› ›

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Quick Links

Rift : The Aion Effect

13

Comments

  • holifeetholifeet Member Posts: 532

    Originally posted by Qazz

    Originally posted by holifeet

    Originally posted by Qazz

    Back to the OP's point:

    Here is the plight of any new AAA mmorpg: They will always have too many servers to start out in order to make the game playable for all the people who want to try the game.  If they are smart, they will have a plan in place to bring the servers down to a manageable number once the initial rush is over with.

    I'm also hoping that the MMORPG community in general will stop seeing server retraction as a 'failure' but a normal process in the life-cycle of any mmorpg.  WoW is the exception, not the standard people.

    But it is a failure, isn't it? If a game can't hold on to the attraction it grabs in the first month then haven't they done something wrong? WAR was a fun game for the first month, then everyone left. The game has rightly been classed as a disappointment because they did something wrong in not being able to keep ahold of those people. WAR was fun because it had a population, but it had problems because things had perhaps not been thought out and people left for that reason. The game didn't maximise its potential and had to cut servers. That doesn't equal success in my mind.

    I can argue that if you lose just 10% of the first month's player base then that's akin to trimming the head off your beer. You're not losing anything substantial. But games aren't losing that 10%. They're losing more and whether Rift loses 10% or more is yet to be seen.

    If Rift loses more than 10% then can you really call it a success? Yet to be seen, like I say.

    Let's go with your definition of success.  There has only been one success in the history of the genre.

    No. I'm talking about losing more than 10% early on in the game's life. Maybe I didn't explain that well enough. Everquest was a huge success. It kept you playing. WoW keeps people playing because it did things different. These modern MMOs never do anything different and that's why they'll lose bucketloads of subs early, and why servers need to be drastically cut straight after the first month.

    All hail the Pixel, for it is glorious Orange!
    .
  • holifeetholifeet Member Posts: 532

    Originally posted by Naral

    My only question is why do people who dislike Rift (or any other game for that matter)  spend SOooooo damn much time worrying about them on this site?  You don't like it, fine, go look at porn or play another game maybe? You do like it, fine, play it and have fun,  but don't forget to make time for porn. 

    Troll responsibly.

    Well I speak for myself when I say i'm fed up of being misled. Never once did Trion come out and make it clear what direction Rift was going in. We even had the amiable Russ Brown telling fans that quest hand holding was not something Trion wanted in Rift.

    I had strong hopes for Rift. I know I shouldn't follow games so closely and lump so much hope on one title but the team gave me that belief. Trion have amassed a huge amount of talent and had such a strong working plan that something really original could have been made here. They really could have made Rift something to stand up and take note of, but they wasted all those resources and all that talent on making another linear and dull MMO the likes of which has been seen a dozen times in the last 6 years.

    It could have been so much better. I'm just fed up of this genre being dumbed down and repeated ad infinitum. THe more I say it, then perhaps there's more chance that developers might take note. ArenaNet seem to have realised where this genre needs to go...in that they're altering the make up of MMOs...and if Trion had done that with the talent they have we could be talking about something really special. It makes me sad that this isn't.

    And I'm not saying it's not a well made game. It is, but it's so lightweight and pale in comparison to what Rift could have been.

    If you want to grab the WoW crowd then you have to make something as absorbing as WoW was to many. Rift isn't that.

    All hail the Pixel, for it is glorious Orange!
    .
  • bleyzwunbleyzwun Member UncommonPosts: 1,087

    Originally posted by Sovrath

    I don't doubt that it will sell more "boxes" at the outset only to have the population drop to a more realistic level but I think you are thinking too much like a gamer.

    People don't care about "new". They don't. They care about things being repackaged and reworked so that they are new but familiar.

    There is absolutely no evidence, looking at movies, books, music that the average person is really looking for anything that brings something "new" to any genre.

    And from the looks of it Trion is not marketing to gamers but more to the average person who might be more inclined to play a game like WoW over something that is "new".

    Maybe most people don't care, but I do.  I tried the Rift beta and it felt too similar to every other MMO, so I decided not to get it.  A friend bought me DCUO and it's different enough that I'm enjoying myself.  It might not be different from all video games, but it's pretty fresh for a MMO. 

     

    I also had more fun in Aion than I did in Rift.  Maybe I will check it out again sometime in the future. 

