Roma Victor does look really cool to me and I really wanted to try it out, but like you said they make you pay before you get to do anything. If I'm going to pay I might just buy Vanguard. You can have player citys in vanguard right? Or did I misread that...
Some people claim that they never suffered a CTD, but in my guild, which was 60ish people, we ALL suffered thru them, with varying degrees of severity. It was odd, during beta I rarely suffered from them, but with each patch, I seemed to suffer more and more from them. I dont think that we can really judge if they are fixed though, because it seems that the people who dont suffer from them are all that's left. Make that 40ish k people in game, and 160k who left the game because of numerous issues with it. Personally, I wanted to like it, I thought that it would have a lot going for it, and I was excited about it's housing and boats. HOWEVER, the developers went with a plan to make a game that would in a way appeal to the original EQ style player. By this I mean no instances, so when people actually played, dungeons were quite often camping contests. A massive world? I thought it sounded like a good thing too, but try spending 30-45 minutes just in transit to get to a group. (this has changed recently with riftways however, and travel can be much reduced) My point however, is that the game was trotted out to appeal to this large group of people that played EQ, and the team thought would come back. However they seriously misread the market, and did not realize the impact of post EQ style games, instances, and so on, and how while it could be a good game, it's more a niche game. Being honest about it, I would not recommend VG for anyone, unless they were looking for frustration. If you really want to try it, check out some of the assorted forums, and ask around for a buddy key. Drawing your own conclusion is really what you should do, because most of these debates are simply preference, and not fact.
Age of Conan like Guild Wars? How exactly is it like Guild Wars? I think people misrepresent AoC because the original plan was to level 1-20 offline in single player, so your character would have his "own" story, and you'd learn the controls. However that plan was scrapped some time ago, and now 1-20 is online, and you most certainly CAN play it with other people. Essentially they give you an option of doing it solo, or group with the day/night cycle. From that point on the game is typical MMO fare. You'll see instances used much like any other MMO, the exception being in the Guild City area, and that is done simply so that every guild can have a city, and participate in the siege style warfare that AoC offers.
Other highpoint, and this is based on personal preference. It's guild verus guild PvP, with siege combat, as opposed to Realm versus Realm, or faction verus faction. This style, guilds take battlekeeps and towers, and reap the benefits that come with controlling those coveted places. Other guilds then try to take them away, and reap the benefits, to me, that's meaningful, shaping the world, and enjoyable. THIS IS STRICTLY PREFERENCE, but I dont care for the RvR style PvP, because after capturing a Captial City, the server essentially resets, and you start all over again, you dont really shape anything, to me, that's meaningless. However like I said, that's preference, I know many people find meaning in it, and enjoy it. So it's really about what you like.
Either or, plenty of games coming out, and it seems that more and more of them are starting to aim at different niches, as opposed to seeking out mass popularity. To me, that's a good thing, because there is a better chance of finding a game that fits a particular taste.
I am not sure the "end pf MMOs" is quite accurate...
The biggest issue we, as gamers, will face is the same no matter the type of gamer you are.... be it FPS, MMO, MMOPRG, Offline RPG, RTS, or anything else... The companies see their games almost entirely as a profit margin. So, lets look at how this will effect games in general...
1) More players = more profit.
2) More user friendly = more players will be able to play.
3) More user friendly often times means easier. More handholding. Less thought required.
4) Even SPORTS GAMES now have strategy guides. And people BUY them.
Combine all these aspects and what you get is an image of the companies' ultimate creation...
Games so simple in design and interface even inbred chimps could play it...
And any twists they choose to add into the game need no in game explanation, no lore, no tie-ins, because the gamers are all going to buy the strat guide or find the solution online anyway.
So... according the above model, we (thinking like game companies now) need a game that we can make appeal to the most people possible... we need to mass market it and make it "cool"... but keep it simple enough even idiots can play it and not feel inferior... and in doing so increase the user base until we are pulling the cash in like maniacs! After the user base gets that size, we can alienate the hardcore all we like... as long as the masses pay and play who cares about the actual MMORPG players, all we need is the numbers! Work on simple interface, easy operation, and flashy graphics... and market the HELL out of it!
Does anyone else think this sounds an awful lot like WoW?
This applies to every kind of game from the next gen RTS to the next console game... nobody seems to care for SKILL based games, like the Street Fighters or Chaos Legion... it is all about getting people in greater numbers to play...
