Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Stargate Worlds: Combat Hands On Preview
Stradden
Managing EditorMember CommonPosts: 6,696
The folks at Firesky have been pretty quiet up until now about their upcoming MMORPG Stargate Worlds. At Comic Con San Diego though, MMORPG.com Managing Editor Jon Wood had the opportunity to try the combat system out for himself and he files this report.
At this year's Comic Con San Diego, no MMORPG had more exposure to the convention center-filling crowd than the upcoming MMORPG from Firesky, Stargate Worlds.
Whether it was the well-situated and busy booth, the water bottles or the sides of busses, it was difficult to come away from the convention without knowing that the first video game based in the Stargate universe (and an MMO no less) would launch in 2009.
Advertising aside, Firesky still had quite an impact at the show, demoing gameplay for the first time to members of the press in a hotel conference room near the convention center. MMORPG.com was there and along with some great video interviews that you will be able to see here at the site over the next week, we also got some hands-on time with the pre-alpha game to get a feel for the game's combat.
Read the whole thing here.
Cheers,
Jon Wood
Managing Editor
MMORPG.com
Comments
Sounds a bit like Tabula Rasa with the shield in TR being replaced by focus, cover affects damage and mobs circle you.
The combat is very fun in TR though and most MMOs borrow from each other.
Blatant robbery of Tabula rasa combat
Which is good
I liked TR's combat. The only thing that bothered me about it, is the same thing that bothers me about DDO. I absolutely can't stand switching back and forth between different weapons in the middle of a fight just because some developers thought it would be a good way to add strategy to combat.
It doesn't add strategy, it just adds tedium. DDO is horrible about this. I always hated the fact that you had to switch weapons to fight slimes, then switch weapons to fight rust monsters or whatever they're called. I hate that type of combat. It does nothing but promote inventory clutter and takes up spaces on the hotkey bars.
I hope the next generation of MMOs gets away from having 10-20% of the screen cluttered with hotkey bars and various other clutter.
As far as SGW is concerned I hope that it's not like TR. You can say, "TR's combat is strategic because you can use cover", but cover never seemed to make that much of a difference in that game.
I could be wrong, but I just don't see any MMORPG combat system being as fun and engaging as a strategic FPS with a good cover system, i.e. Gears of War or Rainbow Six Vegas.
Stargate is a popular IP and I would hate to see it flop around like a fish out of water because the developers decided to go with a MMORPG/FPS hybrid combat system. It hasn't worked for any other MMORPGs.
To the previous poster, read what your sig says. My note on the matter is. With shared xp in an area whats going to keep leechers from just following you around stealing xp while you do the work?
This video explains a little better of the combat system and the UI, hope this helps.
http://www.tentonhammer.com/node/39080
TR is weak in comparison based on this description. TR's combat and cover system was mediocre at best, hopefully SGW takes the combat from TR and makes it fantastic. Considering this was pre-alpha he was playing, I still have my hopes up for SGW.
That video not only cleared up a few of my concerns with the game, but it actually got me pretty hyped up to play the game.
The mini-games look awesome, the UI is fully customizable. The game looks great.
The only downside to me is that the combat seemed slow, but that was also alpha footage of the tutorial combat. Are there any vids out that showcase melee combat?
If they include a halfway decent way to interact socially in the game I'll be totally sold.
Will there be player housing, cities, or anything like that?
"I think playing video games is work. Some one might steal from me... I'm going home".
This game looks pretty interesting. When I heard about StarGate being made as MMO about 1 year ago or something my expectations were very low tbh.
That video not only cleared up a few of my concerns with the game, but it actually got me pretty hyped up to play the game.
The mini-games look awesome, the UI is fully customizable. The game looks great.
The only downside to me is that the combat seemed slow, but that was also alpha footage of the tutorial combat. Are there any vids out that showcase melee combat?
If they include a halfway decent way to interact socially in the game I'll be totally sold.
Will there be player housing, cities, or anything like that?
I agree, this game does look promising. The one thing I didn't like about the combat was that it still seems to use the older MMO style of combat...instead of say the AoC type of combat where you have more control over the combat itself, its still like Lineage, WoW and such. I'd like to see a combat system that doesn't have to be full FPS if they don't want it to be (and I can see why they wouldn't want it to be) but they can have a locking system like on some games, where your gun will lock on the closest mob in your site but you have the control to just fire or to take better aim and say take a head shot or leg shot. I know they don't want to make it full FPS because with online FPS games the good players level while the bad ones don't, its to twitch for an MMO. My way would level the field a bit, making the combat easier for people who haven't played or are bad at FPS games but at the same time would give the FPS person the chanse to do the head shot or what not. Also this way every team would have someone who was good at FPS while having people who were good at other thing.