  • MesfenlirMesfenlir Member Posts: 208

    Op is worried about rift killing whats left of western aion. Dont worry rift is not the enemy..... TERA IS

    Aion was not my cup of tea; too grindy, horrible crafting, classy clothes ;) , worst playerbase I had ever encounter, and the graphics were.... well I must recognize characters were extremely well made as for the world: mostly painted, empty scenarios no thanks. 

    Dying and losing my precious abyss points? not for me sorry.

    Aion now is mostly a gankfest; big fishes eating the little ones in a small pond that is.

    Rift is a WESTERN MMO I repeat a WESTERN MMO. 

    Ony thing I really miss is the lack of rvr... but Who knows? Maybe guys at trion are ready to add some.

    I predict will be an instant smash hit. Above 700k boxes sold first month. Next two months 400k and by end of the year it will have a 300k population.

    But under 100k? you must be kidding, WAR still has some 60-70k and its a complete disaster. 

    They never delivered a solid and stable game. At least trion are doing it.

    Btw warhammer online players like this game it will be like a 2 home for them. 

    Read their forums

  • QazzQazz Member Posts: 577

    Originally posted by holifeet

    Originally posted by Qazz

    Originally posted by holifeet

    Originally posted by Qazz

    Back to the OP's point:

    Here is the plight of any new AAA mmorpg: They will always have too many servers to start out in order to make the game playable for all the people who want to try the game.  If they are smart, they will have a plan in place to bring the servers down to a manageable number once the initial rush is over with.

    I'm also hoping that the MMORPG community in general will stop seeing server retraction as a 'failure' but a normal process in the life-cycle of any mmorpg.  WoW is the exception, not the standard people.

    But it is a failure, isn't it? If a game can't hold on to the attraction it grabs in the first month then haven't they done something wrong? WAR was a fun game for the first month, then everyone left. The game has rightly been classed as a disappointment because they did something wrong in not being able to keep ahold of those people. WAR was fun because it had a population, but it had problems because things had perhaps not been thought out and people left for that reason. The game didn't maximise its potential and had to cut servers. That doesn't equal success in my mind.

    I can argue that if you lose just 10% of the first month's player base then that's akin to trimming the head off your beer. You're not losing anything substantial. But games aren't losing that 10%. They're losing more and whether Rift loses 10% or more is yet to be seen.

    If Rift loses more than 10% then can you really call it a success? Yet to be seen, like I say.

    Let's go with your definition of success.  There has only been one success in the history of the genre.

    No. I'm talking about losing more than 10% early on in the game's life. Maybe I didn't explain that well enough. Everquest was a huge success. It kept you playing. WoW keeps people playing because it did things different. These modern MMOs never do anything different and that's why they'll lose bucketloads of subs early, and why servers need to be drastically cut straight after the first month.

    The OP used Aion in the title, so let's use those numbers.  Comparing worldwide subscription numbers, EQ has anywhere between 150k-300k subs.  Aion has 3 million.  

    Now, according to your logic, EQ is a success because it did not have more than 10% decline after the first month, and Aion did.  The problem is that Aion sold several hundered thousand more boxes than EQ did at launch.  The target market is much much larger than it was when EQ launched, so there are more people trying more games.  

    The bottom line: The percentage of retention is inconsequential to the final success of the game.  This only shows how good the marketing was.  However, the number of subs IS what's important because it shows how much revenue a game is generating for a studio and how much future development that game will receivein the future.

    I maintain that ANY mmo that makes more money than it costs to run, is a success.

  • Cik_AsalinCik_Asalin Member Posts: 3,033

    Originally posted by x0eclipse

    The same thing that happened to Aion will happen to Rift. 

     *snip blah blah blah*

     Call me a troll or whatever im just calling it now.

    . . .so millions still enjoy Aion. . .and like other mmo's they did lose origonal subscribers, but sustained alot.  The same will happen with Rift?  Thanks captain obvious?

  • KilmarKilmar Member UncommonPosts: 844

    Wow Cataclysm:

    1) Nothing new to the genre

    2) Initial record box sales

    3) Then player exodus

     

    At least Rift has modern graphics :P

  • holifeetholifeet Member Posts: 532

    Originally posted by Qazz

    Originally posted by holifeet

    Originally posted by Qazz

    Originally posted by holifeet

    Originally posted by Qazz

    Back to the OP's point:

    Here is the plight of any new AAA mmorpg: They will always have too many servers to start out in order to make the game playable for all the people who want to try the game.  If they are smart, they will have a plan in place to bring the servers down to a manageable number once the initial rush is over with.

