Osmunda, you are simply repeating arguments from pages ago. You had no proof for it then, and you have no proof for it now. You admitted to not having any proof, and are reposting the same links again. Did you think no one would notice?
Silicon Knights - game was terrible, they did a rewrite and tried to avoid paying Epic. Good companies make terrible games too at times, but it was a FUNCTIONING terrible game. MO is a non-functioning terrible game atm.
Digital Extremes did not delay a game, even according to your own link. They decided not to use 1.0 tech so they could dictate their own release dates. It should also be pointed out that even the successful games you list from DE .... used Unreal Engine.
So, again, what evidence do you have? PS3 dev tools being to blame for SV's terrible coding in a PC game perhaps? Nope, you've already tried that one. On the flip side, we have a list of successful games a mile long using UE. So it MUST be the fault of Epic not SV is your logical conclusion. Really?
You are transparent to anyone reading this, you will argue ad infinitum without regard to evidence in order to deflect the blame from SV. Why would someone do that? You start by making claims about Epic and UE, then when questioned say "I don't know if it has anything to do with UE". Wait a few pages, rinse repeat. If you didn't know if it had anything to do with UE then, what has changed? Throwing random components of the engine out (it must be the Flash implementation!) in the hope of getting a hit also won't help your argument. Every single one was proven false in minutes, but can we expect you to restate the points in a few pages in the hope no one notices?
A bit of topic but, to all SW developers out there: Why is coding in English the industry standard? Just curious about what advantages there are in doing so. Sorry, non-coding person here so sorry if the answer is obvious.
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
A bit of topic but, to all SW developers out there: Why is coding in English the industry standard? Just curious about what advantages there are in doing so. Sorry, non-coding person here so sorry if the answer is obvious.
Because its universally understood by every educated person on the planet, saves time, money and effort translating things when you have cross-country departments. Not that Starvault will have those in any likelyhood, but then again they're not exactly in the "professional" waters.
A bit of topic but, to all SW developers out there: Why is coding in English the industry standard? Just curious about what advantages there are in doing so. Sorry, non-coding person here so sorry if the answer is obvious.
The English language is sometimes described as the lingua franca of computing. In comparison to other sciences, where Latin and Greek are the principal sources of vocabulary, Computer Science borrows more extensively from English. Due to the technical limitations of early computers, and the lack of international standards on the Internet, computer users were limited to using English and the Latin alphabet. However, this historical limitation is not relevant today. Most software products are localized in numerous languages and the use of the Unicode character encoding has resolved the problems with non-Latin alphabets.
As with any other lingua franca it does "[save] time, money and effort translating things" when doing international work in computing, but to say that it is "universally understood by every educated person on the planet" is a bit over the top.
P.S. looking for a reference for english as a standard or best practice, the most I could come up with was:
Sensible names
Always use good, unabbreviated, correctly-spelled meaningful names.
Prefer the English language (since C++ and most libraries already use English) and avoid short cryptic names. This will make it easier to read and to type a name without having to look it up.
Yeah, makes sense. Thanks for the replies. You know, I beginning to understand the MO players’ pain. Bought Xsyon on a whim, kinda liked what I saw but "launch" has been less than stellar...
Still, withholding judgment until a few more weeks.
Ah crap, promise not to keep taking thread off topic.
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
If your contention is that a larger, better funded,more experienced development team can get better results, I don't think anyone is disagreeing with you.
Osmunda, you are simply repeating arguments from pages ago. You had no proof for it then, and you have no proof for it now. You admitted to not having any proof, and are reposting the same links again. Did you think no one would notice?
"A lot of promises were made about the Unreal Engine 3, particularly on PS3," he said. "But as we see now, the time frames haven't been met and now a lot of games using it are being held up." Digital Extremes wants to dictate its own release schedule, he said.
I've documented that other companies have planned projects around Epic games development schedule and run into problems because of delays in development in the of the PS3 version (relative to what Epic had led them to expect). Is it any stretch of the imagination to think that SV may be having exactly the same issue except with Atlas instead of the PS3 port?
There may be a list a mile long of successful games using UE3, but can you name a single game that uses Atlas?
If your contention is that a larger, better funded,more experienced development team can get better results, I don't think anyone is disagreeing with you.
Osmunda, you are simply repeating arguments from pages ago. You had no proof for it then, and you have no proof for it now. You admitted to not having any proof, and are reposting the same links again. Did you think no one would notice?
"A lot of promises were made about the Unreal Engine 3, particularly on PS3," he said. "But as we see now, the time frames haven't been met and now a lot of games using it are being held up." Digital Extremes wants to dictate its own release schedule, he said.
I've documented that other companies have planned projects around Epic games development schedule and run into problems because of delays in development in the of the PS3 version (relative to what Epic had led them to expect). Is it any stretch of the imagination to think that SV may be having exactly the same issue except with Atlas instead of the PS3 port?
There may be a list a mile long of successful games using UE3, but can you name a single game that uses Atlas?
SV using Atlas as a 1.0 product took their own risk. I have no doubt the software works, but I would fathom as all game engines tend to be in a 1.0 state; that they are EXTREMELY hard to use.
SV has no development experience at all, and they decided to go the route of a brand new network stack for their MMO, and are wondering now why they have problems. Atlas, like Unreal Engine, is a *base* for what a developer wants to do. It doesn't drop in and make an MMO any more than UE3 drops in and makes a first person shooter. It takes significant work on the engine and network stack in order to make things go the way they want to.
So you have a company with *zero* -- not even a LITTLE bit of experience -- and you're saying the problem might lie with Epic? Please.
If your contention is that a larger, better funded,more experienced development team can get better results, I don't think anyone is disagreeing with you.
Osmunda, you are simply repeating arguments from pages ago. You had no proof for it then, and you have no proof for it now. You admitted to not having any proof, and are reposting the same links again. Did you think no one would notice?
"A lot of promises were made about the Unreal Engine 3, particularly on PS3," he said. "But as we see now, the time frames haven't been met and now a lot of games using it are being held up." Digital Extremes wants to dictate its own release schedule, he said.