I recall a few years back, I would research a console game carefully to choose one I wanted, then usually borrow it or even rent it to try it out... THEN buy it... and often would not see the end of it for several weeks... anyone else remember this? Anymore the console games are weekend affairs, grab it, play through it, dispose of it... and that mentality carries over into even MMOs these days... god knows I went through WoW in only a few months...
I do not know where this will end.
Even the established MMORPGs suffer fits of this... they are constantly changing the core rules of the games in an effort to make them more accessible to "the masses"... EverQuest went through a revamp a couple years back, changing terminology and gameplay elements the hardcore had been used to for nearly 6 years. Why alienate almost everyone they had playing? To dumb it down so more new players would be able to jump right in... and what happened? MANY of us left, eventually, and very few new players came to take our places.
This is not the end of MMOs...
But the future DOES look pretty yucky, unless the companies remember just exactly who bought the games for this long, to get them where they are now. It was not the Johnny Knoxville loving crowd... it was the hardcore gamers.
I think people misrepresent AoC because the original plan was to level 1-20 offline in single player, so your character would have his "own" story, and you'd learn the controls. However that plan was scrapped some time ago, and now 1-20 is online, and you most certainly CAN play it with other people.
Can you please show me where you heard that you can do 1-20 online as well as offline, because I thought that it was a single player game and thats what I think is being said in the dev videos on the website. I'm not flaming or anything I would just like to see your source because I'm very interested in this game.
As far as I'm concerned all The hardcore gamers can quit, vanish, begone. Who cares? You are a small part of the MMO community. Your precious pvp belongs in arenas, and battle grounds no place else. All of you can leave, and no MMO will know the difference, because it is the Majority ruling casual gamer that pays and really supports these games. Sure the smaller population of Hardcore contribute, but the casual gamers is where they make there money. That is why they cater to us. Games like Warhammer? will see that they aren't making the kind of money games like WoW do because the cater to the hardcore pvp sorts only, and they to will "Ruin the game as the hardcore player so gently puts it." Just to attract the casual carebear gamer. Mark my words.
As for it being the end of MMO's? Pfft...Only for the Hardcore gamer maybe.
As far as I'm concerned all The hardcore gamers can quit, vanish, begone. Who cares? You are a small part of the MMO community. Your precious pvp belongs in arenas, and battle grounds no place else. All of you can leave, and no MMO will know the difference, because it is the Majority ruling casual gamer that pays and really supports these games. Sure the smaller population of Hardcore contribute, but the casual gamers is where they make there money. That is why they cater to us. Games like Warhammer? will see that they aren't making the kind of money games like WoW do because the cater to the hardcore pvp sorts only, and they to will "Ruin the game as the hardcore player so gently puts it." Just to attract the casual carebear gamer. Mark my words.
As for it being the end of MMO's? Pfft...Only for the Hardcore gamer maybe.
Raven
Well, Mr Raven...
The biggest problem I have with that entire viewpoint...
We, the hardcore, that will game for 16 hours a day, nonstop, 6 days a week during vacation... WE are the ones that MADE MMOs popular.
Of course we have every bit as much right to a good game as anyone else. Including YOU... the "casual gamer" that loves WoW for taking 0 skill, less than 0 commitment, and nothing more to see the endgame required than a paid account and half-ass attempts at leveling, and a couple days to get a key here and there.
Why in the name of all things would YOU feel any contempt for us? Why would you feel like you should rub our noses in it? I never said you could not have your little tinkertoy games you love, I said I wanted something for me and mine too! You have your games, do not show contempt for us because we play at a different level! Do not deny US the same rights you are taking for granted and rubbing our faces in, you TWERP. You have good games, why should we not also have good games to enjoy? Seriously, what did we ever do to you?
Let there be games for both the Hardcore, and OTHER games for the Casual!!! What is wrong with that????
Fair is fair. I never said I did not want you to have your games. I am glad you DO. There be little enough happiness in the world as it is, and I would not deny you any of yours... I am however sick and friggin TIRED of the folks like YOU trying to say every single game must be made to comply with the "casual people"...
And remember... even if you DID have your way, and you could drive out the true hardcore...
4 years from now they would consider YOU the hardcore guy.... having been around a few years...
Like the idea of your own mentality running YOU out of your own game? No?