    I'm also hoping that the MMORPG community in general will stop seeing server retraction as a 'failure' but a normal process in the life-cycle of any mmorpg.  WoW is the exception, not the standard people.

    But it is a failure, isn't it? If a game can't hold on to the attraction it grabs in the first month then haven't they done something wrong? WAR was a fun game for the first month, then everyone left. The game has rightly been classed as a disappointment because they did something wrong in not being able to keep ahold of those people. WAR was fun because it had a population, but it had problems because things had perhaps not been thought out and people left for that reason. The game didn't maximise its potential and had to cut servers. That doesn't equal success in my mind.

    I can argue that if you lose just 10% of the first month's player base then that's akin to trimming the head off your beer. You're not losing anything substantial. But games aren't losing that 10%. They're losing more and whether Rift loses 10% or more is yet to be seen.

    If Rift loses more than 10% then can you really call it a success? Yet to be seen, like I say.

    Let's go with your definition of success.  There has only been one success in the history of the genre.

    No. I'm talking about losing more than 10% early on in the game's life. Maybe I didn't explain that well enough. Everquest was a huge success. It kept you playing. WoW keeps people playing because it did things different. These modern MMOs never do anything different and that's why they'll lose bucketloads of subs early, and why servers need to be drastically cut straight after the first month.

    The OP used Aion in the title, so let's use those numbers.  Comparing worldwide subscription numbers, EQ has anywhere between 150k-300k subs.  Aion has 3 million.  

    Now, according to your logic, EQ is a success because it did not have more than 10% decline after the first month, and Aion did.  The problem is that Aion sold several hundered thousand more boxes than EQ did at launch.  The target market is much much larger than it was when EQ launched, so there are more people trying more games.  

    The bottom line: The percentage of retention is inconsequential to the final success of the game.  This only shows how good the marketing was.  However, the number of subs IS what's important because it shows how much revenue a game is generating for a studio and how much future development that game will receivein the future.

    I maintain that ANY mmo that makes more money than it costs to run, is a success.

    A game can make back the money it costs to make in the sale of boxes alone. If no one comes back after the first free month then does that make the game a sucess?

    To me whether a game is a sucess or not needs to be judged in more ways that just that. Is the game talked about as a genre changer would be one such way. In that I'd class such titles as Everquest, WoW, UO, EVE and even SWG. There are otherfactors though. It could never be as simple as asking if a game made money.

    If Rift falls off the map in 3 to 6 months it might possibly have made a nice, hefty profit but could it then be called successful for what it has achieved? WAR undoubtedly made it's money back, but do people consider the game a major success? I think it's considered a bit of a failure. More so when you compare it to the success achieved with DAoC.

    All hail the Pixel, for it is glorious Orange!
    .
  • HalandirHalandir Member UncommonPosts: 773

    Even if this has turned into another "clonewar" I think the OP is right to some extent.

    There is a chance a lot of the initial subs will leave 1-3 months in. But I doubt most of them will leave because RIFT has copied lots of things from other games.

    And yes, I think RIFT has borrowed a lot of stuff from other games. But if they took something that was working well in another game and they expand on it and make it work as well or even better in RIFT, then I can't really see a big problem with that. In fact a certain "EQ-clone" did just that with a lot of success.

    They did not take Aion's wings, forced PvP or extreme RNG dependancy. In fact I think the only thing they took from Aion was their best CM (Ayase)

    Yes we might foresee a great influx and servermerges 6-7 months in, but so far I have had enough fun to decide that the game fits me just fine: Preordered and hoping this will keep me occupied at least until GW2 launches.

    We dont need casuals in our games!!! Errm... Well we DO need casuals to fund and populate our games - But the games should be all about "hardcore" because: We dont need casuals in our games!!!
    (repeat ad infinitum)

  • SomeOldBlokeSomeOldBloke Member UncommonPosts: 2,167

    My main gripe about Aion were that the zone were narrow. By that I mean you couldn't veture far from the path and you were directed. Granted, you are directed in WoW and WAR but you got to move further from the pavement than in Aion and i like to get my shoes muddy on occasion.

  • VesaviusVesavius Member RarePosts: 7,908

    Originally posted by Naral

    My only question is why do people who dislike Rift (or any other game for that matter)  spend SOooooo damn much time worrying about them on this site?  You don't like it, fine, go look at porn or play another game maybe? You do like it, fine, play it and have fun,  but don't forget to make time for porn. 

    Troll responsibly.

