Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
End of Nations: Gamer's Day Preview
SBFord
Former Associate EditorMember LegendaryPosts: 33,129
MMORPG.com's own Community Manager Mike Bitton recently had the opportunity to visit the Trion World headquarters in San Francisco. As part of the Gamer's Day visit, Mike got the chance for a hands on look at this groundbreaking MMORTS currently in development at Petroglyph Games.
Following a short introduction by Trion senior producer Gary Wagner, we jumped feet first into the game and created level 15 template characters to check out one of two PvE scenarios we were to be shown that day. The first scenario was set in Magadan, Russia and I opted for an artillery commander. I didn’t find that to be such a great choice as it seemed more geared towards group play than solo play and I basically roamed around the quite large map and did quests for the contacts there. Quests ran the gamut from placing a flare down to mark a location for helicopters to secure, to investigating the downed wreckage of a Chinook helicopter and dealing with the enemies that were inevitably waiting there.
Read Mike's End of Nations preview.
Comments
This looks searing, red hot and could make Starcraft look very small. I really like it.
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
Even though the game looks interesting am leary of playing a MMO type game that has pvp due to human nature of players who do not like to lose and will do anything to win including up to the use of using any type of cheating and exploitation of game mechanics.
Thumbs up for this one.
That isn't so much a problem with the PvP it's self, but rather with developers not taking the proper steps, and remain nimble enough to deal with these issues quickly and effectively.
To be honest, what good would a game like this be WITHOUT PvP? I don't think anyone I know would even both if it was not a PvP game. I am personally looking forward to it, a change of pace in MMO's is a good thing.
- Ice_Hole
Looks promising, I've always wanted to play a good MMORTS.
Yet another grand example of "MMO" being abused by RTS and FPS companies to make extra buck.
I'll say this louder so it makers a larger impact this time: THIS IS NOT AN MMO AND SHOULD NOT BE ON THIS SITE. WOULD YOU PLEASE DO YOUR FLIPPIN JOBS?!?!
Thank You /bow
The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity:
Having a different opinion must mean you're a troll.
i guess you could say its a combination of world in conflict and global agenda.
Even though i like both games and still play them occasionally i couldnt say they are really mmo`s.
Even though it has alot(all) multiplayer play, it stays limited.
Nevertheless sounds like a fun game, but if its a completly subscription based game i don`t think its gonna hold all that long.
(maybe go the global agenda way on that)
Wait a minute
You than choose Quick Match option ?!?!
So this is just another glorified battlenet game that calls its self MMO
LOL
Let me guess. They will start with subs, and than change it to sub free in 2 months
"can only bring a certain number of units" - does not sound very RTS to me... more like DoW2.
I've been waiting for good MMORTS games for a long time now. This might be it!
Yep, i won't be paying a monthly sub for a simple co-op RTS with a few persistent levels and skills on top...
And i'll bet that the old Shattered Galaxy (approaching 10 years now) with its 50 players skirmishes and conquerable territories will have far more MMO features than EoN...
What the fuck is a MMORTS?
Its an RTS and dosent belong to this site. I dont see any RTS department here, would be nice if you fixed one, but there isnt at the moment.
if its half of good as shattered galaxy was its time definitely going to try. God i miss shattered galaxy.
Yep, just another multiplayer game attempting to ride on the coat tails of the MMO genre. MMORPG might as well admit they are becoming a general gaming site, they seem to cover everything lately that has multiplayer anywhere in the description.
Where is the Diablo III discussion? It most certainly fits what they cover on this board better than this stuff?
Or, the term MMO (MMG really) is changing and has been changing for years. MMO does not imply seamless, never has.
End of Nations Trailer
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
The distinction is blured as to what a MMO is, you need a lot of players and persistance, but exactly how many and how much is open to debate. This game does seem to fall on the wrong side of the fence from what I can gather mind you.
Looks awesome, I loved World in Conflict and this seems to be the same kind of idea. Hopefully its executed properly.
As for the elitists complaining about the watering down of "their" genre, let me call you a waaambulance. This game has pesistance, character advancement, large amounts of players playing together (it might be a smaller number than RPG games, but still a large number for standard RTS ones), what about it isn't an MMO? The attitude from the purists on this site is disgusting, NOTHING is an MMO unless it involves Elves and Orcs autoattacking each other while mashing number keys apparently.
Persistent world, persist stats, persistent accounts, 51 players per map (maps are persistent as any other), advancement system, PvE, PvP, territory control, raids, quests.
How is it not by any version of the definition?
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
Doesnt starcraft 2 offer the same principles for no monthly fee?
No... not even close...
51 players per map is less tham you can get in a Battlefield scenario. But good to see all the stats etc are persistant. What about territorial gains are they persistant too?
You can stretch your definition any way you like, but the differences between this game and Starcraft are minimal. They are both multiplayer RTS games. And you can bet that this game won't be even close to as good as Starcraft or the Command and Conquer series. While these games always look good on paper, the actual implementation tends to bring us back to reality.
[quote]
Originally posted by Ozmodan
You should look up who is making this game. (Small hint, West + Wood + Joseph Bostic ) You should also read up on its features before commenting.
If its good or not, is something we will have to see about when its out, but the stuff you are saying and doing right now to discredit the title, is retarded.
This isn't a FPS, its an RTS and most of those only support 8 players.
End of Nations Developer Diary #1
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
"These scenarios often offer a variety of quests that are pushed to you frequently and can be completed cooperatively with many players."
The question is HOW MANY PLAYERS.
But I think an MMORTS is impossible to do anyway, let's wait and see how the PVP turns out.
Obviously it's not going to have more then 20 players on one realtime map because the frame rate would drop to zero with all those units, not to mention connection lag with all those units. Let's hope a server has one big world map on which you can conquer pieces alone or with a clan in realtime on pieces of that map. Like (singleplayer) Dune 2 had.
Its like you didn't watch any of the videos i linked.
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me