I've documented that other companies have planned projects around Epic games development schedule and run into problems because of delays in development in the of the PS3 version (relative to what Epic had led them to expect). Is it any stretch of the imagination to think that SV may be having exactly the same issue except with Atlas instead of the PS3 port?
There may be a list a mile long of successful games using UE3, but can you name a single game that uses Atlas?
SV using Atlas as a 1.0 product took their own risk. I have no doubt the software works, but I would fathom as all game engines tend to be in a 1.0 state; that they are EXTREMELY hard to use.
SV has no development experience at all, and they decided to go the route of a brand new network stack for their MMO, and are wondering now why they have problems. Atlas, like Unreal Engine, is a *base* for what a developer wants to do. It doesn't drop in and make an MMO any more than UE3 drops in and makes a first person shooter. It takes significant work on the engine and network stack in order to make things go the way they want to.
So you have a company with *zero* -- not even a LITTLE bit of experience -- and you're saying the problem might lie with Epic? Please.
Yeah, according to SV, everything is Epic's fault.
I'm pretty confident a solid team of experienced devs would make something work fine out of atlas. But correct me if I'm wrong, some of SV's devs were just making mods for Unreal tournament 3 or something of the kind before starting to work on MO...Big step up there.
I'm also thinking, if I'm a project manager, knowing my team is very inexperienced and small, I'm not going to go for something unknown and likely very hard to program with.
SV should have gone for something easier, less fancy and that worked. less impressive 3d engine, but more stuff on the content side.
Seems like Osmunda just gave some prety solid evidence that other games have been held back by Epic before... (not that I'm hating on Epic... delays happen). You can't just ignore that and claim that just because MO is SV's first commercial game, Epic's delays are somehow SV's fault this time. Or is every Epic delay the licensee's fault?
To avoid future strawman arguments, no one's trying to put 100% blame on Epic (not even Henrik, who would obviously much prefer to spin it that way).
Seems like Osmunda just gave some prety solid evidence that other games have been held back by Epic before... (not that I'm hating on Epic... delays happen). You can't just ignore that and claim that just because MO is SV's first commercial game, Epic's delays are somehow SV's fault this time. Or is every Epic delay the licensee's fault?
To avoid future strawman arguments, no one's trying to put 100% blame on Epic (not even Henrik, who would obviously much prefer to spin it that way).
Yes, no doubt. Have you worked in a professional capacity developing ANY product? Doesn't have to be software. If your company is known to build something, then that's your bread and butter. Epic builds engines and network solutions, they have been doing this for what, 20 years? Osmunda gave solid evidence that one company didn't want to use Unreal tech for PS3 launch dates. Keep a note; Xbox titles don't have that problem. The engine is a DirectX engine, which is (surprise surprise) Windows only. Xbox has no problem using DirectX because it's a Microsoft platform. PS3 however, runs a version of Linux as its base (I believe), but it's sure not Windows. Therefore the technical challenges to get a PS3 engine working with the same TOOLSET, is not going to be 1 for 1.
The delays aren't the fault of Epic. They provide tools and try to sell them. If you are a salesperson, what would you tell SV? That for them to build the network solution even to the point where Atlas is, would take SIGNIFICANT amount of time and effort. And that's true. However, if they have a network solution that does only 80% of what you want, you have to have the expertise to code the remaining 20%. And SV does not have that expertise at all. Similarly, when DE wanted to publish games for PS3, what they wanted out of the engine isn't what was available for them to do. So they went a different route. Oddly enough, DE didn't delay their OWN game, they just felt that the tools weren't what they needed for PS3 development and went a different route. This is something that SV could have looked at with Atlas and said, "we are going to develop it on our own".
The problem is of course, that SV has no experience developing software of any kind, so the idea that they are going to create a network solution that supports an MMO by their design standards is laughable. They have no choice but to license Atlas because they have no idea how to build what they need on their own. Oddly enough, look at ALL THE MMOs using Unreal Engine 3. They *all* chose to write their own server code for the network solution. So if they figured it out, and SV didn't, that just means that SV had no idea what they were doing, or they had no options, or both.
Global Agenda, Blade and Soul, Tera, Huxley (kinda), all used Unreal Engine 3, and all developed their own network solution to support massive player bases. So again, is it Epic's fault that those companies chose to use their graphical engine but not their network solution? No, because they knew what their requirements were and Atlas didn't do the trick for them. But for SV, a company who doesn't have a SINGLE real programmer, they had no choice. It was either Atlas or not having a game. But those choices and lack of talent in the organization are exactly why the game is as broken and buggy as it is.
I still do not understand why all the hate at SV. I can think of two thing that bigger, and more experienced companies have not fix/or still balancing. Windows and it's memory leak problem. World of warcaft and balcancing of the class.
I still do not understand why all the hate at SV. I can think of two thing that bigger, and more experienced companies have not fix/or still balancing. Windows and it's memory leak problem. World of warcaft and balcancing of the class.
This is a forum about Mortal Online. Any problems that Microsoft and Blizzard have is irrelevant. Besides, you can't seriously compare the issues they've had with the mess that MO finds itself in.
Funny how they celebrate outliving 2 of the most rapidly closed games ever. I guess they have their reasons )
Who was celebrating? He was stating facts. For that matter, who is "they"?
Ditto on what funkmastaD said.
Specifically I noted that in response to Betel: "Funny how every other developer using UE doesn't have MO's problems." Basically, I was trying to point out that Starvault may be having problems, but they are not unique.
When you say "The delays aren't the fault of Epic. They provide tools and try to sell them." it is unclear which delays you mean. If you mean the delays in the release of the PS3 version of UE3 and/or the release of features for Atlas, I can't see how anyone but Rpic would be responsible for the delays.
