The game changed, they had a rockey launch, name a game that did not?
Also name one other game that has conquest/pvp/fps in a mmorpg?
Just for the sake of conversation:
LoTRO was perceived to have a pretty smooth launch. At the time, there were no end of forum posts commenting as much.
As for your second question...perhaps Planetside would fit the bill.
O ya because in planetside you risk a a lot in Pvp, lol only thing that would come close is EVE, and eve's combat gets boring fast, not saying DFO wont either, but atm its nice and the more I get into it the more fun I have.
Only thing that will look remotely like DFO is MO, but that will probably have too much fluff/graphics to have any real large scale battles/conquests.
I would not give DFO a higher then a 7.5 still, but if they made the grind less tedium(and add in a skill cap or prestige classes) and made melee combat more in depth then it would be a 9 TO ME(as for polish who gives a sht, I did not come to play DFO for little wildlife animals, I came here for a competitve game, that you have risk vs reward)
6? Sheesh, sorry, but thats an entirely political rating if I may say so, not to aggravate anyone too much. Bad enough for the haters, not too bad for the fanbois. Sorry, but compared to other sixes DFO is NO 6 at all. Period.
Right because 6 for you is based on nice and pretty butterfly worlds and no actual gameplay or risk.
People who like conquest, PVP, FPS, will like this game.
Only thing I think needs changing, is a few mechanics, the grind(or skill cap added) and more depth in melee combat.
Everything else is perfect to me, I did not come here to "Quest" for you mentioning that you should hear the line GO BACK TO WOW.
I'd stay away from making broad comments as you'll usually find you're wrong. I like conquest, PvP and FPS games but I don't like Darkfall. And yes, I've played it to know that I don't like it.
I wonder if you are one of those unlucky ones that had it the first month, or played in beta. Lol the game changed, and judging by a lot of the comments in this thread it seems, most of them have not played it the last few months.
The game changed, they had a rockey launch, name a game that did not?
Also name one other game that has conquest/pvp/fps in a mmorpg?
Sorry but this is another carebear OPINION, which has no siege or raiding, no talking about combat on mounts, archery, killing dragons, fighting on boats/war hulks, sorry but this is a premature review from a flawed reviewer.
I played the first month, yeah. I can't think of another MMORPG that has conquest. PvP and a mandatory FPV. Which is why it's a shame for me. If it had had the production pocketbook (money) of a AAA company it would have been more polished and I'd probably be still playing.
As for the reviewer's opinion, it's his opinion. No need to flame him because you disagree. The way you're sounding the only thing you'd accept is a non-critical review of the game with a 9 or 10 rating. Truth be told, the game does have many flaws and is not polished (and I say is because AoC taught us that in truth there are no miracle patches). Is it playable and enjoyable for some? Sure. You like it. That's cool. But just because someone else doesn't, calling them "carebear" doesn't prove anything about them or invalidate their opinion. Just makes you look bad, that's all. *shrug*
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
WoW did not even have current generation graphics at launch. There are mmos older than WoW that have better graphics than WoW. Also DF does not have next gen graphics. It has current/sub current graphics. Mostly for large pvp battle streamline reasons yes? Though it DOES look much better than WoW. (Though that's not saying much.)
I have to totally disagree with this. WoW's graphics are stylized and very well done. The animations are top notch compared to most MMORPG's - because Blizzard reworks them if necessary to get them right. I've played DFO and the animations are not fluid and sometimes down right ugly. DFO is a good game, but it is nothing to brag about.
Show me anything in DFO that comes close to being this cool and you win.
Graphics or 100 vs 100 combat, let me choose, O here is a fun fact DFO IS A PVP game lol.
Umm...I play on a PvP server in WoW. DFO's so called FPS type combat is a joke. AV said numerous times that their combat was going to be awesome and even went so far as to say it was like Mount and Blades combat. That was an out right lie. LOL! You have one vertical attack and one horizontal attack for melee. Shields cannot actively block anything - they just add to mitigate damage. Not like Mount and Blades where shields really can block swords, arrows and what not. DFO's combat is a joke. The archery in the game sucks. The sounds for the archery sucks. OMG when I played the combat sounds were the worse I'd ever encountered in a game. Anyway, when DFO gets combat like Mount and Blade - then come talk to me. Until then, it is a psuedo FPS wannabe combat.
God I should do a review on DFO - I would not be so nice as MMORPG.com was. Game would be lucky to get a 4 from me.
WoW did not even have current generation graphics at launch. There are mmos older than WoW that have better graphics than WoW. Also DF does not have next gen graphics. It has current/sub current graphics. Mostly for large pvp battle streamline reasons yes? Though it DOES look much better than WoW. (Though that's not saying much.)
I have to totally disagree with this. WoW's graphics are stylized and very well done. The animations are top notch compared to most MMORPG's - because Blizzard reworks them if necessary to get them right. I've played DFO and the animations are not fluid and sometimes down right ugly. DFO is a good game, but it is nothing to brag about.
