Did Waaaagh! prove the common knowledge wrong?

PHInnocent · September 2008

It's common knowledge that no one can release a MMORPG that gives you "finished product" feeling, but it has to "grow" up in the first months.

I think Mythic proved that mantra wrong with this game. It's robust piece of software with very well thought core idea. Some bad news according bugs raise every now and then but no widespread gamebreakers or major downtimes have been noticed.

EDIT: Please don't raise your opinion if you have experienced only till Open Beta, because it didn't have all there is now. I know, because I was there

Zayne3145 · September 2008

Depending on who you speak to WAR could be described as a perfect end product, or a broken piece of crap. I haven't seen such a game divide people quite so much as this, which is why I'm holding out before buying it.

Azrile · September 2008

Originally posted by PHInnocent

It's common knowledge that no one can release a MMORPG that gives you "finished product" feeling, but it has to "grow" up in the first months.
I think Mythic proved that mantra wrong with this game. It's robust piece of software with very well thought core idea. Some bad news according bugs raise every now and then but no widespread gamebreakers or major downtimes have been noticed.
Did Waaaagh! prove the common knowledge wrong?
EDIT: Please don't raise your opinion if you have experienced only till Open Beta, because it didn't have all there is now. I know, because I was there

AOC had hardly any issues the first week either, and I would hardly call that a 'finished product'.

There are two ways a game can be 'unfinished'.

1. First being incomplete systems. Take a look at crafting in Warhammer.. would you consider it a 'real' part of the game? not really.. it was half-done and kept in anyway. Crafting in Warhammer should have been cut like the 4 classes and cities. The second system you need to look at are scenarios. Do you think they are finished? or did they just throw in a couple quick game types. There is not a creative scenerio in Warhammer. For a pvp game, a lot more attention should have gone into the actual mechanisms. Warhammer simply took the two worst BG in WOW and made the map smaller

2. The second way a game is unfinished is if there were fundamantal design flaws which were never put to the test before launch. In Warhammer, I can tell you exaclty what this is going to be.... faction imbalances... this one untested design flaw is going to ruin the game. It is going to turn the majority of servers into 'pve' servers because right now, the side being dominated isn't even showing up to fight. you do scenerios, or you pve.

Majinash · September 2008

Originally posted by Azrile

The second system you need to look at are scenarios. Do you think they are finished? or did they just throw in a couple quick game types. There is not a creative scenerio in Warhammer. For a pvp game, a lot more attention should have gone into the actual mechanisms. Warhammer simply took the two worst BG in WOW and made the map smaller

WoW had murderball? I didn't know the stables and farm exploded killing everyone if you took both of them. and stonetroll crossing just... doesn't look anything like WoW.

really, the scenarios are very diverse. your post shows you haven't played WAR, and are just repeating what other people have said because you don't like the game.

Azrile · September 2008

Originally posted by Majinash

Originally posted by Azrile

The second system you need to look at are scenarios. Do you think they are finished? or did they just throw in a couple quick game types. There is not a creative scenerio in Warhammer. For a pvp game, a lot more attention should have gone into the actual mechanisms. Warhammer simply took the two worst BG in WOW and made the map smaller

WoW had murderball? I didn't know the stables and farm exploded killing everyone if you took both of them. and stonetroll crossing just... doesn't look anything like WoW.

really, the scenarios are very diverse. your post shows you haven't played WAR, and are just repeating what other people have said because you don't like the game.

And how many of the scenarios are simple zerg-fest flag captures? The vast majority of the scenarios are nothing but zergfests ( AB and WSG). The maps are simplistic, the mechanisms are simplistic and there is not strategy (or tactics) except zerging.

Scriar · September 2008

Originally posted by PHInnocent

It's common knowledge that no one can release a MMORPG that gives you "finished product" feeling, but it has to "grow" up in the first months.
I think Mythic proved that mantra wrong with this game. It's robust piece of software with very well thought core idea. Some bad news according bugs raise every now and then but no widespread gamebreakers or major downtimes have been noticed.
Did Waaaagh! prove the common knowledge wrong?
EDIT: Please don't raise your opinion if you have experienced only till Open Beta, because it didn't have all there is now. I know, because I was there

No, unless your playing a different game than me, this game certainly is not a 'finished' product (In terms of how smoothely it launched, no mmo is really a finished product they always change). Theres a lot they can fix that should of been handled before release like animations being terrible for one, the combat being sluggish which is deffinatly down to polish, chat interface problems, and so on. The launch deffinatly was not smooth in Europe either, I would actually class it as one of the worst I have seen and it was completly avoidable.