Re PS3 vs Xbox:
Some of the other games were having issues with the delay of the PS3 version, but the lawsuit is about the Xbox version. "Silicon Knights claims: 'The final development kit for the Xbox 360 was released in early September, 2005, such that Epic was obligated to release the functional Engine for that platform no later than March, 2006.'" http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=14759
Also I'm not sure what you mean when you say "The engine is a DirectX engine, which is (surprise surprise) Windows only." Seems like it's a C++ engine with Direct x telling it how to communicate with the hardware
With its core written in C++ the Unreal Engine features a high degree of portability and it is a tool used by many game developers today supporting a multitude of platforms including Microsoft Windows, Linux, iOS, Mac OS and Mac OS Xon personal computers and many video game consoles including the Dreamcast, Xbox, Xbox 360, PlayStation 2, and PlayStation 3 though the latest version of the Unreal Engine, UE3, does not work on previous generation platforms. A great deal of the gameplay code can be written in UnrealScript, a proprietary scripting language, and as such, large parts of the gameplay can be modified without delving deep into the engine internals. Additionally, as with othermiddleware packages, the Unreal Engine also provides various tools to assist with content creation, both for designers and artists.
I still do not understand why all the hate at SV. I can think of two thing that bigger, and more experienced companies have not fix/or still balancing. Windows and it's memory leak problem. World of warcaft and balcancing of the class.
They released a buggy game with constant server crashes and they charged full price for it, with great dificulty of getting a refund. So no brainer there as why "all the hate at SV".
Would it be any other company, it would be the same.
And just to confirm what was agreed - SV are a small, poorly financed, badly run company with zero coding or MMO experience who tried to release a product using 1.0 tools they also had no experience with.
That about cover it? Haven't seen anyone make a counter claim yet.
MO is instanced too, and I am not going to go over old ground again with you again. If you can't prove your case here, why would I care enough to read an unrelated thread?
You are not a software engineer and know very little about development or technical details. I know some (my training is in electronics and software design) and other posters here know a lot more. You have not made your case, and are just repeating it ad nausuem in the hope we get bored of correcting you.
"A lot of promises were made about the Unreal Engine 3, particularly on PS3," he said. "But as we see now, the time frames haven't been met and now a lot of games using it are being held up." Digital Extremes wants to dictate its own release schedule, he said.
Kindly covered by another poster, but again you are flat out wrong. Same as above, repeating the same thing with no evidence.
I've documented that other companies have planned projects around Epic games development schedule and run into problems because of delays in development in the of the PS3 version (relative to what Epic had led them to expect).
A list that was commented on and proven to be completely unrelated to MO's coding problems. Repition with no new evidence again.
Is it any stretch of the imagination to think that SV may be having exactly the same issue except with Atlas instead of the PS3 port?
Again, covered by another poster. If SV didn't have the coding skills to implement 1.0 tech in an MMO enviroment, why did they CHOOSE to use it? Because, just like you with no technical background, they thought they could drag and drop a world into UE and Atlas just like they did in their ONLY prior experience - map modding. Real world coding isn't like that, as SV are now finding out.
There may be a list a mile long of successful games using UE3, but can you name a single game that uses Atlas?
Give me a complete list of Atlas games then. If only MO is on that list, then they are even stupider than I thought. No coding skills or tools and they think they can first gen implement a massive network solution? Complete talentless idiots if so - see above about thinking it would be like modding an FPS.
They could have chosen tried and tested solutions to both the engine and the network solution, or coded their own. They chose the route they did because it was the prettiest and shiniest (perhaps why pro-SV posters always wax lyrical about graphics that are not really that special in this DX11 age) and they had daddy's money to spend on it. They have no one else to blame, and the fault for the abysmal code lies with them.
I still do not understand why all the hate at SV. I can think of two thing that bigger, and more experienced companies have not fix/or still balancing. Windows and it's memory leak problem. World of warcaft and balcancing of the class.
They released a buggy game with constant server crashes and they charged full price for it, with great dificulty of getting a refund. So no brainer there as why "all the hate at SV".
Would it be any other company, it would be the same.
First, companies release buggy games with constant crashes at full price, like, all the time. It doesn't explain why some people treat hateful forum posting like it's their job.
Second, the guy you just quoted was asking why SV was getting hate when bigger companies (like Epic) are doing the same thing and don't have the 'indy' excuse... Epic releases buggy software (as evidenced by the fact that they release bugfixing patches), yet no one acts like Epic comitted a warcrime.
First, companies release buggy games with constant crashes at full price, like, all the time. It doesn't explain why some people treat hateful forum posting like it's their job.
Second, the guy you just quoted was asking why SV was getting hate when bigger companies (like Epic) are doing the same thing and don't have the 'indy' excuse... Epic releases buggy software (as evidenced by the fact that they release bugfixing patches), yet no one acts like Epic comitted a warcrime.
The difference is that StarVault sold the game to us, not EPIC. If StarVault has a problem with EPIC they should pursue that, just like people who have a problem with StarVault should also do so.
If I had preordered a game from EPIC that I was charged for in July 2009 but didn't ship until June 2010 (no refunds) and still wasn;t working as of March 2011 I would be screaming about EPIC games. That didn't happen though.
So.. back on topic here... even if the root of all the issues Mortal Online has ever had is EPIC games and is rooted in faults with the Atlas network solution which Mortal is based on... isn't that really.. really bad? Doesn't that just mean that SV cannot fix the problem on their own and if EPIC's performance has been so poor (just look at the laundry list Osmunda provided) why would anyone think it would get fixed anytime soon?
Again, as a consumer I don't care who's FAULT it is that StarVault cannot deliver the product they sold. I simply care they they have not done so.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
So.. back on topic here... even if the root of all the issues Mortal Online has ever had is EPIC games and is rooted in faults with the Atlas network solution which Mortal is based on... isn't that really.. really bad? Doesn't that just mean that SV cannot fix the problem on their own and if EPIC's performance has been so poor (just look at the laundry list Osmunda provided) why would anyone think it would get fixed anytime soon?
Again, as a consumer I don't care who's FAULT it is that StarVault cannot deliver the product they sold. I simply care they they have not done so.
I more or less agree with you here. On an individual consumer level, deciding to pay for a subscription or not depends on whether you feel you are getting what you paid for, not on whose fault it is.
From the direction this thread is going, it may seem like I am trying to bash Epic. I am not. I think Epic does bring out some great products. That being said, they are imperfact and do have a history of delaying implementations that their licensees depend on for their own projects. In choosing to use UE3 and Atlas, they are dependent on Epic, but some people scoff any time that Henrick says they are waiting for an update or patch. "Funny how every other developer using UE doesn't have MO's problems."