Then grow up.
On a side note... you seem very very angry at PvP players and seem to think that all Hardcore do naught but PvP. There are few alive that can honestly claim to be harder than me, and I do dabble at PvP for fun, but it is not my primary focus. I play for the challenge, to be truly immersed into a world, and make it my own. I love to be pushed, pulled, and shoved, to find my limits, and then learn better ways to play to pass those previous limits. I LOVE to find better group builds, make close trusted friends, and throw ourselves into things, only barely surviving moment by moment by the seat of our pants! THAT is excitement! It bonds you to your friends, adds to the game, and sates the need to grow and improve within me! I live for that! Never confuse PvP with the really Hardcore. Some people may be both, but they are not by nature the exact same thing!!!
Hardcore CAN do nothing but PvP for days... but Hardcore can also do nothing but grind for the same days... or nothing but plan and raid nonstop for days and days...
The defining line between a very advanced "casual" gamer, and a newly budding "Hardcore" gamer can often times be the difference between liking a game, and truly LOVING the game. One day, YOU, Mr Casual Gamer, could find yourself in LOVE with a game, and find yourself drawn to it, pushing yourself, and REALLY enjoying it! Then, without knowing you have BECOME the Hardcore you so despise... you might be... and some OTHER Casual Gamer will whine and cry until they wreck your newfound love, dumbing it down so much you no longer even like it...
I hope you remember your attitude today, and hate yourself as much as you want to hate me.
That would be FAIR.
*edit*
One last thing.
Don't get it twisted Raven. Money is a driving force, true enough. But the point to making a good game, like any other work of art, is often in making it what the creator envisioned to begin with. Every single time a company buys an indie game company and converts it "to appeal to the masses", that Art DIES.
May the blood of every destroyed work of art haunt you and your ilk.
Maybe I am crazy, but until a game comes out that lets me (through dynamic and challenging means) become a demi-lich that raises an undead army to slowly conquer every player/npc run kingdom in the world and challenge the gods themselves till I ascend, I will hold out on saying that mmorpg potential has run its course. Of course, the games on the horizon are still a little bleak
For a game that's more cooperative (giving) than competitive (taking), and that highlights crafting (construction) over combat (destruction), I was going to suggest Andrew Tepper's "A Tale In The Desert".
But there's no PvP in that game.
So what, I wonder, would a massively multiplayer online game based on "cooperative, constructive PvP" look like? Something like Dark Age of Camelot's "Realm vs. Realm" gameplay, except with really detailed crafting of castles and management of NPC serfs and diplomatic/political options?
Or are "taking" and "destroying" so integral to PvP play that a "cooperative, constructive PvP" game is a contradiction in terms?
As far as I'm concerned all The hardcore gamers can quit, vanish, begone. Who cares? You are a small part of the MMO community. Your precious pvp belongs in arenas, and battle grounds no place else. All of you can leave, and no MMO will know the difference, because it is the Majority ruling casual gamer that pays and really supports these games. Sure the smaller population of Hardcore contribute, but the casual gamers is where they make there money. That is why they cater to us. Games like Warhammer? will see that they aren't making the kind of money games like WoW do because the cater to the hardcore pvp sorts only, and they to will "Ruin the game as the hardcore player so gently puts it." Just to attract the casual carebear gamer. Mark my words.
As for it being the end of MMO's? Pfft...Only for the Hardcore gamer maybe.
Raven
What has playing a game all day got to do with pvp? please explain lol
Im sure mmos would notice a difference in the end its the "Hardcore" that stay and keep the game afloat. Do you think that a game like UO would still be around if it didn't have all these " hardcore" players as you put it playing.
A game that has pvp is a game that will last, a game that just has pve is a game that will die, you an only put so much pre scripted crap down someones throat before they get sick. PvP is always changing, its the most casual friendly game type, and its what makes games like wow do so well.
Because at the end of the day you won't keep playing a game for gear, in the end you want to smack someone "real" upside the head with said gear, at least i do, im sure alot of others do as well.
Lord of the rings hasn't done anywhere as near as well as it could, why? Because it has no pvp it has some crappy monster player thing, it lacks depth, nothing to side step to to escape the grind.
Do you think wow would be as successful if it didn't make all these promises of pvp content, before release? it sure as hell wouldn't.