Show me anything in DFO that comes close to being this cool and you win.
Graphics or 100 vs 100 combat, let me choose, O here is a fun fact DFO IS A PVP game lol.
Umm...I play on a PvP server in WoW. DFO's so called FPS type combat is a joke. AV said numerous times that their combat was going to be awesome and even went so far as to say it was like Mount and Blades combat. That was an out right lie. LOL! You have one vertical attack and one horizontal attack for melee. Shields cannot actively block anything - they just add to mitigate damage. Not like Mount and Blades where shields really can block swords, arrows and what not. DFO's combat is a joke. The archery in the game sucks. The sounds for the archery sucks. OMG when I played the combat sounds were the worse I'd ever encountered in a game. Anyway, when DFO gets combat like Mount and Blade - then come talk to me. Until then, it is a psuedo FPS wannabe combat.
God I should do a review on DFO - I would not be so nice as MMORPG.com was. Game would be lucky to get a 4 from me.
Lol if I rated WOW I would call it the dullest game alive? your point? we both have different opinions, ya melee is not in depth, and it does screw up the immersion, but for people who say it does not take skills are ignorant. And for the above you poster, No wonder why you though DFO was a disaster, no doubt they released it way to early.
Try Na now, lots have changed, have you fought on a mount with DFO btw? lol dont know what mount and blade is like, but the mount combat is extremely skillful, and archery is too, magic is skillful up to a extent, unless you got those giant AOE's but those do only do good damage when you have a group of 10 casting them at other groups.
I bet most of you are basing dfo combat off the 2her combat, which is why you premature review this game, It needs work, and they changed and fixed a lot, but How long was it before EVE actually had a large playerbase and started getting reviews pass 5-6?
retract fast mate or you take the risk of talking about something you dont have a clue about...shilesd block around 95% damage, which is like taking a hit from a 40 kilo sowrd in real life and catching it on a shiled...Fact is it will still hurt you so give AV credit for that one!
retract fast mate or you take the risk of talking about something you dont have a clue about...shilesd block around 95% damage, which is like taking a hit from a 40 kilo sowrd in real life and catching it on a shiled...Fact is it will still hurt you so give AV credit for that one!
No...sorry. Want to compare how Mount and Blade handles combat and DFO handles combat. Play Mount and Blade and tell me it is the same as DFO. Because it isn't even close. LOL!
retract fast mate or you take the risk of talking about something you dont have a clue about...shilesd block around 95% damage, which is like taking a hit from a 40 kilo sowrd in real life and catching it on a shiled...Fact is it will still hurt you so give AV credit for that one!
No...sorry. Want to compare how Mount and Blade handles combat and DFO handles combat. Play Mount and Blade and tell me it is the same as DFO. Because it isn't even close. LOL!
Umm...I play on a PvP server in WoW. DFO's so called FPS type combat is a joke. AV said numerous times that their combat was going to be awesome and even went so far as to say it was like Mount and Blades combat. That was an out right lie. LOL! You have one vertical attack and one horizontal attack for melee. Shields cannot actively block anything - they just add to mitigate damage. Not like Mount and Blades where shields really can block swords, arrows and what not. DFO's combat is a joke. The archery in the game sucks. The sounds for the archery sucks. OMG when I played the combat sounds were the worse I'd ever encountered in a game. Anyway, when DFO gets combat like Mount and Blade - then come talk to me. Until then, it is a psuedo FPS wannabe combat. God I should do a review on DFO - I would not be so nice as MMORPG.com was. Game would be lucky to get a 4 from me.
Wow you play on a pvp server in wow, damn that's so cool
Sorry my good man, shields do actively block. "V" is the default button to do this, seems you was to much of a noob to find it. Archery is very good. The FPV system is actually one of the absolut best features in DF, one of the few things the managed to do well. The sounds is awful yes, and there is alot of other stuff wrong with DF also. I know I will get accused for being a fanboy, but the truth is faaaaaar from it.
Well I like the truth of this reviewer..And he said>>Darkfall is a game that is filled with great ideas and good intentions. Darkfall is a game that seems to fall short on just about everything it has, too. For having been in development for so very long, the game simply felt like an early beta build when I played.
To bad he lied on the score of 6..I am sure his real intention would a been allot lower..SO i believe the rating of Euro gamer gave ...a 2/10
Some people rob you at gun point..Others will rob you at "Ball Point Pen"
Maybe because Vanguard was when it launched. I played Vanguard at launch and I happen to get a chance to play DFO a few times on a friends account and vanguard was way more finished and polished compared to DFO. So don't even go there.
Actually, I already went there.
I know how VG was at launch, my point (too subtle I guess) is that there are a few things that people will take as the truth, despite not seeing themselves, and one of those things is that VG was literally unplayable at launch. I know because after doing a Vanguard podcast for a year I heard those people, over and over, even after VG was chugging along just fine: "You mean you can actually PLAY VG?"
