: ESO
I think this is going to be a major flaw on release. The run from Freesand to Moonshade (2 extremes) is literally a few minutes. Although there are plenty of quests and Rifts, the zone world itself is tiny, it's way less than EQ and WoW had on release.
The beta was level capped so I couldn't see every dungeon and area, but I was amazed at how little physical content Rift had.
We were only allowed in ONE zone. How do you know how large the world is? We haven't been given the chance to see it.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
I think this is going to be a major flaw on release. The run from Freesand to Moonshade (2 extremes) is literally a few minutes. Although there are plenty of quests and Rifts, the zone world itself is tiny, it's way less than EQ and WoW had on release.
The beta was level capped so I couldn't see every dungeon and area, but I was amazed at how little physical content Rift had.
We were only allowed in ONE zone. How do you know how large the world is? We haven't been given the chance to see it.
Technically, 2 zones. Freemarch was available to play during the first beta event. Freemarch felt even smaller, even though the land size (map) was technically a bit larger than the Beta 2 zone.
I climbed one of the mountains just to look into the next zones, from what I saw dont expect it to be any different in terms of land size.
The two starter zones take up quite a bit of space on the world map, so its fair to judge that in contrast to the rest of the game. These two areas are also where the major faction cities are...and design wise, they should feel the largest. I'm not saying it wont get better at higher lvls, no one really knows, but it is fair to make an assessment based on the information above.
Remember, the tutorial zone is 1-6, and the starter zones we are all talking about are 7-20. Thats 1/3 of the game right there in terms of leveling. Take that into consideration. Perhaps it would be better it if was 7-13, then it might not feel so small for such a level range.
It's all in the details. Anyways, land mass isnt the deciding factor in scale, its also in the design. Small buildings, lack of any "cities" generic one building quest hubs, red mobs littered haphazardly every other step. It just feels kind of sloppy and underwhelming.
I dont think anyone should play Rift if they are looking for a big and epic 1/3 of their leveling experience. Rift's ,main appeal is in the "rifts", seems everything else got the short end of the quality stick.
I climbed one of the mountains just to look into the next zones, from what I saw dont expect it to be any different in terms of land size.
The two starter zones take up quite a bit of space on the world map, so its fair to judge that in contrast to the rest of the game. These two areas are also where the major faction cities are...and design wise, they should feel the largest. I'm not saying it wont get better at higher lvls, no one really knows, but it is fair to make an assessment based on the information above.
So... having seen the two starter zones and hopping a bit on a mountain has given you the insight to exactly 'feel' how the whole world of Rift will be like? Lol, you're hilarious.
I dont think anyone should play Rift if they are looking for a big and epic 1/3 of their leveling experience. Rift's ,main appeal is in the "rifts", seems everything else got the short end of the quality stick.
The short end? Lol. Not really. Unless you consider delivering a polished product in soul class system, a beautifully rendered world graphically better than most MMORPG's out there, and solid combat and questing the "short end of the quality stick". I guess that's nothing special compared to most other launches we've seen the last few years... oh wait, it is special
But hey, Rift isn't something you like, I think we get that from all your posting.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
I climbed one of the mountains just to look into the next zones, from what I saw dont expect it to be any different in terms of land size.
The two starter zones take up quite a bit of space on the world map, so its fair to judge that in contrast to the rest of the game. These two areas are also where the major faction cities are...and design wise, they should feel the largest. I'm not saying it wont get better at higher lvls, no one really knows, but it is fair to make an assessment based on the information above.
So... having seen the two starter zones and hopping a bit on a mountain has given you the insight to exactly 'feel' how the whole world of Rift will be like? Lol, you're hilarious.
I dont think anyone should play Rift if they are looking for a big and epic 1/3 of their leveling experience. Rift's ,main appeal is in the "rifts", seems everything else got the short end of the quality stick.
The short end? Lol. Not really. Unless you consider delivering a polished product in soul class system, a beautifully rendered world graphically better than most MMORPG's out there, and solid combat and questing the "short end of the quality stick". I guess that's nothing special compared to most other launches we've seen the last few years... oh wait, it is special
But hey, Rift isn't something you like, I think we get that from all your posting.
No, rather it appears you are offended in some way by my stance. It seems you would rather project that I either hate the game entirely or love every aspect of it. Thats a little illogical dont you think? I am not some "new" user who is hearing about Rift for the first time. From your reactions it seems you would rather defend Rift at all cost, and it comes across as very fanboy-ish.