I'm not sure if I explained my combat idea well enough, it sounded good in my head. I see the combat being more like the games Rogue Trooper or Second Sight (if anyone played these). I'm still looking forward to the game and hope it lives up to everything Stargate.
There is very little melee combat at all..it is mostly one big firefight. (Thou there are lots of little mini-games for various classes)
There will be no player cities or houses , specially at the beginning....watch the TV show to understand why.
About all i can say at this time.
You can always download the official comic con vids here:
http://torrents.sgwirc.com:8000/
Some of them are really good, got me pretty hyped
They've said in a few interviews that there won’t be player housing but you will have a bank like storage mechanic. As for as the combat they said that they where using traditional MMO mechanics but utilizing cover as an active environment aspect of the combat. There is a lot of the game that is not finished and needing to be tweaked so I'm sure the pace will pick up on combat some time in the future of course that is merely speculative at best at these time, only beta testers know and the dev's.
Bah, just watched the video on Ten Ton Hammer and that made clear to me, that SGW will be the next MMO that fails to deliver. Well, if they are lucky enough it fails only for me and most of the players that play MMOs since Ultima Online day one. If the rest buys it, they might not get bankrupt.
Why do i think so? Cause i havnt seen a single thing in that presentation that shows a big scale, a motivation, or anything that i wanna achieve/do/or fight for. I want to colonize a planet with my gilde and ... insert a myriad of playerinteractions Ultima Online already had that makes MMOs worthwhile playing... SGW will be just another overinstanced grindingmachine with minigames...wohooo.
By the way the same mistake AoC just did. Its nothing in the game the players can do or live for. And for the casual "I wanna advance in lvl and get more purple gear" guys there are already enough games like WOW or LotR out there. Well, as i already said, there might be enough of those to make the devs and publisher a living and with the big liscense maybe even some good money...but for me it doenst sound like a really promising MMO to be honest. More like another one for the Gallery of bad Gamedesign, side by side with City of Heroes, Tabula Rasa, Age of Conan, Vanguard.. you name it.
Sounds more like mmorpgs are not for you anymore. Maybe you should return to UO. Oh, that's right, compared to the list of mmos in your post, it sucks now. You will never get that "first mmo" feeling again. Maybe you should remember that this is pre-alpha, doesn't have any "real" testers in it yet, and wait another 8+ months when it is in pre-release to offer your doom prophecy.
Frickin game nay-sayers....
"Sounds more like mmorpgs are not for you anymore."
Yes, all those THEMEPARK MMORPGs that are out there and that are incoming are not for me, that is absolutely correct. But that doesnt count for me and MMORPGs in general. I am just so damn tired of the same handfull of features that are in those games nowadays. If u just use your imagination a bit, there could be so many nice things to be tried in an mmo that the list quickly can grow endless.
All that is done at the moment is to milk licenses. But none of the games that have been released really drove the genre forward. And sorry to throw in Ultima Online again; Compare the featurelist of what u can do in UO and what u can do in any game that came afterwards (exclude AC, Neocron and EVE maybe from that list, and some lowbudget projects), than you must see that all of them were a big step backwards. I am just asking for a step forward, nothing more nothing less. And this process of milking the same concept over and over again will go on till even the most stupid financial guy found out that its now time to try something new. So you may call me impatient but not a nay-sayer.
Well we will discuss SGW a few months after launch anyways. I will even press my thumbs for the game, but i doubt that it will be a step forward...
i'm not seeing anything new here. but then again i'm not into sci-fi mmos, so wouldn't matter anyway.
I've been reading comments like this - the whole "nothing new! same old same old! when will we get (insert laundry list of dream features)" - rant, since literally the dawn of MMOs back in the Meridian 59 era.
Yes, for some people, nothing short of a Star Trek holodeck or the Matrix (not the game, but the actual Matrix) will satisfy them. Until they can literally remove themselves from their actual life and lead a fully realized virtual one, they will say "not enough"
Still others seem to really just not like the genre. Whats "new" in FPS games or fighting games or strategy games? A genre is a genre. What COULD be "new" really? Criticism is easy, but I never see anyone articulate what their grand vision of "new" would be in a way that is remotely realistic in terms of implementation. Yes, human level intelligence on NPCs and completely dynamic living worlds would be nice, but its 2008, not 2080.
The other thing is, what some people mean by "new" is most likely just a totally different genre. Countless times when I have pushed people to articulate WHAT they want to see, they essentially end up describing an RTS, or an FPS, or what have you, but with some level of persistance. Thing is, the persistance isnt really adding value to those genres and there are already FINE examples of online multi-player flavors of FPS and RTS that one can play.