     

     

    Because people who like games like talking about games, and rift is the hot topic right now where all the action is on these boards. Oh, and Trion have kindly given a whole truck of people first hand experience with their game, so many different folks with many different opinions have a valid take on it.

    Forums are for people to chat about the game in question, from all sides, they arnt limited to being a home positive shill threads

    Stop calling others trolls, it's weak debate. You apparently just don't people with different opinions to share 'your' forum.

  • VesaviusVesavius Member RarePosts: 7,908

    Originally posted by mbd1968

    My main gripe about Aion were that the zone were narrow. By that I mean you couldn't veture far from the path and you were directed. Granted, you are directed in WoW and WAR but you got to move further from the pavement than in Aion and i like to get my shoes muddy on occasion.

     

     

    The same is very true in Rift imo.

    The zones are tiny and not one inch is unused by quests. It really feels like a safari park where you go into each enclosure to kill what you are told to.

  • MesfenlirMesfenlir Member Posts: 208

    People are saying that new zones are much bigger than the first ones.

    Dont know cos I still didnt reach them.

    If thats the case some people here need to change their mind

  • NasherUKNasherUK Member UncommonPosts: 480

    Originally posted by Kilmar

    Wow Cataclysm:

    1) Nothing new to the genre

    2) Initial record box sales

    3) Then player exodus

     

    At least Rift has modern graphics :P

     

    But wow holds on to most of it's players because it focuses on end-game and does it very well.  The servers are busy 24/7 and have been since day 1.  In all of the "clones", you log after the first free month to find dead servers and it becomes near impossible to find groups and nothing ever happens from then on.  Which in turn causes more people to quit.

  • TealaTeala Member RarePosts: 7,627

    Originally posted by vesavius

    Originally posted by mbd1968

    My main gripe about Aion were that the zone were narrow. By that I mean you couldn't veture far from the path and you were directed. Granted, you are directed in WoW and WAR but you got to move further from the pavement than in Aion and i like to get my shoes muddy on occasion.

     

     

    The same is very true in Rift imo.

    The zones are tiny and not one inch is unused by quests. It really feels like a safari park where you go into each enclosure to kill what you are told to.

     I do not think the zones in Rift are tiny - at all.   Silverwood the first major zone you get into is as big if not bigger than the Barrens in Vanilla were in fact I go so far to say that it is Barrens plus Durator.   It takes time to get around that zone when you do not have a horse.   Even with a mount it takes time.

  • nerovipus32nerovipus32 Member Posts: 2,735

    Originally posted by vesavius

    Originally posted by mbd1968

    My main gripe about Aion were that the zone were narrow. By that I mean you couldn't veture far from the path and you were directed. Granted, you are directed in WoW and WAR but you got to move further from the pavement than in Aion and i like to get my shoes muddy on occasion.

     

     

    The same is very true in Rift imo.

    The zones are tiny and not one inch is unused by quests. It really feels like a safari park where you go into each enclosure to kill what you are told to.

    actually the zones in rift are pretty big, yet again you a spreading more false information.

  • nomssnomss Member UncommonPosts: 1,468

    Originally posted by nerovipus32

    it seems to me that mmo players want mmo's to fail, most people go on a crusade to tell people how much they dont like a game and how no one else should play the game, and if you do play you're an idiot.  thats pretty much every thread on this forum.

    oh a new release i didnt play it but im gonna make sure other people here my opinion about it.

    I don't think this is true. Most people MMO's to do good, but they want their favorites to do really good.

    Guild Wars 2's 50 minutes game play video:
    http://n4g.com/news/592585/guild-wars-2-50-minutes-of-pure-gameplay
    Everything We Know about GW2:
    http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/287180/page/1

  • VesaviusVesavius Member RarePosts: 7,908

    Originally posted by nerovipus32

    Originally posted by vesavius

    Originally posted by mbd1968

    My main gripe about Aion were that the zone were narrow. By that I mean you couldn't veture far from the path and you were directed. Granted, you are directed in WoW and WAR but you got to move further from the pavement than in Aion and i like to get my shoes muddy on occasion.

     

     

    The same is very true in Rift imo.

    The zones are tiny and not one inch is unused by quests. It really feels like a safari park where you go into each enclosure to kill what you are told to.

    actually the zones in rift are pretty big, yet again you a spreading more false information.

     

    actually, they are pretty much the same as Aions, which most consider to be amongst the smallest of MMORPGs.

    and you didnt actually prove i was 'spreading false info' the first time you accused me of it. Please stop that.