In other words, by saying that (the comment about VG) he could have sparked off more "controversy" than anything else he said.
And there is a difference between "polished" and "working." Vanguard STILL has probably more bugs than most games out there. Doesn't mean it's bad, and doesn't mean that it's unplayable (in fact ,the opposite) that just means that it has more than most.
Beau
Listen to the Spouse Aggro podcast at spouseaggro.com. Twitter: spouseaggro
Umm...I play on a PvP server in WoW. DFO's so called FPS type combat is a joke. AV said numerous times that their combat was going to be awesome and even went so far as to say it was like Mount and Blades combat. That was an out right lie. LOL! You have one vertical attack and one horizontal attack for melee. Shields cannot actively block anything - they just add to mitigate damage. Not like Mount and Blades where shields really can block swords, arrows and what not. DFO's combat is a joke. The archery in the game sucks. The sounds for the archery sucks. OMG when I played the combat sounds were the worse I'd ever encountered in a game. Anyway, when DFO gets combat like Mount and Blade - then come talk to me. Until then, it is a psuedo FPS wannabe combat. God I should do a review on DFO - I would not be so nice as MMORPG.com was. Game would be lucky to get a 4 from me.
Wow you play on a pvp server in wow, damn that's so cool
Sorry my good man, shields do actively block. "V" is the default button to do this, seems you was to much of a noob to find it. Archery is very good, you probably have the aim of a 85 year old woman and therefor think the system sucks when it is infact you that sucks. The FPV system is actually one of the absolut best features in DF, one of the few things the managed to do well. The sounds is awful yes, and there is alot of other stuff wrong with DF also. I know I will get accused for being a fanboy, but the truth is faaaaaar from it. I just cant stand morons lie and spreading untrue rumours.
The game changed, they had a rockey launch, name a game that did not? Also name one other game that has conquest/pvp/fps in a mmorpg?
Just for the sake of conversation:
LoTRO was perceived to have a pretty smooth launch. At the time, there were no end of forum posts commenting as much.
As for your second question...perhaps Planetside would fit the bill.
O ya because in planetside you risk a a lot in Pvp, lol only thing that would come close is EVE, and eve's combat gets boring fast, not saying DFO wont either, but atm its nice and the more I get into it the more fun I have.
Only thing that will look remotely like DFO is MO, but that will probably have too much fluff/graphics to have any real large scale battles/conquests.
I would not give DFO a higher then a 7.5 still, but if they made the grind less tedium(and add in a skill cap or prestige classes) and made melee combat more in depth then it would be a 9 TO ME(as for polish who gives a sht, I did not come to play DFO for little wildlife animals, I came here for a competitve game, that you have risk vs reward)
Planetside has everything your original question stated as far as I am aware. If you want to add conditions to your quesiton after asking it, then sure, the looting in EvE is closer. That said, combat in EvE is just about completely opposite of DF. Since combat/PvP is such a significant part of either game, I believe Planetside would be a more direct comparison due to combat mechanics. But hey, just my opinion. You asked two specific questions and got two specific answers.
As far as MO, a lot remains to be seen and it's not really the time to compare it to DF yet. On paper, it sounds like it will give DF a run for its money in some areas. On paper, DF was going to be received a lot better though. Only time will tell....
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers. Do something wrong, no one forgets" -from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
Maybe because Vanguard was when it launched. I played Vanguard at launch and I happen to get a chance to play DFO a few times on a friends account and vanguard was way more finished and polished compared to DFO. So don't even go there.
Actually, I already went there.
I know how VG was at launch, my point (too subtle I guess) is that there are a few things that people will take as the truth, despite not seeing themselves, and one of those things is that VG was literally unplayable at launch. I know because after doing a Vanguard podcast for a year I heard those people, over and over, even after VG was chugging along just fine: "You mean you can actually PLAY VG?"
In other words, by saying that (the comment about VG) he could have sparked off more "controversy" than anything else he said.
And there is a difference between "polished" and "working." Vanguard STILL has probably more bugs than most games out there. Doesn't mean it's bad, and doesn't mean that it's unplayable (in fact ,the opposite) that just means that it has more than most.
Beau
Maybe for you. It played fine on my gaming rig. I even posted fraps vids to prove it back in the day when everyone said it was not playable. So do you really wish to go there. Not only was my gaming rig playing Vanguard, but running fraps at the time. Yet, Vanguard was unplayable. ::shakes her head::
Maybe because Vanguard was when it launched. I played Vanguard at launch and I happen to get a chance to play DFO a few times on a friends account and vanguard was way more finished and polished compared to DFO. So don't even go there.
Actually, I already went there.
I know how VG was at launch, my point (too subtle I guess) is that there are a few things that people will take as the truth, despite not seeing themselves, and one of those things is that VG was literally unplayable at launch. I know because after doing a Vanguard podcast for a year I heard those people, over and over, even after VG was chugging along just fine: "You mean you can actually PLAY VG?"