I actually work for a developer (not of MMOs, but the comparison applies). This may be a news flash, but we're not idiots. We can dream up the same deep future sci-fi scenarios as anyone. The catch is, we have to actually IMPLEMENT it. What the web community fails to realize is that 98% of the world population can dream things up. I know many think thats a skill and makes you a "designer", but it isnt and it doesnt.
You need to "dream up" something that has SOME chance of realistic implementation and then can be backed by a viable business plan. So yeah, dream away, but reality is reality and to post the same type of comments EVERY release is really the equivalent of yelling "WHY DONT WE HAVE HOVERCRAFTS THAT RUN ON VACUUM ENERGY!!!" on car forums every time a new model is announced.
Combat exactly like TR.....yah that's a recipe for longevity . What I see in that vid is utter boredom. The most exciting part was when the guy decided to run away, that tells you alot.
I've been reading comments like this - the whole "nothing new! same old same old! when will we get (insert laundry list of dream features)" - rant, since literally the dawn of MMOs back in the Meridian 59 era.
Yes, for some people, nothing short of a Star Trek holodeck or the Matrix (not the game, but the actual Matrix) will satisfy them. Until they can literally remove themselves from their actual life and lead a fully realized virtual one, they will say "not enough"
Still others seem to really just not like the genre. Whats "new" in FPS games or fighting games or strategy games? A genre is a genre. What COULD be "new" really? Criticism is easy, but I never see anyone articulate what their grand vision of "new" would be in a way that is remotely realistic in terms of implementation. Yes, human level intelligence on NPCs and completely dynamic living worlds would be nice, but its 2008, not 2080.
The other thing is, what some people mean by "new" is most likely just a totally different genre. Countless times when I have pushed people to articulate WHAT they want to see, they essentially end up describing an RTS, or an FPS, or what have you, but with some level of persistance. Thing is, the persistance isnt really adding value to those genres and there are already FINE examples of online multi-player flavors of FPS and RTS that one can play.
I actually work for a developer (not of MMOs, but the comparison applies). This may be a news flash, but we're not idiots. We can dream up the same deep future sci-fi scenarios as anyone. The catch is, we have to actually IMPLEMENT it. What the web community fails to realize is that 98% of the world population can dream things up. I know many think thats a skill and makes you a "designer", but it isnt and it doesnt.
You need to "dream up" something that has SOME chance of realistic implementation and then can be backed by a viable business plan. So yeah, dream away, but reality is reality and to post the same type of comments EVERY release is really the equivalent of yelling "WHY DONT WE HAVE HOVERCRAFTS THAT RUN ON VACUUM ENERGY!!!" on car forums every time a new model is announced.
I worked for a Publisher myself as Leadtester, QA-Manager, and even as a Producer. I know how difficult the tasks are. But I know too, how many decissions are steered by the financial guys that just want to get money out of it and dont give a shit about the gameplay... so yes i know definitly boths aspects of the industry. For the fact that I even now work as an editor for a gaming magizine I now have more understanding for the media perspective. So, I managed the production of computer games, i did the quality assurance for them, I designed gamefeatures and I even write and wrote previews, reviews, analyzies, walkthroughs and what not for computer games... just to give you a quick overview on my experience.
Non the less the video of Stargate Worlds did not impress ME at all, which isnt easy thats right. And i still hope it will deliver the fun for all the real fans but I dont have high expectations for myself.
And to give you an answer about your: come up with features and stop just critizising. First of all i doubt that anyone in here will bring the patience to read a 200 site thick Detailed Design Document if I would post it in here. And secondly I would be rather stupid if I would do so :-)
But to try to satisfy you: Look at the guild cities in AoC. They are in an seperated instance, where only those people can enter that have a city in that instances. And that are afaik three guilds. So all this city is really good for is to solve the prerequisites for certain crafting tiers and to get the ability for the battlekeep raiding. For the rest of the day its just a dead instance where not much happens and noone visits. The PvP is pointless at the moment anyways so I dont count the few fights you ll have there about ressource nodes and such. A Guild City should be a remarkable spot in the landscape that is recognizable by all other players. It should be able to build a reputation as maybe a good trading hub, a better to be avoided PK-Nest or what ever.
To make it short it should have a certain visibility in the world and for sure proper functions like housing vendors, hosting tourneys or protecting the civilians supporting it, and so on - reasons why people should found such a city. Depends for sure on what gameplay functionalities the game itself offers, which is not much in terms of AoC to be honest. If you look at the much older Star Wars Galaxies you had many of those features already. So I think its pretty legal to critizise those things especially if better gameplay has already been there. You can replace that example from any other given game, I just picked AoC because my experience with it is quite fresh. The point I am trying to make with this example is: Funcome designed some great playercities, but locked them away in an instance in which noone really cares for it. And they took away the natural function of a playercity which could be a saveheaven from monsters due to guards or what ever. This could have been forseeable and with a few changes they could have gotten so much more out of those cities.