For a game that's more cooperative (giving) than competitive (taking), and that highlights crafting (construction) over combat (destruction), I was going to suggest Andrew Tepper's "A Tale In The Desert". But there's no PvP in that game. So what, I wonder, would a massively multiplayer online game based on "cooperative, constructive PvP" look like? Something like Dark Age of Camelot's "Realm vs. Realm" gameplay, except with really detailed crafting of castles and management of NPC serfs and diplomatic/political options? Or are "taking" and "destroying" so integral to PvP play that a "cooperative, constructive PvP" game is a contradiction in terms? --Flatfingers
No contradiction at all. Look at Ultima Online.
And does some one want to explain Vanguard to me... like the gameplay. How do player towns work, factions, pvp, etc. Nothing too detailed just like the basics.
I think people misrepresent AoC because the original plan was to level 1-20 offline in single player, so your character would have his "own" story, and you'd learn the controls. However that plan was scrapped some time ago, and now 1-20 is online, and you most certainly CAN play it with other people.
Can you please show me where you heard that you can do 1-20 online as well as offline, because I thought that it was a single player game and thats what I think is being said in the dev videos on the website. I'm not flaming or anything I would just like to see your source because I'm very interested in this game.
Levels 1-20 can be done alone or you can also play with other people in the starting area as long as it is day-time. During the game days you'll see other online people, during the game-nights you are completely alone. During levels 1-20 you can sleep in the inn and make it go from day to night or night to do as you see fit, but once you hit 20 and leave this starting 'island' the day-night becomes steady and you will be playing with other people at ALL times.
It is in no way 100% single player unless you want it to be up til 20.
So can anyone suggest a game to me? It can be one of the ones I mentioned since many of them I have only "dabbled" in. I was thinking of buying ArchLord just cuz its free per month... is the PvP here as good as the game claims or is the game not even worth it...
Well THAT game is basically exactly what I want. What i've wanted... forever. Darkfall that is... does anyone have a projected release date for this? Or will I have to wait and wait and wait just like I've been doing for Spore...
ive been thinking about trying archlord lately too. i hear the grind its pretty brutal and im not sure if i can make it past a horrendous grind. i cant even stomach this grind in western MMO. Guild Wars was more of my pace lol
To be honest...there aren't that many MMOs with atleast a decent pvp system. GW is my favorite pvp system. I do like Silkroad, and wandering around, finding a noob who is training and just kill him for no reason, but that gets old after about 10 min. I like GW because there are different types of matches. I love GW pvp system, but pve gets old fast.
Don't buy ArchLord unless you like grindfest asian type mmorpgs with gank style pvp. Honestly, I am waiting right now, doing other things till a decent mmorpg comes out that I can put some "well spent" time into. I agree with a lot of what you have said.
My advice, step away from the pc for awhile, enjoy the summer, log back on late fall and !BAM! some new mmorgps to try.
I think people misrepresent AoC because the original plan was to level 1-20 offline in single player, so your character would have his "own" story, and you'd learn the controls. However that plan was scrapped some time ago, and now 1-20 is online, and you most certainly CAN play it with other people.
Can you please show me where you heard that you can do 1-20 online as well as offline, because I thought that it was a single player game and thats what I think is being said in the dev videos on the website. I'm not flaming or anything I would just like to see your source because I'm very interested in this game.
If you are really interested in the game, I'd suggest you take some time to browse thru it so you have a better idea about what they are trying to do. The other site that might be worth checking out is: http://bymitra.com/ It's probably the best community resouce and dev tracker for Age of Conan. Dont take that as flaming, just a suggestion, because there have been changes over time with AoC, and if you did not know this part, there might be some other things that you missed, since this has been in place for a bit.
Per your question, you just have to go look at the FAQ, and read the entire "chapter" titled Single Player for details.
"6.5 How long will the single-player experience last?
Only the first hour or so of the game is completely single-player. Once you reach the village of Tortage, you will start meeting other players. You can switch between day and night by sleeping at the inn, and during day you will always be with other players, while during the night you will be all alone. At level twenty you leave Tortage island and head for the mainland, and from there on you will always be in a massively multiplayer environment."
and
"6.10 Will I have to be online to play the single-player portion of the
Yes, you will still be playing towards our servers, in a personalized instance of the gameworld. So you must log on to the internet in order to play."