In other words, by saying that (the comment about VG) he could have sparked off more "controversy" than anything else he said.
And there is a difference between "polished" and "working." Vanguard STILL has probably more bugs than most games out there. Doesn't mean it's bad, and doesn't mean that it's unplayable (in fact ,the opposite) that just means that it has more than most.
Beau
Maybe for you. It played fine on my gaming rig. I even posted fraps vids to prove it back in the day when everyone said it was not playable. So do you really wish to go there. Not only was my gaming rig playing Vanguard, but running fraps at the time. Yet, Vanguard was unplayable. ::shakes her head::
I think you two are on the same team on this one...
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers. Do something wrong, no one forgets" -from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
I have to wonder at the validity of any review from this site. This is compounded by the fact that you have recently changed your review criteria from being set to subjective.
Your older reviews had 8 set values you reviewed and scored. These were:
Graphics
role-play
fun
performance
sound
value
community
service
Now that has been replaced with a rather general pros and cons section. Worse reviews typically do not support the scores you give games. Have you guys actually scored a game badly in the past 6 month... by bad I mean a 4 or less. Even neosteam managed a 6 on your scale. If you refuse to use the whole scale when grading a game then that scale and your review becomes meaningless. TCoS ranked a 7.7 and yet has almost completely failed... one thing not addressed in your review was the fact that the development company was shaky at best. Something that ultimately killed the game.
You did not touch on sound, community, or service in this review. Other criteria like performance, fun, and value were vaguely addressed at the conclusion with nothing substantive about them. For a review that was worked over quite a bit (from a previous mods post responses) it lacked substantive content.
I could care less about what you grade DF as it is all subjective anyways, but I do care if the grading is substantive and above all consistant. You use to have consistancy. Now though you have thrown that away to be more vague. Your reviews seem to be more about appeasing publishers then informing the players.
Please go back to your old criteria and address things like community and service. This latest review was pointless and rather uninformative.
-Atziluth-
- Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
This review was very generous for as serious as many of DFs failings are.
As mentioned before, the comparatively "bad" community and the shady nature of how AV has operated thus far, deserved mention and should be included to offer prospective players more complete information. Those things could be the difference between having someone on the fence get upset for wasting their money or being grateful to this site for stopping them from making a bad purchase.
Beyond debate is that the DF community is one of the worst (not welcoming, not helpful) in recent memory for a newly released game, and that AV and Tasos have gone back on their word about allowing 1 toon per server to 1 toon per acct, forcing NA players on the EU server to shell out another $50 to play on the NA server. Too Bad MMORPG decided to give DF a free pass on those, not even mentioning them in passing.
As a player who only played on other people's accts for a limited time, and considering these overlooked points, this game deserves no better than a 4.
i think Morpg are inteelegent enough to realise that NA players only have to shell out 50 dollars more if they dont have the patience to wait for transfers friend...so why would they mention it lol? look up previous forum threads and youll find thats been exhausted...even more so now that Tasos has came and anounced that its looking like they might not need any restrictions on transfers But you can understand why they didnt mention it.
Im suprised that after 3 months he didnt mention raiding and sieging though! i mean arent they meant to be this games selling points?
/agree Reviewers are soo afraid of a hellstorm because of they predominantly are a business. If they give a too low score then they are afraid to piss of the fans so they don't come back to mmorpg.com or piss of companies that could potentially bring in revenue i the future. Giving a game like Darkfall with antiquated graphics, lame gameplay mechanics and total lack of pve a 6 is a joke.
They aren't afraid of "pissing off fans." lol
If you think that, you haven't seen some of the things they feature, write, or link to. I mean, in this very article he basically says that Vanguard had more polish than Darkfall. If that isn't asking for players to respond strongly, I don't know what is.
Beau
Because they know a rave review or anything remotely like it would spark even more hate on the forums. I really doubt anyone can seriously give it a 6 / 10 if you aren't a diehard fan.
Look at this:
Final Score
6
Acceptable
Pros
Good concepts
Non-Standard design
Well designed world
Cons
Clunky controls
Huge lack of polish
Little content
Very niche audience
Very poor interface
Consider:
What game could possibly then get a 1, 2 or 3? Or even a four or five?
This is not serious reviewing.
Um let me count the ways....Superman 64 for the Nintendo 64, Castlevania 64, Several "Myst" games, And probably a host of other F2P MMOs.
Oh and lets not forget the worst made game of all time: E.T. for the Atari 2600.
So yeah, the 6 was a bit generous, but then again, the game does exactly what it was designed to do, which is provide a place for all those gankers to go and run around naked.
They aren't afraid of "pissing off fans." lol If you think that, you haven't seen some of the things they feature, write, or link to. I mean, in this very article he basically says that Vanguard had more polish than Darkfall. If that isn't asking for players to respond strongly, I don't know what is.
Beau
Because they know a rave review or anything remotely like it would spark even more hate on the forums. I really doubt anyone can seriously give it a 6 / 10 if you aren't a diehard fan.