At times, I think it stems from some knee jerk reaction to assume that SV is always 100% wrong. There are a couple of posters in this thread who have radically shifted their rationale for why it is all 100% SV's fault. Initially they were both saying that Epic is awesome and no other developer has had problems with Epic and UE3, so it must be all SV's fault. Now they are both saying that Atlas is a 1.0 product and SV should have expected it to be buggy , so it must be all SV's fault.
@ Betel: not ignoring your post-- just figured I'd let more time pass before commenting in any depth since it seemed more focused on insulting people than presenting and argument.. cooler heads and all that.
Instancing may refer to:Dungeon instancing, a technique used in online games to provide several groups of customers with their own instances of some sort of content at the same time,
From the direction this thread is going, it may seem like I am trying to bash Epic. I am not. I think Epic does bring out some great products. That being said, they are imperfact and do have a history of delaying implementations that their licensees depend on for their own projects. In choosing to use UE3 and Atlas, they are dependent on Epic, but some people scoff any time that Henrick says they are waiting for an update or patch. "Funny how every other developer using UE doesn't have MO's problems."
They do NOT have a history of delaying implementations, how do you think they got to be market leader in 3D engine development? By not delivering? There was ONE example you could find (delayed PS3 port problems) and that is it. Even then, by your own evidence, the only competant company you listed decided to use a different solution and didn't delay a single game.
Since Henrik is a habitual liar (lore ready to go, content patch ready to go, pets fixed, etc etc) I am still going with him lying about everything being Epics fault. Competant game companies have no problem with Epic, people who have zero experience of coding do. You admit that SV are a small, poorly financed, badly run company with zero coding or MMO experience who tried to release a product using 1.0 tools they also had no experience with. And you STILL try and blame Epic? Laughable.
At times, I think it stems from some knee jerk reaction to assume that SV is always 100% wrong. There are a couple of posters in this thread who have radically shifted their rationale for why it is all 100% SV's fault. Initially they were both saying that Epic is awesome and no other developer has had problems with Epic and UE3, so it must be all SV's fault. Now they are both saying that Atlas is a 1.0 product and SV should have expected it to be buggy , so it must be all SV's fault.
That is no change in position at all if you understand software development, something it appears you and Henrik do not. Epic produces tools SV could have used that were not 1.0, but they chose not to as the new version is always shinier. You use 1.0 software and a new network solution, you must have programming skills and SV do not. DCUO works remember, why doesn't MO?
@ Betel: not ignoring your post-- just figured I'd let more time pass before commenting in any depth since it seemed more focused on insulting people than presenting and argument.. cooler heads and all that.
So a mod edit's my response but leaves the original smear? Nice moderation.
I didn't insult anyone in my reply, just pointing out the facts of the matter. You having a cool head is irrelevant to the facts, and doesn't change a thing. Neither does endless repitition of the same thing regardless of evidence.
Instancing may refer to:Dungeon instancing, a technique used in online games to provide several groups of customers with their own instances of some sort of content at the same time,
You are using Websters as a technical dictionary? Just lol.
We have covered instances already, and dungeon exclusivity has nothing to do with it. People with programming experience tell you this, but you think you know better with your zero experience in the field. I can't help but feel you and SV are a perfect match.
From the direction this thread is going, it may seem like I am trying to bash Epic. I am not. I think Epic does bring out some great products. That being said, they are imperfact and do have a history of delaying implementations that their licensees depend on for their own projects. In choosing to use UE3 and Atlas, they are dependent on Epic, but some people scoff any time that Henrick says they are waiting for an update or patch. "Funny how every other developer using UE doesn't have MO's problems."
They do NOT have a history of delaying implementations, how do you think they got to be market leader in 3D engine development? By not delivering? There was ONE example you could find (delayed PS3 port problems) and that is it. Even then, by your own evidence, the only competant company you listed decided to use a different solution and didn't delay a single game.
Since Henrik is a habitual liar (lore ready to go, content patch ready to go, pets fixed, etc etc) I am still going with him lying about everything being Epics fault. Competant game companies have no problem with Epic, people who have zero experience of coding do. You admit that SV are a small, poorly financed, badly run company with zero coding or MMO experience who tried to release a product using 1.0 tools they also had no experience with. And you STILL try and blame Epic? Laughable.
At times, I think it stems from some knee jerk reaction to assume that SV is always 100% wrong. There are a couple of posters in this thread who have radically shifted their rationale for why it is all 100% SV's fault. Initially they were both saying that Epic is awesome and no other developer has had problems with Epic and UE3, so it must be all SV's fault. Now they are both saying that Atlas is a 1.0 product and SV should have expected it to be buggy , so it must be all SV's fault.
That is no change in position at all if you understand software development, something it appears you and Henrik do not. Epic produces tools SV could have used that were not 1.0, but they chose not to as the new version is always shinier. You use 1.0 software and a new network solution, you must have programming skills and SV do not. DCUO works remember, why doesn't MO?
@ Betel: not ignoring your post-- just figured I'd let more time pass before commenting in any depth since it seemed more focused on insulting people than presenting and argument.. cooler heads and all that.
So a mod edit's my response but leaves the original smear? Nice moderation.
I didn't insult anyone in my reply, just pointing out the facts of the matter. You having a cool head is irrelevant to the facts, and doesn't change a thing. Neither does endless repitition of the same thing regardless of evidence.
Instancing may refer to:Dungeon instancing, a technique used in online games to provide several groups of customers with their own instances of some sort of content at the same time,
You are using Websters as a technical dictionary? Just lol.
We have covered instances already, and dungeon exclusivity has nothing to do with it. People with programming experience tell you this, but you think you know better with your zero experience in the field. I can't help but feel you and SV are a perfect match.
and what game did you develop betel? with no instances? with nodes?
So.. back on topic here... even if the root of all the issues Mortal Online has ever had is EPIC games and is rooted in faults with the Atlas network solution which Mortal is based on... isn't that really.. really bad? Doesn't that just mean that SV cannot fix the problem on their own and if EPIC's performance has been so poor (just look at the laundry list Osmunda provided) why would anyone think it would get fixed anytime soon?