My suggestion is save up for a console if you like to play online 360 isnt bad but you will be purchasing for more games, or you can play pc games and maybe play cox on the side or something like that considering cox does get boring if you play it to much at one time. I am playing console and pc games at the moment I even have gametap considering I like alot of games from there, im not holding my breath I was dissapointed this year and im fed up as well so instead im doing something about it instead of waiting.
Yes it is a pain to not be able to play a good online game anymore but anyone can switch back for a while it just takes a little time and you will have fun with single player games again, you could even try battlefield2 and etc for online stuff.
You waste to much energy and effort on people devil, but you have to admit there is hardly anything to play online that is actual casual, im actually getting tired of the hardcore pvpers complaining about the pvers and calling us carebears its just dumb.
And honestly if you have enough time to be a hardcore player your either very rich and dont need to work or your out of school for the summer, us people who work hard do deserve more casual games even in end game. And anyone who plays that much needs excercise to see the sun now there isnt a problem with light and moderate playing but putting 6 to 8 hours a day is a bit much and I think thats a problem.
I do agree that MMOG's are some kind of crisis. It seems to me that MMOG developers are designing OLD level based PvE/PvP gridding MMOG's. The veteran MMOG player base is so full of them allready and they want something better and different.
If I would have to ques what veteran MMOG players want, I would say this: Skill based complex virtual world where player can affect many things. Game where PvP and PvE are totally seperated so that game it self is designed from start to be PvP or PvE game.
It's really sad that after allmost 10 year of playing multible MMOG's, I still think that best designed MMOG game system is in Ultima Online. Sure many of the current MMOG are visual ways a lot better, but the game system isn't. I ques we MMOG players just have to wait untill the MMOG developers will wake up and see this too, so we would get the next generation MMOG's. What is't just marketing BS, but actually done it.
The problem is the fall into the lvl/gear based system which we have now, where each and everyone one of us is defined by a number (our level). It dictates where you go, what you do, what you kill, who you can group with, who you can beat in PvP.
All of it makes it really restricive, get a level so we can go to that place, do that thing. We're put on rails so much in nearly every game, which makes most games feel really similar.
I'm not saying that a skill based or a twich based system is the way to go, but the idea of lvls etc is beginning to wear thin.
There is a viable chance that AoC and War can be busts.They both got the smell of a dumbed down DAoC with modern graphics.If these 2 go to the crapper whats left.
Comments
http://www.speedtest.net/result/7300033012
I'll try a few of the things I saw.
Regarding Vanguard:
Some people claim that they never suffered a CTD, but in my guild, which was 60ish people, we ALL suffered thru them, with varying degrees of severity. It was odd, during beta I rarely suffered from them, but with each patch, I seemed to suffer more and more from them. I dont think that we can really judge if they are fixed though, because it seems that the people who dont suffer from them are all that's left. Make that 40ish k people in game, and 160k who left the game because of numerous issues with it. Personally, I wanted to like it, I thought that it would have a lot going for it, and I was excited about it's housing and boats. HOWEVER, the developers went with a plan to make a game that would in a way appeal to the original EQ style player. By this I mean no instances, so when people actually played, dungeons were quite often camping contests. A massive world? I thought it sounded like a good thing too, but try spending 30-45 minutes just in transit to get to a group. (this has changed recently with riftways however, and travel can be much reduced) My point however, is that the game was trotted out to appeal to this large group of people that played EQ, and the team thought would come back. However they seriously misread the market, and did not realize the impact of post EQ style games, instances, and so on, and how while it could be a good game, it's more a niche game. Being honest about it, I would not recommend VG for anyone, unless they were looking for frustration. If you really want to try it, check out some of the assorted forums, and ask around for a buddy key. Drawing your own conclusion is really what you should do, because most of these debates are simply preference, and not fact.
Age of Conan like Guild Wars? How exactly is it like Guild Wars? I think people misrepresent AoC because the original plan was to level 1-20 offline in single player, so your character would have his "own" story, and you'd learn the controls. However that plan was scrapped some time ago, and now 1-20 is online, and you most certainly CAN play it with other people. Essentially they give you an option of doing it solo, or group with the day/night cycle. From that point on the game is typical MMO fare. You'll see instances used much like any other MMO, the exception being in the Guild City area, and that is done simply so that every guild can have a city, and participate in the siege style warfare that AoC offers.
