Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
I bought the game and played...
geetornsage
Member Posts: 40
when it first came out.
I was disappointed because I could not stand on my ship during battle and walk around.
Logged in temp and checked out the changes and well...no change same boring 3rd person view.
Wouldn't it be nice to have this camera feature? Why is this so hard to achieve?
The movies on rel game play out for Rome Total War's next release allow for it. The ship graphics look beautiful also compared to POBS.
Disapointed again.
Comments
Total Wars Empire graphics look great for 2009, in the meantime you might wanna sign up for next months beta of another PvP game, it has been in development longer than Potbs, it will be a full featured skill based game with player driven economy from the start. Society or clan based areas/housing that take a month to build.
1) No instances - 10 hours to cross the huge map!
2) Free for all with full loot.
3) Player skill based pvp (no exp)
4) No auto target. Collision detection with friendly fire.
5) 500+ spells, 500+ skills, thousands of different equipment, all is player made. No one looks alike, and noone has the same template.
6) Low poly / low textures, optimized for large battles, they have tested several hundreds players fighting with 50fps+. Not like AoC or wow, where server freezes up, and your fps drops below 5, as soon as 50 people get together in the same spot.
7) No stupid pets.
8) No stealth - people cant just go invisible. You can hide in the shadows from a distance wearing dark clothing though.
9) NPC AI & PVE far exceeds current mmorpgs, these monsters are more like counterstrike bots, they can loot you if you die & re-generate in enough numbers to go on the offencive & attack towns. if you spot an npc with your or another players gear on you can attack it & get it back.
10) Ship vs ship & boarding combat. + fishing & lots more...(sea depth based safety for small ships)
Sounds like much more content & fun gameplay for your money...
negatives - Darkfall has got elfs & graphics are not the latest but development did start 8 years ago.
Darkfall... ah yes....
You might want to read this thread first though http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/199536
"They" are already there.
You may even recognize some of the posters. They used to be here.
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
If you want to play a decent pirate game go play the disney one, it puts potbs to shame. you can man the cannons and all plus open sea combat not instanced. The graphics are a little in the low end though but its not a bad game.I never thought I would see the day when disney would put out an mmo that I could recommend.
Playing Fallen Earth.
Still, bashing PotBS is probably not something they're going to bother doing, as they probably think:
1) The game is dead already.
2) Those who still play it would long have moved on to Warhammer or Conan if they had been interested in a fantasy MMO.
Still, I'm expecting to see Darkfall become a wasteland within six months, once the l33t have done all their e-peen measuring.
Still, bashing PotBS is probably not something they're going to bother doing, as they probably think:
1) The game is dead already.
2) Those who still play it would long have moved on to Warhammer or Conan if they had been interested in a fantasy MMO.
Still, I'm expecting to see Darkfall become a wasteland within six months, once the l33t have done all their e-peen measuring.
Read the whole thread mate - there is something for you in there ;-)
(As a matter of fact - I used one of your posts to find it again)
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
Still, bashing PotBS is probably not something they're going to bother doing, as they probably think:
1) The game is dead already.
2) Those who still play it would long have moved on to Warhammer or Conan if they had been interested in a fantasy MMO.
Still, I'm expecting to see Darkfall become a wasteland within six months, once the l33t have done all their e-peen measuring.
Read the whole thread mate - there is something for you in there ;-)
(As a matter of fact - I used one of your posts to find it again)
Ah yes, the "next big failure" quote. Those guys don't care about any of that. But you knew that already.
Nonetheless, I'm glad to see Darkfall (apparently) release. Had it been vaporware, we could have been theorizing about whether the model it proposed could have been successful until we would have been blue in the face. Now, we will see whether it can work or not.
I'm prepared to eat crow if Darkfall turns out to be successful, but I am curious what reasons its supporters would come up with should the game fail miserably. It would be all too bad for Adventurine, which spent eight years developing this, but at the same time I'm thinking that, unlike FLS, they knew what they wanted to do all along, and that there were enough examples, from UO to Shadowbane, which demonstrated that FFA PvP games are rarely successful... Not to mention, if they indeed release it before the end of the year (which I doubt), that they are going to be running smack into the Warhammer juggernaut.
My thinking on Darkfall: It would seem that if you're not in a large clan, you're dead the minute you log on. Why should I convince my online buddies to even try it out when we're only a handful but traditionally want to retain our independence? So I think I'm just going to pass, even though I might have been interested had it been 1997, with multi-game guilds a thing of the future. But at this stage, with the MMO genre having a track record of its own, and with game-hopping guilds muscling in on new games like crime syndicates? Not bloody likely.
Pretty fair summary.
I would like to see it succeed too.
At this stage though, I wouldn't put money on it.