Again, as a consumer I don't care who's FAULT it is that StarVault cannot deliver the product they sold. I simply care they they have not done so.
I more or less agree with you here. On an individual consumer level, deciding to pay for a subscription or not depends on whether you feel you are getting what you paid for, not on whose fault it is.
Then... this is basicly /thread as we both agree that the assignment of a percentage of blame is immaterial to the consumer as they are only dealing with StarVault and thus StarVault is the one who failed to deliver. Anything else is just a reason WHY they failed... and is purely an academic argument.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
@Slapshot: I guess as far as any differences between our takes on the situation, this is the end of the thread.
@Betel: It's very difficult to have a discussion when your side of the argument mostly involves explaining why any counter examples don't count.
Originally posted by Batal
Originally posted by Betel
They do NOT have a history of delaying implementations, how do you think they got to be market leader in 3D engine development? By not delivering? There was ONE example you could find (delayed PS3 port problems) and that is it. Even then, by your own evidence, the only competant company you listed decided to use a different solution and didn't delay a single game.
Since Henrik is a habitual liar (lore ready to go, content patch ready to go, pets fixed, etc etc) I am still going with him lying about everything being Epics fault. Competant game companies have no problem with Epic, people who have zero experience of coding do. You admit that SV are a small, poorly financed, badly run company with zero coding or MMO experience who tried to release a product using 1.0 tools they also had no experience with. And you STILL try and blame Epic? Laughable.
the only competant company [Digital Extremes] Midway games may not be as big as it once was, but calling them incompetent is a bit of a stretch. Silicon Knights codeveloped Legacy of Kain and Metal Gear Solid, which makes it seem they should qualify as competent. Koei has an extensive list of games developed, but I can't say any are particularly notable (probably competent but inconclusive) Mistwalker studios-short list of titles, none particularly notable.
Starvault may have very litlle programming experience. I don't know the specifics about their training (and neither do you) but there is one thing I can guarantee about the amount of experience they have. It is not "zero"
I am not trying to say that Epic bears full responsibility for the current state of MO. I am saying that when Henrik posts that they are waiting for a patch from Epic, there is good reason to assume he is telling the truth.
Originally posted by Betel
I didn't insult anyone in my reply, just pointing out the facts of the matter. You having a cool head is irrelevant to the facts, and doesn't change a thing. Neither does endless repitition of the same thing regardless of evidence.
Sorry. I should not have assumed that it was your intent to insult people. When I referred to "cool head" I meant I should allow some time to cool off before answering.
Originally posted by Betel
You are using Websters as a technical dictionary? Just lol.
We have covered instances already, and dungeon exclusivity has nothing to do with it. People with programming experience tell you this, but you think you know better with your zero experience in the field. I can't help but feel you and SV are a perfect match.
Yes I am using Webster's online dictionary as a dictionary. If you check the thread I created specifically to discuss instancing and static vs. dynamic loading, you'll see I also cite http://geekdictionary.computing.net/define/instance, http://www.guildwars2guru.com/forum/loaded-zones-understanding-mmo-server-t10339.html and a lengthy essay by Brad Mcquaid discusses instancing. If you wish to check there, in a bit I'll post why you may be technically correct, but wrong from the standpoint of how people actually use the term. IIRC, YOU are the only person consistently claiming that MO is instanced.
A more precise description would be tnat MO is a seamless persistent world that uses dynamic streaming.. If that is not an accurate description, please give details of how this is wrong.http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/309342
Originally posted by Betel
Give me a complete list of Atlas games then. If only MO is on that list, then they are even stupider than I thought. No coding skills or tools and they think they can first gen implement a massive network solution? Complete talentless idiots if so - see above about thinking it would be like modding an FPS.
They made there decision based on what Epic claims about Atlas. Somebody's got to be first. I'm sure someday when you are playing a different MMO that uses Atlas, you'll thank SV for helping to identify all the bugs, won't you?
Originally posted by Betel
You are not a software engineer and know very little about development or technical details.
Just wondering, how do you know?
P.S. If you think "seamless persistent world that uses dynamic streaming". is accurate in distinguishing MO from other games but "not an instanced game" is not, let me just point out the that would be a mouthful.
@Slapshot: I guess as far as any differences between our takes on the situation, this is the end of the thread.
Then why are you still replying? You just admitted the thread is over, as it is now clear the blame for any faults with MO lie at SV's door - by your own admission.
@Betel: It's very difficult to have a discussion when your side of the argument mostly involves explaining why any counter examples don't count.
A small baby recieves a banana. In trying to eat it, the banana ends up all over the baby, the floor - anywhere but the baby's mouth. Is the banana at fault? Should this example be used in a discussion of whether adults are capable of eating bananas properly?
The game was made and released, and recieved terrible reviews. SK then tried to use elements of UE without paying, Epic and SK sued each other and SK has NOT won any case in the courts. There is ZERO evidence that Epic did not live up to contractual obligations, or SK would have won it's case. They just made a terrible game and looked for someone to blame. Kinda like SV actually.
Likewise the rest of your list has been debunked and I don't care to do so again. I'll just cut and paste from previous posts (as you are doing) if you continue repeating yourself.
Starvault may have very litlle programming experience. I don't know the specifics about their training (and neither do you) but there is one thing I can guarantee about the amount of experience they have. It is not "zero"
Actually we do know, since we know their names and have info from people who have worked with them at SV. Their only experience in programming games is MO, as modding some maps in the UE editor is NOT programming experience. If you can prove me wrong by listing some previously published work, do let us know.
I am not trying to say that Epic bears full responsibility for the current state of MO. I am saying that when Henrik posts that they are waiting for a patch from Epic, there is good reason to assume he is telling the truth.
The only thing you have shown is that using 1.0 tech needs a more competent team than using tried and tested solutions. SV is not a competent team, hence their problems. That is hardly groundbreaking news, and once again shows the lack of judgement of SV's management.
Still waiting on that list of PC games delayed or broken by Epic btw, you know the native format of UE and the format of MO. The fact that you are desperately grabbing anything regardless of platform or maturity of tech shows a paucity of evidence for your beliefs.