I am honestly doubting you have played Rift if you do not think parts of the game have gotten the "short end of the stick". What this means is, the selling points are often given more development time than the other features. If a small team of developers is set aside to work on questing for example, they may only be given a very limited amount of time to get it done, rather than the time needed to get it done RIGHT.
Are you willing to say the crafting system in Rift is good? That is has as much time invested in it than other features or that its better or worse than even WoW's crafting system?
Quests are mostly unscripted ordeals, they are mirrored and reused throughout freemarch and silverwood. This happens when either they put the "interns" in charge of creating and implementing quests into the system(with some oversight) or they are redirecting resourced into other areas of the game. Again, short stick! The quests in Rift are pretty bad and if you have been on the main forums, including the beta forums, you would know for a fact that the majority are really bored to tears by the quest system.
Art assets...not sure if you been paying attention, but many of the art assets are reused as well. That rare blue 2 handed mace you get from the planar vendor is also seen being held by common mobs in Overwatch keep for example.
Linear design for 1/3 of the leveling process is evident and not well hidden. You ignored that by the way...the fact that 1/3 of the max level has already been seen in Beta. We are not talking about 1/5th or a mere fraction of the total sum of character level, but 1/3.
We are talking about core mechanics here that have been under developed for the sake of creating the selling points of the game, which are the Rifts.
Did you not notice that most of the souls actually mirror each other? They share many of the same skills but with different names and a different property or none at all.
The graphics are fairly low end actually if you consider the limitations by the engine and the alternatives. What do you know about game graphics btw? Have you ever made game assets? Textures? UV Mapped 3D models? There are a lot of really low rez models in Rifts, while they do this for performance issues, it doesnt actually make it good graphics. You see, one of the costs of designing seamless zones and say something like npc armies, is that you have to make graphics less expensive. This means you cut out a lot of potentially good graphics. It also means that the mmorpgs who do not do that tend to have better graphics as a whole. Check out the ones using the unreal and cryengine for example. The art assets in quite a few areas, were obviously rushed. I am saying this as someone who makes art assets.
When the starter zones take up 1/3 of the leveling process, and they take up a huge part of the map, do you really expect the speed in which the character walks to be different in one area than another? lol I dont think so. When I talked about climbing the mountains to see the next zones... I am talking about looking at not just the draw distance and land, but also the map. Did you forget the map gets unlocked and shows you landmarks? What part of "from what I saw" do you not understand? It is not a claim of absolutes, but observation. If you are going to disagree with my observation, then do so in a less childish manner.
THESE ARE VALID CRITICISMS OF THE GAME.
You can try to ignore the fact that I think Rift's hooks (do you know what that means?) are well developed, but you cannot attack me for pointing out its also at the cost of other core mechanics and features. If you read the main forums, you will find that my observations are shared by the majority, not the minority. It is part of the "FEEDBACK PROCESS" which the beta forum was created for.
I can like some elements of a game, and others not so much. I might even play it for one element rather than the other, but you have to understand that it does not disqualify anyone from posting criticisms and or sharing observations that you may be offended by.
You do know Trions development team is also working another another mmorpg at the same time right? Think about it, you might figure out what kind of impact that will have on a game's development process.
So instead of insulting me, instead disagree with actual substance to go off of.
The short end? Lol. Not really. Unless you consider delivering a polished product in soul class system, a beautifully rendered world graphically better than most MMORPG's out there, and solid combat and questing the "short end of the quality stick". I guess that's nothing special compared to most other launches we've seen the last few years... oh wait, it is special
But hey, Rift isn't something you like, I think we get that from all your posting.
I can't believe you've added questing in there. Can I ask have you actually played the game? Questing - and I use the term loosely - is awful. Aion had far far better graphics. And the combat in Rift is still up for debate.
Meh, too long a textwall and seems a bit preachy. Will get back at it at a later moment maybe to read it then.
Originally posted by Milliecake
Originally posted by cyphers
The short end? Lol. Not really. Unless you consider delivering a polished product in soul class system, a beautifully rendered world graphically better than most MMORPG's out there, and solid combat and questing the "short end of the quality stick". I guess that's nothing special compared to most other launches we've seen the last few years... oh wait, it is special
But hey, Rift isn't something you like, I think we get that from all your posting.