The game isnt as bad as some of the releases lately like say Age of Conan, but it is not as polished as Lotro was at launch for instance. And the actual launch of the game as mentioned was not particually fantastic.

For an mmo it was an okay release, but mmos dont exactly have high standards when it comes to releases, so its nothing that is going to raise the bar on what developers should produce for a finished product.

All that said, all that is importent now is how they move forward with patches, and service. If the latest patch shows anything, they are atleast lisening to the community.

maskedweasel · September 2008

Originally posted by Azrile

Originally posted by Majinash

Originally posted by Azrile

The second system you need to look at are scenarios. Do you think they are finished? or did they just throw in a couple quick game types. There is not a creative scenerio in Warhammer. For a pvp game, a lot more attention should have gone into the actual mechanisms. Warhammer simply took the two worst BG in WOW and made the map smaller

WoW had murderball? I didn't know the stables and farm exploded killing everyone if you took both of them. and stonetroll crossing just... doesn't look anything like WoW.

really, the scenarios are very diverse. your post shows you haven't played WAR, and are just repeating what other people have said because you don't like the game.

And how many of the scenarios are simple zerg-fest flag captures? The vast majority of the scenarios are nothing but zergfests ( AB and WSG). The maps are simplistic, the mechanisms are simplistic and there is not strategy (or tactics) except zerging.

If thats how you play then its easy to see why you have such a horrible distaste for the game. The game is what you make of it bud. A grilled cheese sandwich could taste horrible or taste wonderful. You and I must be eating two different grilled cheese sandwiches mate.

What I would suggest is find a good guild and give it an honest try instead of being a biased pessimist. WAR is just as good as anything thats released recently, and better then many of the games released in the past 2 years ---personal opinions notwithstanding-- so you can complain if you like, but don't expect to find an AoC flame-fest here. Mythics done this right.

BinaryDigit · September 2008

Originally posted by Zayne3145

Depending on who you speak to WAR could be described as a perfect end product, or a broken piece of crap. I haven't seen such a game divide people quite so much as this, which is why I'm holding out before buying it.

Zayne I agree that there is a major schism between groups in the MMORPG community, but I would argue that it has existed for far longer than WAR. On one side you have the Carebears and on the other you have PKers. No wait, on one side you have the Fanbois and on the other you have the Haters. Either way you slice the pie it amounts to the same thing.

If you love PvP you'll love WAR. If you prefer PvE raids and quests, you'll be better off elsewhere. If you do decide to give WAR a try you'll find that the community within isn't nearly as divided as the community here.

Omega3 · September 2008

Originally posted by PHInnocent

It's common knowledge that no one can release a MMORPG that gives you "finished product" feeling, but it has to "grow" up in the first months.
I think Mythic proved that mantra wrong with this game. It's robust piece of software with very well thought core idea. Some bad news according bugs raise every now and then but no widespread gamebreakers or major downtimes have been noticed.
Did Waaaagh! prove the common knowledge wrong?
EDIT: Please don't raise your opinion if you have experienced only till Open Beta, because it didn't have all there is now. I know, because I was there

Depends if you're looking at this game from a subjective or objective point of view...

Objectively it's a painless, stable, mostly bugfree, content-packed, launch.

Subjectively, it's a grind game with small replayability. I disagree with people saying that loving PvP=loving WAR. I'm lvl 20 and so far all i've seen is both factions carefully avoiding themselves and taking undefended keeps; if a slaughter happens at a fort, it's more an accident than actual strategy. As for scenarios it was a bad idea to implement them, open world PvP suffers from it and ultimately, they are the cause and the consequence for the relative unpopulation of RvR zones.

Also, it's too easy to take a fort, and unrewarding to hold it; especially with server caps being so low, all 6 forts of a tier cannot be defended by a single faction without a concerted effort.

RvR zone are just scenarios within a gameworld zone, they lack depth, taking a fort is mostly painless and pointless.

PvE is inferior to WOW given that you're forced ona set path, your class rewards are offered to you on a platter, and everyone follow the same cookie cutterered road to lvling while queuing a scenario.