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
It will be interesting how Aventurine handle DFO promotion, its curious that their forums are already hitting the high numbers that Potbs & SOE could only achieved on release despite no promotion at all.
DF will have its gankers but is packed with content, I'm also pretty sure that the vast map size is going to make a big difference to keep PvE & PvP apart along with the main town & hired guards.
My feeling is that Potbs lost a lot of its players by having too little content & little red circles so players gank because of nothing much else to do.
Still, bashing PotBS is probably not something they're going to bother doing, as they probably think:
1) The game is dead already.
2) Those who still play it would long have moved on to Warhammer or Conan if they had been interested in a fantasy MMO.
Still, I'm expecting to see Darkfall become a wasteland within six months, once the l33t have done all their e-peen measuring.
Read the whole thread mate - there is something for you in there ;-)
(As a matter of fact - I used one of your posts to find it again)
Ah yes, the "next big failure" quote. Those guys don't care about any of that. But you knew that already.
Nonetheless, I'm glad to see Darkfall (apparently) release. Had it been vaporware, we could have been theorizing about whether the model it proposed could have been successful until we would have been blue in the face. Now, we will see whether it can work or not.
I'm prepared to eat crow if Darkfall turns out to be successful, but I am curious what reasons its supporters would come up with should the game fail miserably. It would be all too bad for Adventurine, which spent eight years developing this, but at the same time I'm thinking that, unlike FLS, they knew what they wanted to do all along, and that there were enough examples, from UO to Shadowbane, which demonstrated that FFA PvP games are rarely successful... Not to mention, if they indeed release it before the end of the year (which I doubt), that they are going to be running smack into the Warhammer juggernaut.
My thinking on Darkfall: It would seem that if you're not in a large clan, you're dead the minute you log on. Why should I convince my online buddies to even try it out when we're only a handful but traditionally want to retain our independence? So I think I'm just going to pass, even though I might have been interested had it been 1997, with multi-game guilds a thing of the future. But at this stage, with the MMO genre having a track record of its own, and with game-hopping guilds muscling in on new games like crime syndicates? Not bloody likely.
Don't forget that there is also a whole elgion of PvP or PvP heavy games comming out within the next year. Warhammer, Darkfall, Aion, Chronicles, Earthrise, Fallen Earth etc. From my observations I would say that avid PvPers are the smallest category of players, the other two being PvE and mix batch orieneted players.
Quite simply I don't beleive there is enough of players to man all of those games. Warhammer is the current flavour of the month at this time but I am sceptical at that game's ability to retain original players. After all if one is not interested in PvP and RvR 24/7 the game holds very little to no appeal.
The current crop of PvP orinted games is product of the 2-3 years old rush to corner that segemnt of the market. Roughly that is how long it takes to develop one of these and game developers showed they are mostly reactive and not proactive. Thus I suspect PvP orineted games will fall to mediocrity simply due to too many of them competing for too few players.
And that is without taking into account internal issues that most or all of them will display - namely the balance, inability to play outside large organized groups etc.
POTBS was and is poorly designed and implemented game but I suspect it can be used as an extreme example of the issues PvP oriented games face.
I don't think there ever was or ever will be a FFA PvP game without ganking and griefing, to use those terms. If anything the NPC guards are slight inconvenience and they can and will be overrun.
I also seem to remember that you were dead set defender of POTBS with rather similar claims regarding how the game will make a turnabout. The bitter end came and those few remainign fans are switching their alligence to toher flag but with equal zeal. Darkfall being packed with content is the official line from its developers, the same line was used by AoC developers and look how that turned out. I find it funny that quite a few developers start by advertising a hardcore PvP game and then start making PvE inroads to satisfy the market. That being said I cannot see anyone fairly informed that buys Warhammer or Darkfall for PvE content.
I don't think there ever was or ever will be a FFA PvP game without ganking and griefing, to use those terms. If anything the NPC guards are slight inconvenience and they can and will be overrun.
I also seem to remember that you were dead set defender of POTBS with rather similar claims regarding how the game will make a turnabout. The bitter end came and those few remainign fans are switching their alligence to toher flag but with equal zeal. Darkfall being packed with content is the official line from its developers, the same line was used by AoC developers and look how that turned out. I find it funny that quite a few developers start by advertising a hardcore PvP game and then start making PvE inroads to satisfy the market. That being said I cannot see anyone fairly informed that buys Warhammer or Darkfall for PvE content.
You are right the current DF hype is all false but the developers don't care as at this stage any publicity is good, the real proof of the pudding will be in the community & clans the eventual players will make it.
Overrunning an enemy town will only be achievable in DF with a large planned raid party or alliances between clans & so on. Town guards will be hard if not impossible to defeat solo.
i agree with Potbs being an example how not to implement PvP but as Isildur said he was going to reduce ganking i stayed loyal to FLS but they have failed to keep their word.