Other highpoint, and this is based on personal preference. It's guild verus guild PvP, with siege combat, as opposed to Realm versus Realm, or faction verus faction. This style, guilds take battlekeeps and towers, and reap the benefits that come with controlling those coveted places. Other guilds then try to take them away, and reap the benefits, to me, that's meaningful, shaping the world, and enjoyable. THIS IS STRICTLY PREFERENCE, but I dont care for the RvR style PvP, because after capturing a Captial City, the server essentially resets, and you start all over again, you dont really shape anything, to me, that's meaningless. However like I said, that's preference, I know many people find meaning in it, and enjoy it. So it's really about what you like.
Either or, plenty of games coming out, and it seems that more and more of them are starting to aim at different niches, as opposed to seeking out mass popularity. To me, that's a good thing, because there is a better chance of finding a game that fits a particular taste.
The biggest issue we, as gamers, will face is the same no matter the type of gamer you are.... be it FPS, MMO, MMOPRG, Offline RPG, RTS, or anything else... The companies see their games almost entirely as a profit margin. So, lets look at how this will effect games in general...
1) More players = more profit.
2) More user friendly = more players will be able to play.
3) More user friendly often times means easier. More handholding. Less thought required.
4) Even SPORTS GAMES now have strategy guides. And people BUY them.
Combine all these aspects and what you get is an image of the companies' ultimate creation...
Games so simple in design and interface even inbred chimps could play it...
And any twists they choose to add into the game need no in game explanation, no lore, no tie-ins, because the gamers are all going to buy the strat guide or find the solution online anyway.
So... according the above model, we (thinking like game companies now) need a game that we can make appeal to the most people possible... we need to mass market it and make it "cool"... but keep it simple enough even idiots can play it and not feel inferior... and in doing so increase the user base until we are pulling the cash in like maniacs! After the user base gets that size, we can alienate the hardcore all we like... as long as the masses pay and play who cares about the actual MMORPG players, all we need is the numbers! Work on simple interface, easy operation, and flashy graphics... and market the HELL out of it!
Does anyone else think this sounds an awful lot like WoW?
This applies to every kind of game from the next gen RTS to the next console game... nobody seems to care for SKILL based games, like the Street Fighters or Chaos Legion... it is all about getting people in greater numbers to play...
I recall a few years back, I would research a console game carefully to choose one I wanted, then usually borrow it or even rent it to try it out... THEN buy it... and often would not see the end of it for several weeks... anyone else remember this? Anymore the console games are weekend affairs, grab it, play through it, dispose of it... and that mentality carries over into even MMOs these days... god knows I went through WoW in only a few months...
I do not know where this will end.
Even the established MMORPGs suffer fits of this... they are constantly changing the core rules of the games in an effort to make them more accessible to "the masses"... EverQuest went through a revamp a couple years back, changing terminology and gameplay elements the hardcore had been used to for nearly 6 years. Why alienate almost everyone they had playing? To dumb it down so more new players would be able to jump right in... and what happened? MANY of us left, eventually, and very few new players came to take our places.
This is not the end of MMOs...
But the future DOES look pretty yucky, unless the companies remember just exactly who bought the games for this long, to get them where they are now. It was not the Johnny Knoxville loving crowd... it was the hardcore gamers.
Can you please show me where you heard that you can do 1-20 online as well as offline, because I thought that it was a single player game and thats what I think is being said in the dev videos on the website. I'm not flaming or anything I would just like to see your source because I'm very interested in this game.
As for it being the end of MMO's?
Raven
The biggest problem I have with that entire viewpoint...
We, the hardcore, that will game for 16 hours a day, nonstop, 6 days a week during vacation... WE are the ones that MADE MMOs popular.
Of course we have every bit as much right to a good game as anyone else. Including YOU... the "casual gamer" that loves WoW for taking 0 skill, less than 0 commitment, and nothing more to see the endgame required than a paid account and half-ass attempts at leveling, and a couple days to get a key here and there.
Why in the name of all things would YOU feel any contempt for us? Why would you feel like you should rub our noses in it? I never said you could not have your little tinkertoy games you love, I said I wanted something for me and mine too! You have your games, do not show contempt for us because we play at a different level! Do not deny US the same rights you are taking for granted and rubbing our faces in, you TWERP. You have good games, why should we not also have good games to enjoy? Seriously, what did we ever do to you?