Yes I am using Webster's online dictionary as a dictionary.
It is not a technical dictionary, and is not useful in a technical discussion of computer terminology.
If you check the thread I created specifically to discuss instancing and static vs. dynamic loading,
No thanks, you seem to be having a lot of fun by yourself in there. Would hate to interrupt.
YOU are the only person consistently claiming that MO is instanced.
Not at all, other posters here agree.
A more precise description would be tnat MO is a seamless persistent world that uses dynamic streaming.
It loads areas as you move into them across server bounderies hence the world is not seamless. There is also loading lag as you cross these bounderies.
They made there decision based on what Epic claims about Atlas. Somebody's got to be first. I'm sure someday when you are playing a different MMO that uses Atlas, you'll thank SV for helping to identify all the bugs, won't you?
So are there no other games that use Atlas? Then how can we say Atlas is at fault? A company with no experience and terrible QA systems seems a more likely culprit given the reliability and robustness of Epic products (they didn't get to their current position by creating buggy and unreliable code).
I don't think Epic will get any useful feedback on Atlas from SV's programmers. They just don't have the talent to contribute in any meaningful way.
Just wondering, how do you know?
If you are a software engineer, I weep for your clients given your support of SV and need to refer to Wiki for anything programming related.
P.S. If you think "seamless persistent world that uses dynamic streaming". is accurate in distinguishing MO from other games but "not an instanced game" is not, let me just point out the that would be a mouthful.
I disagree with the seamless part, as stated many, many times.
Right, that is my last reply until you bring something new to the table. This endless repitition is pointless and you are doing it solely to absolve SV of culpability for their inability to code and silly design decisions.
The thread is over till then. Done. Finished. See this quote -
Originally posted by osmunda -
I more or less agree with you here. On an individual consumer level, deciding to pay for a subscription or not depends on whether you feel you are getting what you paid for, not on whose fault it is.
Comments
Osmunda, you are simply repeating arguments from pages ago. You had no proof for it then, and you have no proof for it now. You admitted to not having any proof, and are reposting the same links again. Did you think no one would notice?
Silicon Knights - game was terrible, they did a rewrite and tried to avoid paying Epic. Good companies make terrible games too at times, but it was a FUNCTIONING terrible game. MO is a non-functioning terrible game atm.
Digital Extremes did not delay a game, even according to your own link. They decided not to use 1.0 tech so they could dictate their own release dates. It should also be pointed out that even the successful games you list from DE .... used Unreal Engine.
So, again, what evidence do you have? PS3 dev tools being to blame for SV's terrible coding in a PC game perhaps? Nope, you've already tried that one. On the flip side, we have a list of successful games a mile long using UE. So it MUST be the fault of Epic not SV is your logical conclusion. Really?
You are transparent to anyone reading this, you will argue ad infinitum without regard to evidence in order to deflect the blame from SV. Why would someone do that? You start by making claims about Epic and UE, then when questioned say "I don't know if it has anything to do with UE". Wait a few pages, rinse repeat. If you didn't know if it had anything to do with UE then, what has changed? Throwing random components of the engine out (it must be the Flash implementation!) in the hope of getting a hit also won't help your argument. Every single one was proven false in minutes, but can we expect you to restate the points in a few pages in the hope no one notices?
And finally,
Why does DCUO work and MO doesn't?
A bit of topic but, to all SW developers out there: Why is coding in English the industry standard? Just curious about what advantages there are in doing so. Sorry, non-coding person here so sorry if the answer is obvious.
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
Because its universally understood by every educated person on the planet, saves time, money and effort translating things when you have cross-country departments. Not that Starvault will have those in any likelyhood, but then again they're not exactly in the "professional" waters.
The English language is sometimes described as the lingua franca of computing. In comparison to other sciences, where Latin and Greek are the principal sources of vocabulary, Computer Science borrows more extensively from English. Due to the technical limitations of early computers, and the lack of international standards on the Internet, computer users were limited to using English and the Latin alphabet. However, this historical limitation is not relevant today. Most software products are localized in numerous languages and the use of the Unicode character encoding has resolved the problems with non-Latin alphabets.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_in_computing
That being said, it may be custom to use English. but if there were some source that cited use of English as a standard or "best practice" it's fairly certain someone would have linked to it by now. http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Computer_Programming/Standards_and_Best_Practices
As with any other lingua franca it does "[save] time, money and effort translating things" when doing international work in computing, but to say that it is "universally understood by every educated person on the planet" is a bit over the top.
P.S. looking for a reference for english as a standard or best practice, the most I could come up with was:
Sensible names
Always use good, unabbreviated, correctly-spelled meaningful names.
Prefer the English language (since C++ and most libraries already use English) and avoid short cryptic names. This will make it easier to read and to type a name without having to look it up.
Yeah, makes sense. Thanks for the replies. You know, I beginning to understand the MO players’ pain. Bought Xsyon on a whim, kinda liked what I saw but "launch" has been less than stellar...
Still, withholding judgment until a few more weeks.
Ah crap, promise not to keep taking thread off topic.
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
I think I answered already.
Just in case you missed it. Also DCUO is instanced. In case you want to rebut that, here's the thread on instances if you want to keep that all in one place. http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/309342/Static-loading-vs-Dynamic-loading-instances.html
"A lot of promises were made about the Unreal Engine 3, particularly on PS3," he said. "But as we see now, the time frames haven't been met and now a lot of games using it are being held up." Digital Extremes wants to dictate its own release schedule, he said.
http://www.gamesradar.com/ps3/stranglehold/news/unreal-engine-3-delaying-games/a-2007082016332832027/g-20060301165611510047
I've documented that other companies have planned projects around Epic games development schedule and run into problems because of delays in development in the of the PS3 version (relative to what Epic had led them to expect). Is it any stretch of the imagination to think that SV may be having exactly the same issue except with Atlas instead of the PS3 port?
There may be a list a mile long of successful games using UE3, but can you name a single game that uses Atlas?
SV using Atlas as a 1.0 product took their own risk. I have no doubt the software works, but I would fathom as all game engines tend to be in a 1.0 state; that they are EXTREMELY hard to use.