    Even Scot Hartsman dosent claim rift is a 'big' world... no idea why you are trying to make out otherwise.

  • Little11Little11 Member Posts: 51

    Originally posted by x0eclipse

    The same thing that happened to Aion will happen to Rift. 

     

    Rift:

    What has happened

    -Game has been over hyped

    -"Genre changing... Revolutionary.. wolooolo WoW killer.."

    What is happening

    -Trion adding more servers based on hyper popularity

    -more hype

    What is going to happen

    -Box sales will be high/ close to 'record breaking'

    -More servers to accommodate large influx of players

    But after the free month...

    -People will realize the game is nothing more then WoW clone #999999 and offers nothing new to the MMO genre, has little of X game content, too much Y game content

    -Trion will have to downsize server numbers to save money.

    -Game will find a niche in the market <100k subs.

     

    Call me a troll or whatever im just calling it now.

    Yes you might be right but hopefully people will notice that Rift is a upgraded WoW or what I would like to call it  WoW 2,0

    This is how WoW should have been at launch. So lets see how it turns out at least I know I would pick rift over wow any day

  • nerovipus32nerovipus32 Member Posts: 2,735

    Originally posted by vesavius

    Originally posted by nerovipus32

    Originally posted by vesavius

    Originally posted by mbd1968

    My main gripe about Aion were that the zone were narrow. By that I mean you couldn't veture far from the path and you were directed. Granted, you are directed in WoW and WAR but you got to move further from the pavement than in Aion and i like to get my shoes muddy on occasion.

     

     

    The same is very true in Rift imo.

    The zones are tiny and not one inch is unused by quests. It really feels like a safari park where you go into each enclosure to kill what you are told to.

    actually the zones in rift are pretty big, yet again you a spreading more false information.

     

    actually, they are pretty much the same as Aions, which most consider to be amongst the smallest of MMORPGs.

    and you didnt actually prove i was 'spreading false info' the first time you accused me of it. Please stop that.

    Even Scot Hartsman dosent claim rift is a 'big' world... no idea why you are trying to make out otherwise.

    not true at all, ive played aion and the zones in rift are twice the size. go into the game and just walk around or did you not make it passed the tutorial zone, otherwise you wouldnt say such things.

  • VesaviusVesavius Member RarePosts: 7,908

    Originally posted by Teala

    Originally posted by vesavius

    Originally posted by mbd1968

    My main gripe about Aion were that the zone were narrow. By that I mean you couldn't veture far from the path and you were directed. Granted, you are directed in WoW and WAR but you got to move further from the pavement than in Aion and i like to get my shoes muddy on occasion.

     

     

    The same is very true in Rift imo.

    The zones are tiny and not one inch is unused by quests. It really feels like a safari park where you go into each enclosure to kill what you are told to.

     I do not think the zones in Rift are tiny - at all.   Silverwood the first major zone you get into is as big if not bigger than the Barrens in Vanilla were in fact I go so far to say that it is Barrens plus Durator.   It takes time to get around that zone when you do not have a horse.   Even with a mount it takes time.

     

    No, it really dosent.

    Cross the Karanas and then we will talk about 'taking time'. Hell, play GW... The zones in this game are small jammed packed safari parks of mobs to kill, every one used in this or that quest.

    (The world dosent begin and end with WoW.)

    Rift obviously has one of the smaller launch worlds for a MMORPG. It is on par with Aions efforts.

  • VesaviusVesavius Member RarePosts: 7,908

    Originally posted by nerovipus32

    Originally posted by vesavius

    Originally posted by nerovipus32

    Originally posted by vesavius

    Originally posted by mbd1968

    My main gripe about Aion were that the zone were narrow. By that I mean you couldn't veture far from the path and you were directed. Granted, you are directed in WoW and WAR but you got to move further from the pavement than in Aion and i like to get my shoes muddy on occasion.

     

     

    The same is very true in Rift imo.

    The zones are tiny and not one inch is unused by quests. It really feels like a safari park where you go into each enclosure to kill what you are told to.

    actually the zones in rift are pretty big, yet again you a spreading more false information.

     

    actually, they are pretty much the same as Aions, which most consider to be amongst the smallest of MMORPGs.

    and you didnt actually prove i was 'spreading false info' the first time you accused me of it. Please stop that.

    Even Scot Hartsman dosent claim rift is a 'big' world... no idea why you are trying to make out otherwise.

    not true at all, ive played aion and the zones in rift are twice the size. go into the game and just walk around or did you not make it passed the tutorial zone, otherwise you wouldnt say such things.