I mentioned replayability at the beginning, this is because both the zones and classes definitely lack personnality, and the combat system is tinkered to work like a PvE system: stand your ground, hit, advance. Sure you can throw in some tactical moves with a tank rush supported by healers... but that's about it.

Oh yeah forgot to mention, : i'm disappointed.

twhint · September 2008

Originally posted by Omega3

Originally posted by PHInnocent

It's common knowledge that no one can release a MMORPG that gives you "finished product" feeling, but it has to "grow" up in the first months.
I think Mythic proved that mantra wrong with this game. It's robust piece of software with very well thought core idea. Some bad news according bugs raise every now and then but no widespread gamebreakers or major downtimes have been noticed.
Did Waaaagh! prove the common knowledge wrong?
EDIT: Please don't raise your opinion if you have experienced only till Open Beta, because it didn't have all there is now. I know, because I was there

Depends if you're looking at this game from a subjective or objective point of view...

Objectively it's a painless, stable, mostly bugfree, content-packed, launch.

Subjectively, it's a grind game with small replayability. I disagree with people saying that loving PvP=loving WAR. I'm lvl 20 and so far all i've seen is both factions carefully avoiding themselves and taking undefended keeps; if a slaughter happens at a fort, it's more an accident than actual strategy. As for scenarios it was a bad idea to implement them, open world PvP suffers from it and ultimately, they are the cause and the consequence for the relative unpopulation of RvR zones.

Also, it's too easy to take a fort, and unrewarding to hold it; especially with server caps being so low, all 6 forts of a tier cannot be defended by a single faction without a concerted effort.

RvR zone are just scenarios within a gameworld zone, they lack depth, taking a fort is mostly painless and pointless.

PvE is inferior to WOW given that you're forced ona set path, your class rewards are offered to you on a platter, and everyone follow the same cookie cutterered road to lvling while queuing a scenario.

I mentioned replayability at the beginning, this is because both the zones and classes definitely lack personnality, and the combat system is tinkered to work like a PvE system: stand your ground, hit, advance. Sure you can throw in some tactical moves with a tank rush supported by healers... but that's about it.

Oh yeah forgot to mention, : i'm disappointed.

Not sure if you're played the game much, based on your comments. A couple of people could easily hold off a fort attack, and disrupt it enough that it fails. It's the attackers that have to make the concerted effort. There isn't the organization that needs to be able to fight the keep lord, 4 bodyguards and some PC's at the same time, so generally what happens is people mill about on the bottom and get picked off. It'll change, but to say it's too easy to take a keep is facetious and misleading, as it is not easy to take a keep at all unless you're organized or have a ton of people, as in, more than a warband. As to the reward of holding a keep, it's the ability to buy reknown gear and points, which would otherwise be unavailable if you didn't have a keep. Reknown gear is generally better than the gear you will get from drops in the zone, unless it's blue or above.

Have you tried open RvR servers, if you're dissatisfied with how RvR zones are setup, then you might want to join where the whole world is a RvR zone. You whine about one side of the equation without mentioning that there is an alternative.

PvE is inferior in that it is easy, but easier than WoW? I disagree with that. When I played WoW, I found it to be incredibly easy. PvE is PvE is PvE. It's all the same whatever game you play. As to leading you along a path? Again, all of your games do that. You do quests in area A, then are gently guided to Area B with a generic 'report to person X for more quests'. Vanguard was the only one to seriously challenge that trend, with high level mob areas mixed in with low level mob areas, but otherwise, all games have that same 'lead you by the hand' narrow progression.

As far as your tactics go, you, again, haven't played the game very much it seems. Right now, as it is new, people are relying on zerg tactics for the most part, but as time goes on and people get used to the RvR, you'll find the more organized teams will win over the zergings, just like in Starcraft where the term originated.

It also depends on the server you are playing on. The more populated servers will have more clashes, just as the lower pop servers will have less. Scenarios becomes the focus of RvR simply because there they don't have to worry about being outnumbered by a huge degree. In Tier 2, a party can take over the points, while at least 2 would be needed for the keep. In Tier 3, it becomes more difficult and you'll find you need more to properly take points and the keeps are more complicated with more than 1 door, while Tier 4 becomes even more difficult. Then there are the cities which will require a ton of people, with many different points that need to be capped.