Look at this:
Final Score
6
Acceptable
Pros
Good concepts
Non-Standard design
Well designed world
Cons
Clunky controls
Huge lack of polish
Little content
Very niche audience
Very poor interface
Consider:
What game could possibly then get a 1, 2 or 3? Or even a four or five?
This is not serious reviewing.
Exactly.
i mean he put in the pros Good concepts and Non-standard design, come on those two points are the most vague pro i have ever read.
And anyway how good concepts can be a pro when in the review it's clear that those concepts failed to be applied into the game?
I think it deserves at least 1 more point for making these forums what they are! if it wasn't for darkfall these forums would be boring so it's official
Comments
Just for the sake of conversation:
LoTRO was perceived to have a pretty smooth launch. At the time, there were no end of forum posts commenting as much.
As for your second question...perhaps Planetside would fit the bill.
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers.
Do something wrong, no one forgets"
-from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
Just for the sake of conversation:
LoTRO was perceived to have a pretty smooth launch. At the time, there were no end of forum posts commenting as much.
As for your second question...perhaps Planetside would fit the bill.
O ya because in planetside you risk a a lot in Pvp, lol only thing that would come close is EVE, and eve's combat gets boring fast, not saying DFO wont either, but atm its nice and the more I get into it the more fun I have.
Only thing that will look remotely like DFO is MO, but that will probably have too much fluff/graphics to have any real large scale battles/conquests.
I would not give DFO a higher then a 7.5 still, but if they made the grind less tedium(and add in a skill cap or prestige classes) and made melee combat more in depth then it would be a 9 TO ME(as for polish who gives a sht, I did not come to play DFO for little wildlife animals, I came here for a competitve game, that you have risk vs reward)
Right because 6 for you is based on nice and pretty butterfly worlds and no actual gameplay or risk.
People who like conquest, PVP, FPS, will like this game.
Only thing I think needs changing, is a few mechanics, the grind(or skill cap added) and more depth in melee combat.
Everything else is perfect to me, I did not come here to "Quest" for you mentioning that you should hear the line GO BACK TO WOW.
I'd stay away from making broad comments as you'll usually find you're wrong. I like conquest, PvP and FPS games but I don't like Darkfall. And yes, I've played it to know that I don't like it.
I wonder if you are one of those unlucky ones that had it the first month, or played in beta. Lol the game changed, and judging by a lot of the comments in this thread it seems, most of them have not played it the last few months.
The game changed, they had a rockey launch, name a game that did not?
Also name one other game that has conquest/pvp/fps in a mmorpg?
Sorry but this is another carebear OPINION, which has no siege or raiding, no talking about combat on mounts, archery, killing dragons, fighting on boats/war hulks, sorry but this is a premature review from a flawed reviewer.
I played the first month, yeah. I can't think of another MMORPG that has conquest. PvP and a mandatory FPV. Which is why it's a shame for me. If it had had the production pocketbook (money) of a AAA company it would have been more polished and I'd probably be still playing.
As for the reviewer's opinion, it's his opinion. No need to flame him because you disagree. The way you're sounding the only thing you'd accept is a non-critical review of the game with a 9 or 10 rating. Truth be told, the game does have many flaws and is not polished (and I say is because AoC taught us that in truth there are no miracle patches). Is it playable and enjoyable for some? Sure. You like it. That's cool. But just because someone else doesn't, calling them "carebear" doesn't prove anything about them or invalidate their opinion. Just makes you look bad, that's all. *shrug*
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
I have to totally disagree with this. WoW's graphics are stylized and very well done. The animations are top notch compared to most MMORPG's - because Blizzard reworks them if necessary to get them right. I've played DFO and the animations are not fluid and sometimes down right ugly. DFO is a good game, but it is nothing to brag about.
Show me anything in DFO that comes close to being this cool and you win.
Bigger Pic <<< clicky here
Graphics or 100 vs 100 combat, let me choose, O here is a fun fact DFO IS A PVP game lol.
Umm...I play on a PvP server in WoW. DFO's so called FPS type combat is a joke. AV said numerous times that their combat was going to be awesome and even went so far as to say it was like Mount and Blades combat. That was an out right lie. LOL! You have one vertical attack and one horizontal attack for melee. Shields cannot actively block anything - they just add to mitigate damage. Not like Mount and Blades where shields really can block swords, arrows and what not. DFO's combat is a joke. The archery in the game sucks. The sounds for the archery sucks. OMG when I played the combat sounds were the worse I'd ever encountered in a game. Anyway, when DFO gets combat like Mount and Blade - then come talk to me. Until then, it is a psuedo FPS wannabe combat.
God I should do a review on DFO - I would not be so nice as MMORPG.com was. Game would be lucky to get a 4 from me.
I have to totally disagree with this. WoW's graphics are stylized and very well done. The animations are top notch compared to most MMORPG's - because Blizzard reworks them if necessary to get them right. I've played DFO and the animations are not fluid and sometimes down right ugly. DFO is a good game, but it is nothing to brag about.