I can't believe you've added questing in there. Can I ask have you actually played the game? Questing - and I use the term loosely - is awful. Aion had far far better graphics. And the combat in Rift is still up for debate.
I have. Speaking of Aion, did you do questing in Aion? The repeat quests too? Right.
Questing sucked pretty much in Aion, and regarding graphics, the Aion character graphics are only surpassed by AoC's and FFXIV's in my opinion, but the environmental graphics, please, give me a break: a mix of very low texture graphics and highly detailed graphics, Rift's environment graphics make more of an impression than Aion's.
Regarding character graphics: f**k the WoW and LotrO character models, not even mentioning DDO's, Vanguard's, Darkfall's or Fallen Earth's. Rift's character graphics are better than those.
I could go on, but what's the point? Some people are going to keep on disagreeing just to disagree and because they're on the anti Rift bandwagon, so scrap any reasonable discussion about it. Besides, tastes and opinions differ, there is no real 'right' or 'wrong' in them in most cases.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Comments
From what I gathered - but I will do some tests myself with the next beta - from north edge to south edge the world is 30 minutes straight-line traveling distance large, and from the west tip to the coast also 30 minutes.
To compare, WoW's Kalimdor from north to south and Lotro Ered Luin to Rivendell are both about 45 minutes straight-line distance, with Kalimdor from west to east coast being 15-18 minutes traveling distance.
That would make Rift's surface area something like roughly 1.5 times a WoW continent, or Kalimdor and the southern part of Eastern Kingdoms bunched up together in one mass.
About the content, hmm, most players exhaust the content of most MMORPG's in 1 or 2 months, except for raid dungeons and such, and hey, people can play those for years. Bit hard to tell how long it takes Rift right now, it's all just vague gut feeling speculation anyway.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
I have to agree with Loke, I prefer being in a world not a very measured and tracked space where every square foot is eithe for a purpose or leading one to a purpose.
But then we start getting back into the whole fast travel argument and not taking to long to do anything.
From what Iv'e seen it just comes down to different types of people wanting different things.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
It takes 45 minutes to run from say Winterspring to the Gates of AQ? I thought it would have taken much longer, always seemed longer. I might test this.
I found a map in google images of the Rift world, which I'd seen before. It looks smallish still, not as tiny as I'd imagined though, but not sure if it's a genuine map. Only thing I did pick out is the starter zones look wider than the zones on their left. So Gloamwood, Scarlet Gorge and Stonefield might appear even more narrow and linear and make the world feel small.
Yeah but the exact opposite has been said in the beta forums by even more.
When you actually travel, it might take longer, because you hardly ever travel in a straight line with no obstacles all the time.
The best and most accurate tests that are done for actual measuring, is travel in a straight line between recognisable points for a minute or so, look at the distance you've crossed on the map, and then extrapolate that distance using the larger worldmap. This will give you the actual traveling distances of a region, continent or world size, when you'd be able to cross those distance in a straight line, as a bird would fly with no terrain obstacles to hinder you.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
I have to agree with Loke, I prefer being in a world not a very measured and tracked space where every square foot is eithe for a purpose or leading one to a purpose.
But then we start getting back into the whole fast travel argument and not taking to long to do anything.
From what Iv'e seen it just comes down to different types of people wanting different things.
Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm all for large spaces and exploration (got the Explorer title in WoW), but when a game releases, you often have to choose between things to put in a game. If each zone keeps me occupied until I leave it, then that's "good enough". If there is content there that keeps me occupied until I leave it in addition to extra space to explore or more content to discover, that's definitely better.
We'll have to see what they do with the game's future content. They own the world, it's not like they can't add stuff. Now, if they add nothing, then yeah, that's going to be a big issue. It would be a bonehead move though and they don't strike me as stupid people.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
The zones themselves are rather large (though nog huge by any means), there are not that many zones though.
So the world will be rather small. But not tiny, like Aion.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
so in comparison to WoW is it atleast half the size or atleast the same size as one of the continents.
does each race have its own starting area?
I'd say it is about the size of one WoW continent, though I can not judge the size of the other zones very accurately, as I did not play them.
I'm just looking at the map.
Defiants have a starting area and Guardians have a starting area, races don't matter (except for the racial bonuses which are sometimes very powerful). You also start in a small tutorial zone which is different for both factions.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
hmm only having 2 starting areas tells me this is a lot smaller then wow then.
very well put Raben, and very true.
part of my core issue with Rift right now is how ordinary it feels, and this that you say is a big part of that.