     

    look, it's obvious I have been beyond the starter zone (at least it is to anyone who hasnt just arrived).

    Twice the size of Aions zones? Prove it.

  • JimmydeanJimmydean Member UncommonPosts: 1,290

    Originally posted by vesavius

    Originally posted by Teala

    Originally posted by vesavius

    Originally posted by mbd1968

    My main gripe about Aion were that the zone were narrow. By that I mean you couldn't veture far from the path and you were directed. Granted, you are directed in WoW and WAR but you got to move further from the pavement than in Aion and i like to get my shoes muddy on occasion.

     

     

    The same is very true in Rift imo.

    The zones are tiny and not one inch is unused by quests. It really feels like a safari park where you go into each enclosure to kill what you are told to.

     I do not think the zones in Rift are tiny - at all.   Silverwood the first major zone you get into is as big if not bigger than the Barrens in Vanilla were in fact I go so far to say that it is Barrens plus Durator.   It takes time to get around that zone when you do not have a horse.   Even with a mount it takes time.

     

    No, it really dosent.

    Cross the Karanas and then we will talk about 'taking time'. Hell, play GW... The zones in this game are small jammed packed safari parks of mobs to kill, every one used in this or that quest.

    (The world dosent begin and end with WoW.)

    Rift obviously has one of the smaller launch worlds for a MMORPG. It is on par with Aions efforts.

    Just out of curiosity, How far have you played in Rift V? If you played through level 5, I can see your argument. If you've been in any of the lvl 25-30ish zones you are down right lying.

  • VesaviusVesavius Member RarePosts: 7,908

    Originally posted by Little11

    Originally posted by vesavius

    Originally posted by nerovipus32

    Originally posted by vesavius

    Originally posted by nerovipus32

    Originally posted by vesavius

    Originally posted by mbd1968

    My main gripe about Aion were that the zone were narrow. By that I mean you couldn't veture far from the path and you were directed. Granted, you are directed in WoW and WAR but you got to move further from the pavement than in Aion and i like to get my shoes muddy on occasion.

     

     

    The same is very true in Rift imo.

    The zones are tiny and not one inch is unused by quests. It really feels like a safari park where you go into each enclosure to kill what you are told to.

    actually the zones in rift are pretty big, yet again you a spreading more false information.

     

    actually, they are pretty much the same as Aions, which most consider to be amongst the smallest of MMORPGs.

    and you didnt actually prove i was 'spreading false info' the first time you accused me of it. Please stop that.

    Even Scot Hartsman dosent claim rift is a 'big' world... no idea why you are trying to make out otherwise.

    not true at all, ive played aion and the zones in rift are twice the size. go into the game and just walk around or did you not make it passed the tutorial zone, otherwise you wouldnt say such things.

     

    look, it's obvious I have been beyond the starter zone (at least it is to anyone who hasnt just arrived).

    Twice the size of Aions zones? Prove it.

    Im butting into your disscusion because I think your really wrong.. Small zones? compared to what?

    I mean just look at WoW, Elvynn forest, West Fall, Duskwood... They arent any bigger? sorry but I cant see were you get it from.

    And you cant even begin to compare aion zones with rifts.

     

    Well, we have benn obviously talking about Rift as compared to Aion, so that has answered your first question I guess.

    Aion had, from L20-30, access to Eltnen (inc ETC), Theo, and the Abyss (from 25, inc NTC), not to mention rifting content on the other side.

    Rift, 20-30, you have what? 1 Zone thats around the same size as Eltnen?

    Twice the same play area in a comparable zone range some of you are saying?

  • VesaviusVesavius Member RarePosts: 7,908

    Originally posted by Elidien

    Not to jump into the discussion, but does the size of the zone matter really? Isn't it more about content? I mean wasn't one of the major complaints about some game (FFXIV I think) that there were big zones but no content? I would rather have small zones and lots of content than huge, empty zones with little content.

     

    For a lot of players having space to explore and the chance to get away from the 'killing  boars in a field with 10 others' feeling is extremely important.

    I don't demand everyone shares this sentiment, but yes it matters to a lot, and if a game dosent deliver on it then it is valid for them to say so.

    I find the 'killing pigs in a field next to a farm with 10 others' type of play that small maps dictate horrible these days, honestly.

    Play GW... now theres a game that understands how to give the player a sense of 'journey'.

This discussion has been closed.