You're simply showing your discontent with whining ramblings that don't make any sort of credible argument. The bottom line is, if you don't like it, go back to WoW where it seems you are more comfortable.

kadepsyson · September 2008

I guess a lot of people do like it. I mean look at maskedweasel, he's played it for 45 hours in a week, that's more than many people spend working

CobraSolidus · September 2008

Originally posted by PHInnocent

It's common knowledge that no one can release a MMORPG that gives you "finished product" feeling, but it has to "grow" up in the first months.
I think Mythic proved that mantra wrong with this game. It's robust piece of software with very well thought core idea. Some bad news according bugs raise every now and then but no widespread gamebreakers or major downtimes have been noticed.
Did Waaaagh! prove the common knowledge wrong?
EDIT: Please don't raise your opinion if you have experienced only till Open Beta, because it didn't have all there is now. I know, because I was there

You provoke me when you write stuff like this. WAR is performing like a Oldsmobile. Even though the WAR devteam obviously had low ambitions for this game in the graphics department, the game run as bad as it initially did for AoC. The only issue here is that AoC had a good reason for low FPS (The graphics are awesome). I will probably test out WAR again, but I might reconsider if you fanbois keep having a go on this perfectness of WAR. WARcode is crap right now and Mythic need to put in at least 3 months of allnighters before this thing cleans up.

Sovrath · September 2008

Originally posted by CobraSolidus

Originally posted by PHInnocent

It's common knowledge that no one can release a MMORPG that gives you "finished product" feeling, but it has to "grow" up in the first months.
I think Mythic proved that mantra wrong with this game. It's robust piece of software with very well thought core idea. Some bad news according bugs raise every now and then but no widespread gamebreakers or major downtimes have been noticed.
Did Waaaagh! prove the common knowledge wrong?
EDIT: Please don't raise your opinion if you have experienced only till Open Beta, because it didn't have all there is now. I know, because I was there

You provoke me when you write stuff like this. WAR is performing like a Oldsmobile. Even though the WAR devteam obviously had low ambitions for this game in the graphics department, the game run as bad as it initially did for AoC. The only issue here is that AoC had a good reason for low FPS (The graphics are awesome). I will probably test out WAR again, but I might reconsider if you fanbois keep having a go on this perfectness of WAR. WARcode is crap right now and Mythic need to put in at least 3 months of allnighters before this thing cleans up.

lol, well wait a minute.

I'm not exactly sure where this is coming from but the graphics are fine and quite franklly, though there are bugs and annoyances, the fps is quite good.

so I think the issue is your machine or connection with the software. Not everyone is having problems. It's not being a fanboi to state something like that. Just like it's not being a troll if one doesn't like the game.

As far as the OP's post, well, LOTRO had a better launch. Sorry, it just did. I play both games avidly and LOTRO feels more polished and more complete and stable.

Warhammer runs exceptionally well for me but there is some junkiness to the interface, the interface editing is wonky, some general bugs, etc.

I don't see why people say the graphics are bad. They are made so that you can have quite a few players on the screen at the same time. I have yet to have slowdown with large amounts of players and this is with the graphics high.

if you don't like the art design, well that is what it is. If you don't like the gameplay, same thing. It's very obvious that not everyone will like the gameplay as it is very fun but very light. Nothing wrong with that, I'm pretty sure most of us enjoy some sort of "light" in our lives, whether it's the food we eat, candy we eat, music, movies, taste in bad clothes, etc.

The game is what it is and apparently it has struck a chord with many players who enjoy it.

This screen shot is not horrible. it might not be AOC or LOTRo as far as good but it certainly is on par with many games out there.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y6/Sovrath/SovrathF_000.jpg

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y6/Sovrath/SovrathF_001.jpg

Conan for comparison. Not a great picture

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y6/Sovrath/nameunknown_picture000.png

LOTRO

http://windowsxp-privacy.net/?id=12434619123

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y6/Sovrath/ScreenShot00058.jpg

So Warhammer is comparable. Might not be the most amazing but it's not really a dog.

nogardnaz · September 2008

While I believe WAR is a desperate step backwards for MMORPG's, the OP is correct. People fear bad launches and this game showed that a game doesn't have to have an incredibly disappointing launch. The launch is pretty good. If you don't agree with that you're just trying to be an asshole. It's as simple as that. The game might be a huge pile of shit for casuals, but it was still a great launch by comparison.