Show me anything in DFO that comes close to being this cool and you win.
Bigger Pic <<< clicky here
Graphics or 100 vs 100 combat, let me choose, O here is a fun fact DFO IS A PVP game lol.
Umm...I play on a PvP server in WoW. DFO's so called FPS type combat is a joke. AV said numerous times that their combat was going to be awesome and even went so far as to say it was like Mount and Blades combat. That was an out right lie. LOL! You have one vertical attack and one horizontal attack for melee. Shields cannot actively block anything - they just add to mitigate damage. Not like Mount and Blades where shields really can block swords, arrows and what not. DFO's combat is a joke. The archery in the game sucks. The sounds for the archery sucks. OMG when I played the combat sounds were the worse I'd ever encountered in a game. Anyway, when DFO gets combat like Mount and Blade - then come talk to me. Until then, it is a psuedo FPS wannabe combat.
God I should do a review on DFO - I would not be so nice as MMORPG.com was. Game would be lucky to get a 4 from me.
Lol if I rated WOW I would call it the dullest game alive? your point? we both have different opinions, ya melee is not in depth, and it does screw up the immersion, but for people who say it does not take skills are ignorant. And for the above you poster, No wonder why you though DFO was a disaster, no doubt they released it way to early.
Try Na now, lots have changed, have you fought on a mount with DFO btw? lol dont know what mount and blade is like, but the mount combat is extremely skillful, and archery is too, magic is skillful up to a extent, unless you got those giant AOE's but those do only do good damage when you have a group of 10 casting them at other groups.
I bet most of you are basing dfo combat off the 2her combat, which is why you premature review this game, It needs work, and they changed and fixed a lot, but How long was it before EVE actually had a large playerbase and started getting reviews pass 5-6?
retract fast mate or you take the risk of talking about something you dont have a clue about...shilesd block around 95% damage, which is like taking a hit from a 40 kilo sowrd in real life and catching it on a shiled...Fact is it will still hurt you
so give AV credit for that one!
Very good review, best I have read on MMORPG for a looong time.
My gaming blog
No...sorry. Want to compare how Mount and Blade handles combat and DFO handles combat. Play Mount and Blade and tell me it is the same as DFO. Because it isn't even close. LOL!
Here...download and try Mount and Blade <<< download here.
Sorry DFO's and Mount and Blades combat are not the same and shields in DFO are not like shields in Mount and Blade.
No...sorry. Want to compare how Mount and Blade handles combat and DFO handles combat. Play Mount and Blade and tell me it is the same as DFO. Because it isn't even close. LOL!
Here...download and try Mount and Blade <<< download here.
Sorry DFO's and Mount and Blades combat are not the same and shields in DFO are not like shields in Mount and Blade.
Not saying they are friend sorry if i came across like that.
I just meant that the shields usage in DF is rather well done and quite realistic in game terms. sorryi came across wrong
Wow you play on a pvp server in wow, damn that's so cool
Sorry my good man, shields do actively block. "V" is the default button to do this, seems you was to much of a noob to find it. Archery is very good. The FPV system is actually one of the absolut best features in DF, one of the few things the managed to do well. The sounds is awful yes, and there is alot of other stuff wrong with DF also. I know I will get accused for being a fanboy, but the truth is faaaaaar from it.
{ Mod Edit }
Bingolotto
Well I like the truth of this reviewer..And he said>>Darkfall is a game that is filled with great ideas and good intentions. Darkfall is a game that seems to fall short on just about everything it has, too. For having been in development for so very long, the game simply felt like an early beta build when I played.
To bad he lied on the score of 6..I am sure his real intention would a been allot lower..SO i believe the rating of Euro gamer gave ...a 2/10
Some people rob you at gun point..Others will rob you at "Ball Point Pen"
Maybe because Vanguard was when it launched. I played Vanguard at launch and I happen to get a chance to play DFO a few times on a friends account and vanguard was way more finished and polished compared to DFO. So don't even go there.
Actually, I already went there.
I know how VG was at launch, my point (too subtle I guess) is that there are a few things that people will take as the truth, despite not seeing themselves, and one of those things is that VG was literally unplayable at launch. I know because after doing a Vanguard podcast for a year I heard those people, over and over, even after VG was chugging along just fine: "You mean you can actually PLAY VG?"
In other words, by saying that (the comment about VG) he could have sparked off more "controversy" than anything else he said.
And there is a difference between "polished" and "working." Vanguard STILL has probably more bugs than most games out there. Doesn't mean it's bad, and doesn't mean that it's unplayable (in fact ,the opposite) that just means that it has more than most.
Beau
Listen to the Spouse Aggro podcast at spouseaggro.com. Twitter: spouseaggro
Nice generous score of 6. So this game falls in-between a 2 like poop from Eurogamer and 6, as in mediocre, from mmorpg.com.