The only 'wow' moment I have had in Rift up to this point is seeing each rift for the first time, but even now I just past them without a second glance if I am in to a quest or something.
I also am not a fan of the safari park, thats a bunch of mobs standing around in fields, approach that this game has taken. Not the next gen dynamic evolution I was hoping for.
Just curious . . .
Are all of these people complaining about a small world the same ones that want insta-porting and fast travel? The people that say "seen it once, dont need to see it again"? The long walks in the "old" MMOs were a detriment, not something positive and people that say otherwise are using rose-colored glass? Is it those people? The same people that say I only have an hour to play, I dont want to spend it walking from "A" to "B" and not getting anything done? Is it those people? Because it looks like to me that nobody is happy with whatever comes out . . . too small of a world, too big of a world, too much travel, not enough travel. Are these the same people that realize only a couple of zones have been made available during the beta testing, not the whole world? Is it those people? Like the poster that said it only takes a couple of minutes to travel across the whole world and mentioned to points that weren't even released for beta testing?
These forums are littered with people full of contradiction.
Gaming since Avalon Hill was making board games.
Played SWG, EVE, Fallen Earth, LOTRO, Rift, Vanguard, WoW, SWTOR, TSW, Tera
Tried Aoc, Aion, EQII, RoM, Vindictus, Darkfail, DDO, GW, PotBS
thats the world of fanboys for you, mmo ones are the worst though since they hate on everything and love nothing.
Apparently stating the truth in my sig is "trolling"
Sig typo fixed thanks to an observant stragen001.
I doubt it.
people who want fast travel does not mean they want a small world with small zones that are crammed pack with mobs, it means they want a large world with easy acess. those are very different things.
personaly I always found wows flight system to be ok for me. I am never in that much of a hurry.
Just wandering but how are you guys getting to see the whole world?
I played in both betas so far and only got to see the 1 - 20 areas of each faction, which lets be honest was only designed to be a weeks content at most.
i would love to be able to see it all like you guys so i could comment too
ON the bright side, you only ever need to have 4 characters, to be able to play all 32 souls. If you do 2 on each side, that means you'll only ever need to do same s**t twice. Still much better than many games out there.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall
Currently Playing: ESO
We were only allowed in ONE zone. How do you know how large the world is? We haven't been given the chance to see it.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Technically, 2 zones. Freemarch was available to play during the first beta event. Freemarch felt even smaller, even though the land size (map) was technically a bit larger than the Beta 2 zone.
I climbed one of the mountains just to look into the next zones, from what I saw dont expect it to be any different in terms of land size.
The two starter zones take up quite a bit of space on the world map, so its fair to judge that in contrast to the rest of the game. These two areas are also where the major faction cities are...and design wise, they should feel the largest. I'm not saying it wont get better at higher lvls, no one really knows, but it is fair to make an assessment based on the information above.
Remember, the tutorial zone is 1-6, and the starter zones we are all talking about are 7-20. Thats 1/3 of the game right there in terms of leveling. Take that into consideration. Perhaps it would be better it if was 7-13, then it might not feel so small for such a level range.
It's all in the details. Anyways, land mass isnt the deciding factor in scale, its also in the design. Small buildings, lack of any "cities" generic one building quest hubs, red mobs littered haphazardly every other step. It just feels kind of sloppy and underwhelming.
I dont think anyone should play Rift if they are looking for a big and epic 1/3 of their leveling experience. Rift's ,main appeal is in the "rifts", seems everything else got the short end of the quality stick.
The short end? Lol. Not really. Unless you consider delivering a polished product in soul class system, a beautifully rendered world graphically better than most MMORPG's out there, and solid combat and questing the "short end of the quality stick". I guess that's nothing special compared to most other launches we've seen the last few years... oh wait, it is special
But hey, Rift isn't something you like, I think we get that from all your posting.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Seemed pretty decent size to me. It's no Vanguard, but being able to travel through rifts to those planes makes the game a bit bigger.
He who keeps his cool best wins.
No, rather it appears you are offended in some way by my stance. It seems you would rather project that I either hate the game entirely or love every aspect of it. Thats a little illogical dont you think? I am not some "new" user who is hearing about Rift for the first time. From your reactions it seems you would rather defend Rift at all cost, and it comes across as very fanboy-ish.