If you're going to complain, at least complain about the right things.

Alioth · September 2008

Originally posted by nogardnaz

"The launch is pretty good. If you don't agree with that you're just trying to be an asshole. It's as simple as that."

WAR doesn't even come close to giving me that "finished product" feel. Online gaming experiences are unique. It seems as though you expect everyone to have the same opinion as yourself.

nogardnaz · October 2008

Originally posted by Alioth

Originally posted by nogardnaz
"The launch is pretty good. If you don't agree with that you're just trying to be an asshole. It's as simple as that."

WAR doesn't even come close to giving me that "finished product" feel. Online gaming experiences are unique. It seems as though you expect everyone to have the same opinion as yourself.

My point was that by comparison the game had a good launch. It still has issues, I acknowledge that, but it has less than most.

Omega3 · October 2008

Not sure if you're played the game much, based on your comments. I'm lvl 20.

A couple of people could easily hold off a fort attack, and disrupt it enough that it fails. Sure enough, but it's boring after a time (10 minutes~], and completely unrewarding. My point is, defending a fort doesnt make any sense since they cna be taken easily by a 24 man raid.

As to the reward of holding a keep, it's the ability to buy reknown gear and points, which would otherwise be unavailable if you didn't have a keep. Please, you don't have to defend a fort to buy renown gear, you just have to take one. Which is easy stuff.

Reknown gear is generally better than the gear you will get from drops in the zone, unless it's blue or above. Public Quest provide equivalent of not better stuff, at least in Tier 2. My main weapon is a blue axe (IB), getting it was far easier and quicker than accumulating realm points.

Have you tried open RvR servers, if you're dissatisfied with how RvR zones are setup, then you might want to join where the whole world is a RvR zone. You whine about one side of the equation without mentioning that there is an alternative. No, you are asking me to enter a world where i can (will) be ganked in PvE areas, not improve my PvP experience in RvR areas.

PvE is inferior in that it is easy, but easier than WoW? I disagree with that. When I played WoW, I found it to be incredibly easy. PvE is PvE is PvE. It's all the same whatever game you play. As to leading you along a path? Again, all of your games do that. You do quests in area A, then are gently guided to Area B with a generic 'report to person X for more quests'. Actually WoW PvE is better in the sense that you're not told where to go (red circles on the maps), quests while more painful are more varied and you get the feeling that the gameworld is much more tinkered to be coherent, while in WAR? everything seems to have been setup for you to lvl with the generic kill quests. I'm not good at explaining, PvE mechanics are the same, but more involving in WoW, because the world is crafted better and is more coherent. Also, when you fly over the world, it makes a large difference to having a cutscene (WAR).

As far as your tactics go, you, again, haven't played the game very much it seems. Right now, as it is new, people are relying on zerg tactics for the most part, but as time goes on and people get used to the RvR, you'll find the more organized teams will win over the zergings, just like in Starcraft where the term originated. We'll see - most people in WAR come from WOW/DAOC, it's not like they have to come up with fresh and new tactics, they are already applying what they learned in other games so i don't see how it can get "better": EVERYONE is experienced.

Oh, i played the game as much as you, but we didn't see the same things.

It also depends on the server you are playing on. The more populated servers will have more clashes, just as the lower pop servers will have less. Medium pop, almost high.

You're simply showing your discontent with whining ramblings that don't make any sort of credible argument. I don't see the point in being agressive toward people who criticize WAR; i made valid points with valid arguments; you can criticize them on the basis of your opinion, but not discard them as "not credible", it's ridiculous.

The bottom line is, if you don't like it, go back to WoW where it seems you are more comfortable. I quit WoW 2 years ago. Seeing the flaws in WAR and discussing them is not "loving WoW" in case you didn't get it already.

Warmaker · October 2008

Originally posted by Zayne3145

Depending on who you speak to WAR could be described as a perfect end product, or a broken piece of crap. I haven't seen such a game divide people quite so much as this, which is why I'm holding out before buying it.