That about sums up the breadth, depth, and content for this experiment in shadyness and scam called Darkfall.
Wow you play on a pvp server in wow, damn that's so cool
Sorry my good man, shields do actively block. "V" is the default button to do this, seems you was to much of a noob to find it. Archery is very good, you probably have the aim of a 85 year old woman and therefor think the system sucks when it is infact you that sucks. The FPV system is actually one of the absolut best features in DF, one of the few things the managed to do well. The sounds is awful yes, and there is alot of other stuff wrong with DF also. I know I will get accused for being a fanboy, but the truth is faaaaaar from it. I just cant stand morons lie and spreading untrue rumours.
LOL! I am dying here.
Just for the sake of conversation:
LoTRO was perceived to have a pretty smooth launch. At the time, there were no end of forum posts commenting as much.
As for your second question...perhaps Planetside would fit the bill.
O ya because in planetside you risk a a lot in Pvp, lol only thing that would come close is EVE, and eve's combat gets boring fast, not saying DFO wont either, but atm its nice and the more I get into it the more fun I have.
Only thing that will look remotely like DFO is MO, but that will probably have too much fluff/graphics to have any real large scale battles/conquests.
I would not give DFO a higher then a 7.5 still, but if they made the grind less tedium(and add in a skill cap or prestige classes) and made melee combat more in depth then it would be a 9 TO ME(as for polish who gives a sht, I did not come to play DFO for little wildlife animals, I came here for a competitve game, that you have risk vs reward)
Planetside has everything your original question stated as far as I am aware. If you want to add conditions to your quesiton after asking it, then sure, the looting in EvE is closer. That said, combat in EvE is just about completely opposite of DF. Since combat/PvP is such a significant part of either game, I believe Planetside would be a more direct comparison due to combat mechanics. But hey, just my opinion. You asked two specific questions and got two specific answers.
As far as MO, a lot remains to be seen and it's not really the time to compare it to DF yet. On paper, it sounds like it will give DF a run for its money in some areas. On paper, DF was going to be received a lot better though. Only time will tell....
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers.
Do something wrong, no one forgets"
-from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
Maybe because Vanguard was when it launched. I played Vanguard at launch and I happen to get a chance to play DFO a few times on a friends account and vanguard was way more finished and polished compared to DFO. So don't even go there.
Actually, I already went there.
I know how VG was at launch, my point (too subtle I guess) is that there are a few things that people will take as the truth, despite not seeing themselves, and one of those things is that VG was literally unplayable at launch. I know because after doing a Vanguard podcast for a year I heard those people, over and over, even after VG was chugging along just fine: "You mean you can actually PLAY VG?"
In other words, by saying that (the comment about VG) he could have sparked off more "controversy" than anything else he said.
And there is a difference between "polished" and "working." Vanguard STILL has probably more bugs than most games out there. Doesn't mean it's bad, and doesn't mean that it's unplayable (in fact ,the opposite) that just means that it has more than most.
Beau
Maybe for you. It played fine on my gaming rig. I even posted fraps vids to prove it back in the day when everyone said it was not playable. So do you really wish to go there. Not only was my gaming rig playing Vanguard, but running fraps at the time. Yet, Vanguard was unplayable. ::shakes her head::
Maybe because Vanguard was when it launched. I played Vanguard at launch and I happen to get a chance to play DFO a few times on a friends account and vanguard was way more finished and polished compared to DFO. So don't even go there.
Actually, I already went there.
I know how VG was at launch, my point (too subtle I guess) is that there are a few things that people will take as the truth, despite not seeing themselves, and one of those things is that VG was literally unplayable at launch. I know because after doing a Vanguard podcast for a year I heard those people, over and over, even after VG was chugging along just fine: "You mean you can actually PLAY VG?"
In other words, by saying that (the comment about VG) he could have sparked off more "controversy" than anything else he said.
And there is a difference between "polished" and "working." Vanguard STILL has probably more bugs than most games out there. Doesn't mean it's bad, and doesn't mean that it's unplayable (in fact ,the opposite) that just means that it has more than most.
Beau
Maybe for you. It played fine on my gaming rig. I even posted fraps vids to prove it back in the day when everyone said it was not playable. So do you really wish to go there. Not only was my gaming rig playing Vanguard, but running fraps at the time. Yet, Vanguard was unplayable. ::shakes her head::
I think you two are on the same team on this one...
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers.
Do something wrong, no one forgets"
-from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
I have to wonder at the validity of any review from this site. This is compounded by the fact that you have recently changed your review criteria from being set to subjective.
Your older reviews had 8 set values you reviewed and scored. These were:
Graphics
role-play
fun
performance
sound
value
community
service
Now that has been replaced with a rather general pros and cons section. Worse reviews typically do not support the scores you give games. Have you guys actually scored a game badly in the past 6 month... by bad I mean a 4 or less. Even neosteam managed a 6 on your scale. If you refuse to use the whole scale when grading a game then that scale and your review becomes meaningless. TCoS ranked a 7.7 and yet has almost completely failed... one thing not addressed in your review was the fact that the development company was shaky at best. Something that ultimately killed the game.