They dont!
Look at Tabula Rasa as another example. NOW they found out that people absolutely want to fight about Outpost against each other and the whole team is working like mad to get that implemented. I guess at least half of us could have told them that upfront. So much for the comment that Developers and Publishers know in 98% what they do
"The other thing is, what some people mean by "new" is most likely just a totally different genre."
If you integrate FPS, RTS, or whatever features into it is just a matter of gamedesign.
I have to answer to that sentence. In my opinion that is not really accurate what you say. Especially an MMO offers the possibility to merge as many genres as you can think of and foremost it doesnt have a very typical featureset that defines it as an MMO or MMORPG. Only the fact that it hosts a massive amount of players on one server
The only point I go hand in hand with you is the businessplan. And that is the biggest problem I have seen during my days as a pro. Especially in the german speaking area Developers and Publishers have had a lot of problems determining a good timeframe and budget for a game. The publishers made the misstep and wanted too much for not enough money and the Developers often tend trying to deliver too much without enough man power and experience. And that goes for many projects in the past that had no big online functionality. With an MMO you have to think three times as much as what can be done and what cant. How much money do we need, how big has the team to be, the timeframe...what about QA which is pure hell with an online-game and so on... . And to get back on topic and look at Stargate Worlds I would think that this game needs an overall development cycle of almost 5 years to then run about ten years. That are compareable numbers as WOW had. And with Metro Goldwyn Mayer as the financial backup and license giver i would expect more than this core feature list: http://www.stargateworlds.com/about.html
I am sorry if i sounded too negative but so far my experience tells me that this project is on a too short timeframe to deliver what many people will expect from it and that there are not enough creative people on board that understand what an MMO can offer or have the experience with that genre. So i stick to my earlier message that I fear another Themepark-MMO with not many features and boring gameplay/worlds. Which might be the concequence coming form the duty to deliver to the market and earn money. But I still think that there could be more than just fighting, leveling and a few Minigames. Let the people chose which race to play..give them powers/positions to influecne the diplomatic connections between the races, mix that with Realm vs Realm PvP (DaoC has shown a way to make this work) and therefor give the players worlds to play with. And not just instances to grind in. ... Ok i better stop here because that post reaches a length no one usually reads anyways hehe.
Ah and the rest of your post is just a mix of overstatements. i know that a proper Holodeck is not coming bevor next year xmas!
I am sorry but i totally disagree with you.It adds a lot of strategy and is only tedius if you can't handle it.I play a lot of unreal tournament and although that game is sort of broken by cable internet the weapon balance is still amazing.Just weapon knowledge alone can separate good players from weak players.As is the case all too often on the internet you get players hanging out on servers where they outping the majority of players.These players use any weapon they want most anytime because they have a huge advantage,but when comes time to weapon swap and they are facing a superior player in that department,they are dead easily.I can often kill many players giving away 70-120 ping just because i use very good judgment on weapons and when to swap.
I am not surprised the OP found the combat decent and strategic,i have quite a bit of confidence in this developer.
My only problem is that i am not a SGW fanatic and never really watched the TV show.I am not even sure i could get into that type of game,but i have always had a fair bit of confidence in this developer and there professionalism.Best case scenario would be the game wins me over and i can have something new to enjoy for some time.I will most likely be trying out this game.I mean i was never into a FPS type game,but UT99 won me over with great weapon balance and a great game design.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
That shouldn't be a problem, as long as Stargate Worlds can get by on 1% of the playerbase Star Wars Galaxies has.
When I heard the original claims for SGW, I was interested. They described mission-based scenarios where science, diplomacy, archeology and - as a last resort - combat were all going to work together, just like in the TV show.
And what do we see now? Just another run-and-gun first-person-shooter. Oh, but this one has a new kind of hit-point bar! Whoop-freakin'-eee.
Seriously though; that's perfectly fine, but the game will be judged on those merits, in a very competitive field. I doubt that having theStargate brand and visuals will make people less likely to play this game than to play any game not based on a license from a medium outside of computer gaming, but I don't see why it would make anyone except the extreme fans of the series any more likely to play this game. Will this turn out to be better than Tabula Rasa? Maybe. But better than Halo, Gears of War or Army of Two? Seems unlikely.
And all this talk about an "unfinished" game doesn't mean squat. Graphics, level content, bug fixes, optimizations, etc., etc., call all be added as you go along. But core gameplay is something that should have been mocked up and fully playtested during pre-alpha; a very long time before the artists designed ten different kinds of body armor. The basic FUN of a game isn't something you can tack on later. If you don't have that at the beginning, all the rest of your work is wasted. If we can't look at the gameplay and see why it's supposed to be special now; there's no reason to think we ever will.