Then you haven't tried out or followed Age of Conan

Creasian · October 2008

Originally posted by CobraSolidus

Originally posted by PHInnocent

It's common knowledge that no one can release a MMORPG that gives you "finished product" feeling, but it has to "grow" up in the first months.
I think Mythic proved that mantra wrong with this game. It's robust piece of software with very well thought core idea. Some bad news according bugs raise every now and then but no widespread gamebreakers or major downtimes have been noticed.
Did Waaaagh! prove the common knowledge wrong?
EDIT: Please don't raise your opinion if you have experienced only till Open Beta, because it didn't have all there is now. I know, because I was there

You provoke me when you write stuff like this. WAR is performing like a Oldsmobile. Even though the WAR devteam obviously had low ambitions for this game in the graphics department, the game run as bad as it initially did for AoC. The only issue here is that AoC had a good reason for low FPS (The graphics are awesome). I will probably test out WAR again, but I might reconsider if you fanbois keep having a go on this perfectness of WAR. WARcode is crap right now and Mythic need to put in at least 3 months of allnighters before this thing cleans up.

I dont think WAR is that bad off in the performance area. Generally I see more people having issues in the huge RVR battles, which were rampant in OB. WAR isnt perfect by any means. Its segmented well, and the project has a great chance at success.

Of course this comes from someone who finds Original EQ graphics as appealing as AoC's graphics. I am also not someone who has some low grade pc. E8400 3.825ghz, HD4870 Crossfire.. so turning off the settings on any mmorpg right now isnt a issue for me. My FW900 monitor has insane color purity and it is easy to see the real imperfections in mmorpgs in the landscape. To see the graphical smears.

I am also a PVE'er, what some would call a carebear, and enjoy the RVR quite fine but sometimes rather boring. A zerg is still a zerg, be it by AI or someone with no tactics. Warhammer's only issue right now with me is that the entire project is controlled by the abilities of the players within, and if they fail to perform, then as does the game.

Kaioh · October 2008

All I can do right now when i read these kinds of posts is laugh my butt off. Don't you realize that there are different kind of games out there? Different games appeal to different people, otherwise we would be all robots. The game had a good launch, its been out what less than 2 weeks and some people just wanna go samurai on Mythic.

If you people don't like this game, don't buy it and don't play it. There are plenty of other games that I'm sure will make you very happy. For WoW players, WOTLK will be out soon and you can go back to raiding and whatever else that it is you do there these days. For other players go play everquest, AOC (lawl), ect...

More Blood for the Blood God!!!

nogardnaz · October 2008

Originally posted by Kaioh

All I can do right now when i read these kinds of posts is laugh my butt off. Don't you realize that there are different kind of games out there? Different games appeal to different people, otherwise we would be all robots. The game had a good launch, its been out what less than 2 weeks and some people just wanna go samurai on Mythic.
If you people don't like this game, don't buy it and don't play it. There are plenty of other games that I'm sure will make you very happy. For WoW players, WOTLK will be out soon and you can go back to raiding and whatever else that it is you do there these days. For other players go play everquest, AOC (lawl), ect...
More Blood for the Blood God!!!

The fact is, what you say is not true. All MMO's in fact, hell, all games are made for casuals now. No challenge. No commitment. No Skill.

That's the reason people hate WAR. It's just another game for casuals so people that blow can feel like they're awesome.

Sovrath · October 2008

Originally posted by nogardnaz

Originally posted by Kaioh

All I can do right now when i read these kinds of posts is laugh my butt off. Don't you realize that there are different kind of games out there? Different games appeal to different people, otherwise we would be all robots. The game had a good launch, its been out what less than 2 weeks and some people just wanna go samurai on Mythic.
If you people don't like this game, don't buy it and don't play it. There are plenty of other games that I'm sure will make you very happy. For WoW players, WOTLK will be out soon and you can go back to raiding and whatever else that it is you do there these days. For other players go play everquest, AOC (lawl), ect...
More Blood for the Blood God!!!

The fact is, what you say is not true. All MMO's in fact, hell, all games are made for casuals now. No challenge. No commitment. No Skill.

That's the reason people hate WAR. It's just another game for casuals so people that blow can feel like they're awesome.

lol, or people who just want to relax and have some fun can sit down enjoy themselves for an hour and get on with whatever they want to do that actually matters.