SV has no development experience at all, and they decided to go the route of a brand new network stack for their MMO, and are wondering now why they have problems. Atlas, like Unreal Engine, is a *base* for what a developer wants to do. It doesn't drop in and make an MMO any more than UE3 drops in and makes a first person shooter. It takes significant work on the engine and network stack in order to make things go the way they want to.
So you have a company with *zero* -- not even a LITTLE bit of experience -- and you're saying the problem might lie with Epic? Please.
Yeah, according to SV, everything is Epic's fault.
I'm pretty confident a solid team of experienced devs would make something work fine out of atlas. But correct me if I'm wrong, some of SV's devs were just making mods for Unreal tournament 3 or something of the kind before starting to work on MO...Big step up there.
I'm also thinking, if I'm a project manager, knowing my team is very inexperienced and small, I'm not going to go for something unknown and likely very hard to program with.
SV should have gone for something easier, less fancy and that worked. less impressive 3d engine, but more stuff on the content side.
Really? No doubt?
Seems like Osmunda just gave some prety solid evidence that other games have been held back by Epic before... (not that I'm hating on Epic... delays happen). You can't just ignore that and claim that just because MO is SV's first commercial game, Epic's delays are somehow SV's fault this time. Or is every Epic delay the licensee's fault?
To avoid future strawman arguments, no one's trying to put 100% blame on Epic (not even Henrik, who would obviously much prefer to spin it that way).
Yes, no doubt. Have you worked in a professional capacity developing ANY product? Doesn't have to be software. If your company is known to build something, then that's your bread and butter. Epic builds engines and network solutions, they have been doing this for what, 20 years? Osmunda gave solid evidence that one company didn't want to use Unreal tech for PS3 launch dates. Keep a note; Xbox titles don't have that problem. The engine is a DirectX engine, which is (surprise surprise) Windows only. Xbox has no problem using DirectX because it's a Microsoft platform. PS3 however, runs a version of Linux as its base (I believe), but it's sure not Windows. Therefore the technical challenges to get a PS3 engine working with the same TOOLSET, is not going to be 1 for 1.
The delays aren't the fault of Epic. They provide tools and try to sell them. If you are a salesperson, what would you tell SV? That for them to build the network solution even to the point where Atlas is, would take SIGNIFICANT amount of time and effort. And that's true. However, if they have a network solution that does only 80% of what you want, you have to have the expertise to code the remaining 20%. And SV does not have that expertise at all. Similarly, when DE wanted to publish games for PS3, what they wanted out of the engine isn't what was available for them to do. So they went a different route. Oddly enough, DE didn't delay their OWN game, they just felt that the tools weren't what they needed for PS3 development and went a different route. This is something that SV could have looked at with Atlas and said, "we are going to develop it on our own".
The problem is of course, that SV has no experience developing software of any kind, so the idea that they are going to create a network solution that supports an MMO by their design standards is laughable. They have no choice but to license Atlas because they have no idea how to build what they need on their own. Oddly enough, look at ALL THE MMOs using Unreal Engine 3. They *all* chose to write their own server code for the network solution. So if they figured it out, and SV didn't, that just means that SV had no idea what they were doing, or they had no options, or both.
Global Agenda, Blade and Soul, Tera, Huxley (kinda), all used Unreal Engine 3, and all developed their own network solution to support massive player bases. So again, is it Epic's fault that those companies chose to use their graphical engine but not their network solution? No, because they knew what their requirements were and Atlas didn't do the trick for them. But for SV, a company who doesn't have a SINGLE real programmer, they had no choice. It was either Atlas or not having a game. But those choices and lack of talent in the organization are exactly why the game is as broken and buggy as it is.
I still do not understand why all the hate at SV. I can think of two thing that bigger, and more experienced companies have not fix/or still balancing. Windows and it's memory leak problem. World of warcaft and balcancing of the class.
Funny how they celebrate outliving 2 of the most rapidly closed games ever. I guess they have their reasons
)
Who was celebrating? He was stating facts. For that matter, who is "they"?
This is a forum about Mortal Online. Any problems that Microsoft and Blizzard have is irrelevant. Besides, you can't seriously compare the issues they've had with the mess that MO finds itself in.
Ditto on what funkmastaD said.
Specifically I noted that in response to Betel: "Funny how every other developer using UE doesn't have MO's problems." Basically, I was trying to point out that Starvault may be having problems, but they are not unique.
@ Hercules: If you reread this post http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/4115171#4115171 you can see that it is 5 developers not just one (Silicon Knights, Digital Extremes, Koei, Midway, and Mistwalker studios).
When you say "The delays aren't the fault of Epic. They provide tools and try to sell them." it is unclear which delays you mean. If you mean the delays in the release of the PS3 version of UE3 and/or the release of features for Atlas, I can't see how anyone but Rpic would be responsible for the delays.
Re PS3 vs Xbox:
Some of the other games were having issues with the delay of the PS3 version, but the lawsuit is about the Xbox version. "Silicon Knights claims: 'The final development kit for the Xbox 360 was released in early September, 2005, such that Epic was obligated to release the functional Engine for that platform no later than March, 2006.'" http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=14759
Also I'm not sure what you mean when you say "The engine is a DirectX engine, which is (surprise surprise) Windows only." Seems like it's a C++ engine with Direct x telling it how to communicate with the hardware
With its core written in C++ the Unreal Engine features a high degree of portability and it is a tool used by many game developers today supporting a multitude of platforms including Microsoft Windows, Linux, iOS, Mac OS and Mac OS Xon personal computers and many video game consoles including the Dreamcast, Xbox, Xbox 360, PlayStation 2, and PlayStation 3 though the latest version of the Unreal Engine, UE3, does not work on previous generation platforms. A great deal of the gameplay code can be written in UnrealScript, a proprietary scripting language, and as such, large parts of the gameplay can be modified without delving deep into the engine internals. Additionally, as with othermiddleware packages, the Unreal Engine also provides various tools to assist with content creation, both for designers and artists.