I am honestly doubting you have played Rift if you do not think parts of the game have gotten the "short end of the stick". What this means is, the selling points are often given more development time than the other features. If a small team of developers is set aside to work on questing for example, they may only be given a very limited amount of time to get it done, rather than the time needed to get it done RIGHT.
Are you willing to say the crafting system in Rift is good? That is has as much time invested in it than other features or that its better or worse than even WoW's crafting system?
Quests are mostly unscripted ordeals, they are mirrored and reused throughout freemarch and silverwood. This happens when either they put the "interns" in charge of creating and implementing quests into the system(with some oversight) or they are redirecting resourced into other areas of the game. Again, short stick! The quests in Rift are pretty bad and if you have been on the main forums, including the beta forums, you would know for a fact that the majority are really bored to tears by the quest system.
Art assets...not sure if you been paying attention, but many of the art assets are reused as well. That rare blue 2 handed mace you get from the planar vendor is also seen being held by common mobs in Overwatch keep for example.
Linear design for 1/3 of the leveling process is evident and not well hidden. You ignored that by the way...the fact that 1/3 of the max level has already been seen in Beta. We are not talking about 1/5th or a mere fraction of the total sum of character level, but 1/3.
We are talking about core mechanics here that have been under developed for the sake of creating the selling points of the game, which are the Rifts.
Did you not notice that most of the souls actually mirror each other? They share many of the same skills but with different names and a different property or none at all.
The graphics are fairly low end actually if you consider the limitations by the engine and the alternatives. What do you know about game graphics btw? Have you ever made game assets? Textures? UV Mapped 3D models? There are a lot of really low rez models in Rifts, while they do this for performance issues, it doesnt actually make it good graphics. You see, one of the costs of designing seamless zones and say something like npc armies, is that you have to make graphics less expensive. This means you cut out a lot of potentially good graphics. It also means that the mmorpgs who do not do that tend to have better graphics as a whole. Check out the ones using the unreal and cryengine for example. The art assets in quite a few areas, were obviously rushed. I am saying this as someone who makes art assets.
When the starter zones take up 1/3 of the leveling process, and they take up a huge part of the map, do you really expect the speed in which the character walks to be different in one area than another? lol I dont think so. When I talked about climbing the mountains to see the next zones... I am talking about looking at not just the draw distance and land, but also the map. Did you forget the map gets unlocked and shows you landmarks? What part of "from what I saw" do you not understand? It is not a claim of absolutes, but observation. If you are going to disagree with my observation, then do so in a less childish manner.
THESE ARE VALID CRITICISMS OF THE GAME.
You can try to ignore the fact that I think Rift's hooks (do you know what that means?) are well developed, but you cannot attack me for pointing out its also at the cost of other core mechanics and features. If you read the main forums, you will find that my observations are shared by the majority, not the minority. It is part of the "FEEDBACK PROCESS" which the beta forum was created for.
I can like some elements of a game, and others not so much. I might even play it for one element rather than the other, but you have to understand that it does not disqualify anyone from posting criticisms and or sharing observations that you may be offended by.
You do know Trions development team is also working another another mmorpg at the same time right? Think about it, you might figure out what kind of impact that will have on a game's development process.
So instead of insulting me, instead disagree with actual substance to go off of.
I can't believe you've added questing in there. Can I ask have you actually played the game? Questing - and I use the term loosely - is awful. Aion had far far better graphics. And the combat in Rift is still up for debate.
Meh, too long a textwall and seems a bit preachy. Will get back at it at a later moment maybe to read it then.
I have. Speaking of Aion, did you do questing in Aion? The repeat quests too? Right.
Questing sucked pretty much in Aion, and regarding graphics, the Aion character graphics are only surpassed by AoC's and FFXIV's in my opinion, but the environmental graphics, please, give me a break: a mix of very low texture graphics and highly detailed graphics, Rift's environment graphics make more of an impression than Aion's.
Regarding character graphics: f**k the WoW and LotrO character models, not even mentioning DDO's, Vanguard's, Darkfall's or Fallen Earth's. Rift's character graphics are better than those.
I could go on, but what's the point? Some people are going to keep on disagreeing just to disagree and because they're on the anti Rift bandwagon, so scrap any reasonable discussion about it. Besides, tastes and opinions differ, there is no real 'right' or 'wrong' in them in most cases.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."