Zyten · October 2008

Originally posted by kadepsyson

I guess a lot of people do like it. I mean look at maskedweasel, he's played it for 45 hours in a week, that's more than many people spend working

this guy made the whole thread worth reading

maskedweasel · October 2008

Originally posted by Zyten

Originally posted by kadepsyson

I guess a lot of people do like it. I mean look at maskedweasel, he's played it for 45 hours in a week, that's more than many people spend working

this guy made the whole thread worth reading

hahaha I totally missed that comment. Nail on the head kadepsyson. And with the amount of time I've played it, there are others that play it twice as long as I do ACTUALLY HAVE a full time job that I go to everyday

twhint · October 2008

Originally posted by Omega3

Not sure if you're played the game much, based on your comments. I'm lvl 20.

Your reknown rank isn't the same, I believe, based on your comments, but you made it to the start of Tier 3.

A couple of people could easily hold off a fort attack, and disrupt it enough that it fails. Sure enough, but it's boring after a time (10 minutes~], and completely unrewarding. My point is, defending a fort doesnt make any sense since they cna be taken easily by a 24 man raid.

As to the reward of holding a keep, it's the ability to buy reknown gear and points, which would otherwise be unavailable if you didn't have a keep. Please, you don't have to defend a fort to buy renown gear, you just have to take one. Which is easy stuff.

True enough, but it is still more difficult to /take/ a keep than defend it, which goes against the point you seemed to be trying to make. You make it sound easy and yet, my experiences have been the opposite. A party can hold off a warband quite easily in a keep battle, especially since the defenders only have to delay as more and more defenders show up and take the attackers from behind. Not much I can say if you're bored that easily. You say a keep can be easily taken by 24 people and yet I can guarantee you that I can defend it with 6 against your 24.

Reknown gear is generally better than the gear you will get from drops in the zone, unless it's blue or above. Public Quest provide equivalent of not better stuff, at least in Tier 2. My main weapon is a blue axe (IB), getting it was far easier and quicker than accumulating realm points.

You say you have better without actually gaining the RR points to check? PQ's hardly give equivalent stuff. The high end Reknown gear will be better than the stuff you can get through PvE, except for the gold bags that are quite rare in PQ's. But it all becomes moot as most people level up their reknown slower than their regular levels, so they move up into the next tier which drops better gear than the previous tier's reknown gear.

Have you tried open RvR servers, if you're dissatisfied with how RvR zones are setup, then you might want to join where the whole world is a RvR zone. You whine about one side of the equation without mentioning that there is an alternative. No, you are asking me to enter a world where i can (will) be ganked in PvE areas, not improve my PvP experience in RvR areas.

So you are arguing that you don't like how RvR zones are setup and how they're artificial, yet you lack the stones to actually participate in the open world because you're afraid of getting attacked? So do you want to PvP or not? Also, with open RvR servers, the same rules apply about levels and being chickened, so ganking will only occur with people within 10 levels of you at the most. It also promotes grouping far more than the core servers as there is safety in numbers. People complain about the anarchy present on such servers without actually checking to see if it exists. You'll find that with the natural seperation of the opposing sides, that roving bands of people looking to attack the other side aren't as frequent as you make it out to be. Greenskins would be an exception since they blend the sides all over the place, having shared PQ's in pretty much every tier that I saw. But, I haven't played on this type of server either, so I can't say with a certainty what actually happens there.

PvE is inferior in that it is easy, but easier than WoW? I disagree with that. When I played WoW, I found it to be incredibly easy. PvE is PvE is PvE. It's all the same whatever game you play. As to leading you along a path? Again, all of your games do that. You do quests in area A, then are gently guided to Area B with a generic 'report to person X for more quests'. Actually WoW PvE is better in the sense that you're not told where to go (red circles on the maps), quests while more painful are more varied and you get the feeling that the gameworld is much more tinkered to be coherent, while in WAR? everything seems to have been setup for you to lvl with the generic kill quests. I'm not good at explaining, PvE mechanics are the same, but more involving in WoW, because the world is crafted better and is more coherent. Also, when you fly over the world, it makes a large difference to having a cutscene (WAR).

WoW tells you where to go, but doesn't limit your search area like War does. It sounds like you prefer to waste the couple of hours to look for a mob rather than have it helpfully limited. That's fine if you don't have a life/job/etc. but for those of us who play limited times, it's a huge timesaver. This is mostly a difference of playstyles, I suppose. I came from EQ and played WoW and was unimpressed. I found the game to be incredibly easy, the graphics childish, and the gameplay mimicking everything that came before it with no innovation. Not to mention that my class choice, Hunter, was bugged and broken for a while. But I think we can both agree that PvE is not the main focus in War and it merely does the job of offering an alternative means of progression to PvP, which will be the focus of the end game.