Let there be games for both the Hardcore, and OTHER games for the Casual!!! What is wrong with that????
Fair is fair. I never said I did not want you to have your games. I am glad you DO. There be little enough happiness in the world as it is, and I would not deny you any of yours... I am however sick and friggin TIRED of the folks like YOU trying to say every single game must be made to comply with the "casual people"...
And remember... even if you DID have your way, and you could drive out the true hardcore...
4 years from now they would consider YOU the hardcore guy.... having been around a few years...
Like the idea of your own mentality running YOU out of your own game? No?
Then grow up.
On a side note... you seem very very angry at PvP players and seem to think that all Hardcore do naught but PvP. There are few alive that can honestly claim to be harder than me, and I do dabble at PvP for fun, but it is not my primary focus. I play for the challenge, to be truly immersed into a world, and make it my own. I love to be pushed, pulled, and shoved, to find my limits, and then learn better ways to play to pass those previous limits. I LOVE to find better group builds, make close trusted friends, and throw ourselves into things, only barely surviving moment by moment by the seat of our pants! THAT is excitement! It bonds you to your friends, adds to the game, and sates the need to grow and improve within me! I live for that! Never confuse PvP with the really Hardcore. Some people may be both, but they are not by nature the exact same thing!!!
Hardcore CAN do nothing but PvP for days... but Hardcore can also do nothing but grind for the same days... or nothing but plan and raid nonstop for days and days...
The defining line between a very advanced "casual" gamer, and a newly budding "Hardcore" gamer can often times be the difference between liking a game, and truly LOVING the game. One day, YOU, Mr Casual Gamer, could find yourself in LOVE with a game, and find yourself drawn to it, pushing yourself, and REALLY enjoying it! Then, without knowing you have BECOME the Hardcore you so despise... you might be... and some OTHER Casual Gamer will whine and cry until they wreck your newfound love, dumbing it down so much you no longer even like it...
I hope you remember your attitude today, and hate yourself as much as you want to hate me.
That would be FAIR.
*edit*
One last thing.
Don't get it twisted Raven. Money is a driving force, true enough. But the point to making a good game, like any other work of art, is often in making it what the creator envisioned to begin with. Every single time a company buys an indie game company and converts it "to appeal to the masses", that Art DIES.
May the blood of every destroyed work of art haunt you and your ilk.
For a game that's more cooperative (giving) than competitive (taking), and that highlights crafting (construction) over combat (destruction), I was going to suggest Andrew Tepper's "A Tale In The Desert".
But there's no PvP in that game.
So what, I wonder, would a massively multiplayer online game based on "cooperative, constructive PvP" look like? Something like Dark Age of Camelot's "Realm vs. Realm" gameplay, except with really detailed crafting of castles and management of NPC serfs and diplomatic/political options?
Or are "taking" and "destroying" so integral to PvP play that a "cooperative, constructive PvP" game is a contradiction in terms?
--Flatfingers
Im sure mmos would notice a difference in the end its the "Hardcore" that stay and keep the game afloat. Do you think that a game like UO would still be around if it didn't have all these " hardcore" players as you put it playing.
A game that has pvp is a game that will last, a game that just has pve is a game that will die, you an only put so much pre scripted crap down someones throat before they get sick. PvP is always changing, its the most casual friendly game type, and its what makes games like wow do so well.
Because at the end of the day you won't keep playing a game for gear, in the end you want to smack someone "real" upside the head with said gear, at least i do, im sure alot of others do as well.
Lord of the rings hasn't done anywhere as near as well as it could, why? Because it has no pvp it has some crappy monster player thing, it lacks depth, nothing to side step to to escape the grind.
Do you think wow would be as successful if it didn't make all these promises of pvp content, before release? it sure as hell wouldn't.
And does some one want to explain Vanguard to me... like the gameplay. How do player towns work, factions, pvp, etc. Nothing too detailed just like the basics.
Can you please show me where you heard that you can do 1-20 online as well as offline, because I thought that it was a single player game and thats what I think is being said in the dev videos on the website. I'm not flaming or anything I would just like to see your source because I'm very interested in this game.
Levels 1-20 can be done alone or you can also play with other people in the starting area as long as it is day-time. During the game days you'll see other online people, during the game-nights you are completely alone. During levels 1-20 you can sleep in the inn and make it go from day to night or night to do as you see fit, but once you hit 20 and leave this starting 'island' the day-night becomes steady and you will be playing with other people at ALL times.