You did not touch on sound, community, or service in this review. Other criteria like performance, fun, and value were vaguely addressed at the conclusion with nothing substantive about them. For a review that was worked over quite a bit (from a previous mods post responses) it lacked substantive content.
I could care less about what you grade DF as it is all subjective anyways, but I do care if the grading is substantive and above all consistant. You use to have consistancy. Now though you have thrown that away to be more vague. Your reviews seem to be more about appeasing publishers then informing the players.
Please go back to your old criteria and address things like community and service. This latest review was pointless and rather uninformative.
-Atziluth-
- Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
This review was very generous for as serious as many of DFs failings are.
As mentioned before, the comparatively "bad" community and the shady nature of how AV has operated thus far, deserved mention and should be included to offer prospective players more complete information. Those things could be the difference between having someone on the fence get upset for wasting their money or being grateful to this site for stopping them from making a bad purchase.
Beyond debate is that the DF community is one of the worst (not welcoming, not helpful) in recent memory for a newly released game, and that AV and Tasos have gone back on their word about allowing 1 toon per server to 1 toon per acct, forcing NA players on the EU server to shell out another $50 to play on the NA server. Too Bad MMORPG decided to give DF a free pass on those, not even mentioning them in passing.
As a player who only played on other people's accts for a limited time, and considering these overlooked points, this game deserves no better than a 4.
i think Morpg are inteelegent enough to realise that NA players only have to shell out 50 dollars more if they dont have the patience to wait for transfers friend...so why would they mention it lol? look up previous forum threads and youll find thats been exhausted...even more so now that Tasos has came and anounced that its looking like they might not need any restrictions on transfers
But you can understand why they didnt mention it.
Im suprised that after 3 months he didnt mention raiding and sieging though! i mean arent they meant to be this games selling points?
lol or not, u know nothign about Darkfall. I am sure u never played it..
First of all you have more then 2 kind of mele strikes
- Normal attack (horizontal and vertical)
- Power strike (affecting with DOT, but the effect is different for the differnet kind of weapons )
- Knockback attack (makes your opponent jump back when u hit him)
- Whirlwind attack (character spins arround hitting all nearby targets)
- Seize attack (pulling the enemy towards you)
you have this strikes for all weapons..
- Blocking DO WORK! ..and works very well if you know how to save stamina. Some people say its overpowered, because drains stamina of the attacker..
- Archery sucks?? its exactly like on Mount and Blade so wtf you complain about?? .. its the best skill in the game
- Magic: fireballs, wall of fire, acid rain, buffs and stamina/mana/health management spell makes every battle different!
but i guess all this menace nothing to you since you never played the game....why are you talking about something you obviously have no idea about??
They aren't afraid of "pissing off fans." lol
If you think that, you haven't seen some of the things they feature, write, or link to. I mean, in this very article he basically says that Vanguard had more polish than Darkfall. If that isn't asking for players to respond strongly, I don't know what is.
Beau
Because they know a rave review or anything remotely like it would spark even more hate on the forums. I really doubt anyone can seriously give it a 6 / 10 if you aren't a diehard fan.
Look at this:
Final Score
6
Acceptable
Pros
Good concepts
Non-Standard design
Well designed world
Cons
Clunky controls
Huge lack of polish
Little content
Very niche audience
Very poor interface
Consider:
What game could possibly then get a 1, 2 or 3? Or even a four or five?
This is not serious reviewing.
Um let me count the ways....Superman 64 for the Nintendo 64, Castlevania 64, Several "Myst" games, And probably a host of other F2P MMOs.
Oh and lets not forget the worst made game of all time: E.T. for the Atari 2600.
So yeah, the 6 was a bit generous, but then again, the game does exactly what it was designed to do, which is provide a place for all those gankers to go and run around naked.
Because they know a rave review or anything remotely like it would spark even more hate on the forums. I really doubt anyone can seriously give it a 6 / 10 if you aren't a diehard fan.
Look at this:
Final Score
6
Acceptable
Pros
Good concepts
Non-Standard design
Well designed world
Cons
Clunky controls
Huge lack of polish
Little content
Very niche audience
Very poor interface
Consider:
What game could possibly then get a 1, 2 or 3? Or even a four or five?
This is not serious reviewing.
Exactly.
i mean he put in the pros Good concepts and Non-standard design, come on those two points are the most vague pro i have ever read.
And anyway how good concepts can be a pro when in the review it's clear that those concepts failed to be applied into the game?
If it's a niche game why not rate it for the niche audience? I would give this game an 8. I absolutely love it.
Of course it gets low scores from places that rate WOW high.
The Official God FAQ
I think it deserves at least 1 more point for making these forums what they are! if it wasn't for darkfall these forums would be boring so it's official
Darkfall scored 7!