As far as your tactics go, you, again, haven't played the game very much it seems. Right now, as it is new, people are relying on zerg tactics for the most part, but as time goes on and people get used to the RvR, you'll find the more organized teams will win over the zergings, just like in Starcraft where the term originated. We'll see - most people in WAR come from WOW/DAOC, it's not like they have to come up with fresh and new tactics, they are already applying what they learned in other games so i don't see how it can get "better": EVERYONE is experienced.

Oh, i played the game as much as you, but we didn't see the same things.

WoW's pvp hardly requires tactics. As to Daoc, how do the classes compare? I never played it so can't comment on it, but tactics will be similar, as you say. Everyone is experienced with tactics and what is supposed to happen, but they are not experienced with their class choice and the nuances of what it can really do, for the most part. Sure, we can say a tank is a tank, but can you really say the Black Orc plays exactly the same as the Chosen and that there is no difference in the tactics one would use for each? Same for the healers, the melee dps, the ranged dps, etc.

It also depends on the server you are playing on. The more populated servers will have more clashes, just as the lower pop servers will have less. Medium pop, almost high.

You're simply showing your discontent with whining ramblings that don't make any sort of credible argument. I don't see the point in being agressive toward people who criticize WAR; i made valid points with valid arguments; you can criticize them on the basis of your opinion, but not discard them as "not credible", it's ridiculous.

You're doing the same thing I am, basing your argument solely on your opinions. We have dissenting opinions and I am offering a counterpoint to your points. We do see things differently, and while I'm not going to go so far as to say War is innovative or fresh or anything else, i will say it is fun. Yes, the PvE is lacking, but the PvP is done in such a way that even people who previously disliked PvP will find it fun. Scenarios are a great way to get people used to the PvP, with little ways to vary it up with the different playstyles of the different scenarios.

The bottom line is, if you don't like it, go back to WoW where it seems you are more comfortable. I quit WoW 2 years ago. Seeing the flaws in WAR and discussing them is not "loving WoW" in case you didn't get it already.

You're not pointing out the flaws. You're simply saying what you don't like about the game, with which I disagree and offer my own arguments as to why. You aren't discussing them, you're simply saying you don't like it and this is why. You offer no alternatives, nor do you even bother to acknowledge that they exist. Personally, this argument has run its course between us. We're not having a discussion as we are just providing dissenting viewpoints. Let the others come up with their own ideas beyond that.

twhint · October 2008

Originally posted by nogardnaz

Originally posted by Kaioh

All I can do right now when i read these kinds of posts is laugh my butt off. Don't you realize that there are different kind of games out there? Different games appeal to different people, otherwise we would be all robots. The game had a good launch, its been out what less than 2 weeks and some people just wanna go samurai on Mythic.
If you people don't like this game, don't buy it and don't play it. There are plenty of other games that I'm sure will make you very happy. For WoW players, WOTLK will be out soon and you can go back to raiding and whatever else that it is you do there these days. For other players go play everquest, AOC (lawl), ect...
More Blood for the Blood God!!!

The fact is, what you say is not true. All MMO's in fact, hell, all games are made for casuals now. No challenge. No commitment. No Skill.

That's the reason people hate WAR. It's just another game for casuals so people that blow can feel like they're awesome.

I love these type of comments. Spending 40+hours a week in a game doesn't mean you are great. Honestly, I'd say you pretty much suck at it if it takes you that long to accomplish things. While War is a casual game, it is fun. And it's great I don't have to spend 6 hours fighting down a boss that I know I can beat if I just spend the time to burn through the numbers, which is all these games are. Making sure your numbers are better than the mobs numbers. Fighting elite mob x? You need to make sure you have X amount of DPS type Y with X amount of healers available, your tank needs to be positioned here, while the rest of you have to stop when elite boss mob farts, then continue beating after Z amount of minutes. Yeah, real exciting stuff there....

Howdy, Stranger!

Did Waaaagh! prove the common knowledge wrong?

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Did Waaaagh! prove the common knowledge wrong?

Comments