It is in no way 100% single player unless you want it to be up til 20.
EDIT: see fer yerself
Check out the MUD I'm making!
Well THAT game is basically exactly what I want. What i've wanted... forever. Darkfall that is... does anyone have a projected release date for this? Or will I have to wait and wait and wait just like I've been doing for Spore...
Don't buy ArchLord unless you like grindfest asian type mmorpgs with gank style pvp. Honestly, I am waiting right now, doing other things till a decent mmorpg comes out that I can put some "well spent" time into. I agree with a lot of what you have said.
My advice, step away from the pc for awhile, enjoy the summer, log back on late fall and !BAM! some new mmorgps to try.
Can you please show me where you heard that you can do 1-20 online as well as offline, because I thought that it was a single player game and thats what I think is being said in the dev videos on the website. I'm not flaming or anything I would just like to see your source because I'm very interested in this game.
If you are really interested in the game, I'd suggest you take some time to browse thru it so you have a better idea about what they are trying to do. The other site that might be worth checking out is: http://bymitra.com/ It's probably the best community resouce and dev tracker for Age of Conan. Dont take that as flaming, just a suggestion, because there have been changes over time with AoC, and if you did not know this part, there might be some other things that you missed, since this has been in place for a bit.
Per your question, you just have to go look at the FAQ, and read the entire "chapter" titled Single Player for details.
"6.5 How long will the single-player experience last?
Only the first hour or so of the game is completely single-player. Once you reach the village of Tortage, you will start meeting other players. You can switch between day and night by sleeping at the inn, and during day you will always be with other players, while during the night you will be all alone. At level twenty you leave Tortage island and head for the mainland, and from there on you will always be in a massively multiplayer environment."
and
"6.10 Will I have to be online to play the single-player portion of the
Yes, you will still be playing towards our servers, in a personalized instance of the gameworld. So you must log on to the internet in order to play."
http://community.ageofconan.com/wsp/conan/frontend.cgi?session=4rolywt3dliu3s0sz8dqwk6dow5x2j&func=publish.show&template=content&func_id=1334&sort=PRIORITY&table=CONTENT
My suggestion is save up for a console if you like to play online 360 isnt bad but you will be purchasing for more games, or you can play pc games and maybe play cox on the side or something like that considering cox does get boring if you play it to much at one time. I am playing console and pc games at the moment I even have gametap considering I like alot of games from there, im not holding my breath I was dissapointed this year and im fed up as well so instead im doing something about it instead of waiting.
Yes it is a pain to not be able to play a good online game anymore but anyone can switch back for a while it just takes a little time and you will have fun with single player games again, you could even try battlefield2 and etc for online stuff.
You waste to much energy and effort on people devil, but you have to admit there is hardly anything to play online that is actual casual, im actually getting tired of the hardcore pvpers complaining about the pvers and calling us carebears its just dumb.
And honestly if you have enough time to be a hardcore player your either very rich and dont need to work or your out of school for the summer, us people who work hard do deserve more casual games even in end game. And anyone who plays that much needs excercise to see the sun now there isnt a problem with light and moderate playing but putting 6 to 8 hours a day is a bit much and I think thats a problem.
If I would have to ques what veteran MMOG players want, I would say this: Skill based complex virtual world where player can affect many things. Game where PvP and PvE are totally seperated so that game it self is designed from start to be PvP or PvE game.
It's really sad that after allmost 10 year of playing multible MMOG's, I still think that best designed MMOG game system is in Ultima Online. Sure many of the current MMOG are visual ways a lot better, but the game system isn't. I ques we MMOG players just have to wait untill the MMOG developers will wake up and see this too, so we would get the next generation MMOG's. What is't just marketing BS, but actually done it.
MMORPG.COM has worst forum editor ever exists
The problem is the fall into the lvl/gear based system which we have now, where each and everyone one of us is defined by a number (our level). It dictates where you go, what you do, what you kill, who you can group with, who you can beat in PvP.
All of it makes it really restricive, get a level so we can go to that place, do that thing. We're put on rails so much in nearly every game, which makes most games feel really similar.
I'm not saying that a skill based or a twich based system is the way to go, but the idea of lvls etc is beginning to wear thin.