Incidently their is a good guide how to design a successful PvP game here on broken toys:
http://brokentoys.org/2007/12/10/how-to-make-a-game-with-pvp-done-right/
PvP should not be the focus of your entire game.
PvP players hate classes- PvP players need classes
PvP players detest grinding -PvP players need some grinding
PvP should not screw new players over - PvP should screw over someone
You gotta keep ‘em separated - PVE & PVP - but not too separated.
Wow...that guy gets it. Every designer currently working on a game with PvP should be reading that article. It's interesting that PotBS broke every single one of those guidelines.
Wow...that guy gets it. Every designer currently working on a game with PvP should be reading that article. It's interesting that PotBS broke every single one of those guidelines.
Which, dare I say, did not prevent Isildur from posting in the comments, acknowledging at least that he has read it.
But read what he has responded, and tell me if you see any trace of that in PotBS. Personally, I don't see any.
I would have paid good money to attend FLS's dev meetings in those days, because if Isildur was being honest about what he wrote, it basically means he was overruled at some point down the line. The fact that he has since decided to clam up can be interpreted in this and a few other ways.
To be fair too - the article is NOT 100% applicable to what PotBS tried to be.
The article could use a follow up "How To Make A Game With ‘RvR Done Right’"
Because PvP is one thing - and RvR is another. You can have one without the other. When you mix the two new rules apply again.
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
To be honest I didn't find the article very useful as a PvP blueprint. It is a bit tongue-in-cheek and I was under the impression it is a list of problems every PvP design have to face.
It is very likely that every design will have some flaws, what is amazing about POTBS is a sheer number of flaws made.
I do agree that the article is tongue-in-cheek, especially since it basically says the best approach to PvP is to include everything and its contrary. I guess the conclusion of it is that there is no secret formula, just to try to strike a balance between contradictory positions. I'm not sure anyone could write a useful guide on that.
I do agree that the article is tongue-in-cheek, especially since it basically says the best approach to PvP is to include everything and its contrary. I guess the conclusion of it is that there is no secret formula, just to try to strike a balance between contradictory positions. I'm not sure anyone could write a useful guide on that.
Good points, not to change the topic but I would like to hear opinions if people think this is really the end. I think the game will hobble onwards on station pass support. Bloody shame for I think the age of sail MMO concept was very original but extremely badly implemented in this case.
I do agree that the article is tongue-in-cheek, especially since it basically says the best approach to PvP is to include everything and its contrary. I guess the conclusion of it is that there is no secret formula, just to try to strike a balance between contradictory positions. I'm not sure anyone could write a useful guide on that.
Good points, not to change the topic but I would like to hear opinions if people think this is really the end. I think the game will hobble onwards on station pass support. Bloody shame for I think the age of sail MMO concept was very original but extremely badly implemented in this case.
I think the next months will be crucial to judge of that, since they are planning on doing advertising. That cannot compensate for dysfunctional game mechanics, but it is true that SOE did drop the ball on this one at release -- next to no advertising, deficient distribution (it was notoriously bad in Spain), the works. Maybe SOE knew from the start that it was a dud, sticking to their reputation of dwelling very close to the bottom of the barrel.
However, just consider how they managed to alienate a large chunk of their players in the first six months -- including the most supportive of so-called beta "fanbois" -- and that 1.7 managed to create such an uproar that the devs even went as far as promising to consider returning to the old system. All of this indicates to me that nobody is at the wheel, they're all looking for some way to fix a game that probably can't be fixed.
The ad push might attract some people, but unlike at release time, word of mouth will precede the game whatever it does.
Ultimately it will depend on how long FLS is willing to keep it afloat. Already there are indications that they are moving on to other projects. The ad push thus sounds more like a swan song than a renaissance.
If I were FLS, though, I'd just translate the game into Mandarin / Korean; it's the kind of repetitive playstyle that I am told they like over there.
FLS were warm & happy in their small embryonic beta environment where mainly economists ruled the day. Ship loss was never an issue due to several wipes & high ship availability.
Even in those early days many testers who were not crafters did not hang around long & despite many beta invites being sent out FLS failed to spot the real reasons why players were leaving, only a relatively small group of beta testers remained.
These issues were pointed out by some in beta who were shouted down by the core beta players so FLS was totally unprepared for the kind of player that came along at release. Since then FLS has been fire fighting trying to plug the leaks in a sinking ship but it has all been too little too late to stop the majority from leaving. Some of the devs have also left or been transfered to a new project so new content is very slow in being released, the hiring of more devs specifically for Potbs is badly needed.
The future of Potbs is in the balance & much will depend on how committed FLS are into financing & obtaining the devs needed to turn its fortune around.
It's possible that FLS themselves have decided that the game cannot be truly fixed without a major re-design so would prefer to put its main resources into a new more successful project.