The latest release is the Unreal Engine 3, which is designed around Microsoft's DirectX 9 technology for 32/64-bit Windows XP/Windows Vista/Windows 7 and Xbox 360 platforms, DirectX 10 and DirectX 11 for 32/64-bit Windows Vista/Windows 7, and OpenGL for 32/64-bit Linux, Mac OS X, and PlayStation 3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unreal_Engine
They released a buggy game with constant server crashes and they charged full price for it, with great dificulty of getting a refund. So no brainer there as why "all the hate at SV".
Would it be any other company, it would be the same.
My gaming blog
First, companies release buggy games with constant crashes at full price, like, all the time. It doesn't explain why some people treat hateful forum posting like it's their job.
Second, the guy you just quoted was asking why SV was getting hate when bigger companies (like Epic) are doing the same thing and don't have the 'indy' excuse... Epic releases buggy software (as evidenced by the fact that they release bugfixing patches), yet no one acts like Epic comitted a warcrime.
The difference is that StarVault sold the game to us, not EPIC. If StarVault has a problem with EPIC they should pursue that, just like people who have a problem with StarVault should also do so.
If I had preordered a game from EPIC that I was charged for in July 2009 but didn't ship until June 2010 (no refunds) and still wasn;t working as of March 2011 I would be screaming about EPIC games. That didn't happen though.
So.. back on topic here... even if the root of all the issues Mortal Online has ever had is EPIC games and is rooted in faults with the Atlas network solution which Mortal is based on... isn't that really.. really bad? Doesn't that just mean that SV cannot fix the problem on their own and if EPIC's performance has been so poor (just look at the laundry list Osmunda provided) why would anyone think it would get fixed anytime soon?
Again, as a consumer I don't care who's FAULT it is that StarVault cannot deliver the product they sold. I simply care they they have not done so.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
I more or less agree with you here. On an individual consumer level, deciding to pay for a subscription or not depends on whether you feel you are getting what you paid for, not on whose fault it is.
From the direction this thread is going, it may seem like I am trying to bash Epic. I am not. I think Epic does bring out some great products. That being said, they are imperfact and do have a history of delaying implementations that their licensees depend on for their own projects. In choosing to use UE3 and Atlas, they are dependent on Epic, but some people scoff any time that Henrick says they are waiting for an update or patch. "Funny how every other developer using UE doesn't have MO's problems."
At times, I think it stems from some knee jerk reaction to assume that SV is always 100% wrong. There are a couple of posters in this thread who have radically shifted their rationale for why it is all 100% SV's fault. Initially they were both saying that Epic is awesome and no other developer has had problems with Epic and UE3, so it must be all SV's fault. Now they are both saying that Atlas is a 1.0 product and SV should have expected it to be buggy , so it must be all SV's fault.
@ Betel: not ignoring your post-- just figured I'd let more time pass before commenting in any depth since it seemed more focused on insulting people than presenting and argument.. cooler heads and all that.
just a tidbit tho...http://www.websters-dictionary-online.org/definitions/instancing?cx=partner-pub-0939450753529744%3Av0qd01-tdlq&cof=FORID%3A9&ie=UTF-8&q=instancing&sa=Search#922
Instancing may refer to:Dungeon instancing, a technique used in online games to provide several groups of customers with their own instances of some sort of content at the same time,
There's more on the thread I made focusing on instancing.http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/309342/Static-loading-vs-Dynamic-loading-instances.html
and what game did you develop betel? with no instances? with nodes?
Then... this is basicly /thread as we both agree that the assignment of a percentage of blame is immaterial to the consumer as they are only dealing with StarVault and thus StarVault is the one who failed to deliver. Anything else is just a reason WHY they failed... and is purely an academic argument.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
@Slapshot: I guess as far as any differences between our takes on the situation, this is the end of the thread.
@Betel: It's very difficult to have a discussion when your side of the argument mostly involves explaining why any counter examples don't count.
"The comments come in the middle of a hail of abuse aimed at UE3, the eye of the storm being Silicon Knights' lawsuit against Epic, in which it claims SK was 'misled' over how complete Xbox 360 Unreal Engine 3 code actually was." http://www.gamesradar.com/ps3/stranglehold/news/unreal-engine-3-delaying-games/a-2007082016332832027/g-20060301165611510047 i.e."There was ONE example you could find (delayed PS3 port problems) and that is it." is not true
the only competant company [Digital Extremes] Midway games may not be as big as it once was, but calling them incompetent is a bit of a stretch. Silicon Knights codeveloped Legacy of Kain and Metal Gear Solid, which makes it seem they should qualify as competent. Koei has an extensive list of games developed, but I can't say any are particularly notable (probably competent but inconclusive) Mistwalker studios-short list of titles, none particularly notable.
Starvault may have very litlle programming experience. I don't know the specifics about their training (and neither do you) but there is one thing I can guarantee about the amount of experience they have. It is not "zero"
I am not trying to say that Epic bears full responsibility for the current state of MO. I am saying that when Henrik posts that they are waiting for a patch from Epic, there is good reason to assume he is telling the truth.
Sorry. I should not have assumed that it was your intent to insult people. When I referred to "cool head" I meant I should allow some time to cool off before answering.
Yes I am using Webster's online dictionary as a dictionary. If you check the thread I created specifically to discuss instancing and static vs. dynamic loading, you'll see I also cite http://geekdictionary.computing.net/define/instance, http://www.guildwars2guru.com/forum/loaded-zones-understanding-mmo-server-t10339.html and a lengthy essay by Brad Mcquaid discusses instancing. If you wish to check there, in a bit I'll post why you may be technically correct, but wrong from the standpoint of how people actually use the term. IIRC, YOU are the only person consistently claiming that MO is instanced.
A more precise description would be tnat MO is a seamless persistent world that uses dynamic streaming.. If that is not an accurate description, please give details of how this is wrong.http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/309342
They made there decision based on what Epic claims about Atlas. Somebody's got to be first. I'm sure someday when you are playing a different MMO that uses Atlas, you'll thank SV for helping to identify all the bugs, won't you?
Just wondering, how do you know?
P.S. If you think "seamless persistent world that uses dynamic streaming". is accurate in distinguishing MO from other games but "not an instanced game" is not, let me just point out the that would be a mouthful.