Howdy, Stranger!

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

5 Games That Deserve an Emulated Version | MMORPG.com

13

Comments

  • BobRichmondBobRichmond Member UncommonPosts: 32

    Sevenwind said:

    I think if there was a Marvel Heroes emulator it would go the route City of Heroes emulator did before it was leaked to the mmo sites. It would be extremely underground because if Disney got word they would agressivly seek legal action and take their children.



    I would love to play Tabula Rasa again and Asheron's Call 1/2.



    I don't know Disney's record on legal action against its shut down games, but they seem to be ok with the two that I am somewhat familiar with. What was once Virtual Magic Kingdom and Pirates of the Caribbean Online both were being emulated and Disney didn't seem to care.

    Bob

  • illutianillutian Member UncommonPosts: 343
    kitarad said:
    illutian said:
    It should be mandated that if you close down servers, you are required to 'open source' the game that ran on them.

    Imagine being told (and legally enforced) you can't drive your car anymore because the dealer you bought it from is no more. A lawsuit wouldn't even need the lawyers for the Judge to rule in your favor.
    It would if you rented the car. In MMORPG we are renting the game according to the way the EULA is written.
    ...the laws need to be changed. 'Software' is no different than 'hardware'. I own my computer, I own my software. Because I paid for both.

    Our greatest glory is not in never falling but in rising everytime we fall.

  • TillerTiller Member LegendaryPosts: 11,485
    edited February 2022
    I remember a time when discussing emulators here was an instant ban; I shit you not. I'm glad to see this has changed.
    MendelConstantineMerusachesomaIceAge
    SWG Bloodfin vet
    Elder Jedi/Elder Bounty Hunter
     
  • MendelMendel Member LegendaryPosts: 5,609
    illutian said:
    It should be mandated that if you close down servers, you are required to 'open source' the game that ran on them.

    Imagine being told (and legally enforced) you can't drive your car anymore because the dealer you bought it from is no more. A lawsuit wouldn't even need the lawyers for the Judge to rule in your favor.

    I totally disagree with this.  It circumvents all the concepts of IP ownership.

    A car is a physical thing.  It will die on its own due to accidents, neglect, and plain old rust.  Software isn't totally physical, it's electronic.  The physical devices it is stored and operated on might deteriorate, but the software (code) can be replicated and executed on other devices.

    Your attempted analogy suggests that all old models should still be manufactured, even if that model didn't sell, was badly designed, or financially disastrous to the company.  It essentially gives a 'product' a life, and requires the 'originator' of that product a responsibility for life.

    Aside: Henry Ford had to fight to build cars because ALAM claimed that every automobile was subject to their patent of the idea of an automobile.  Eventually, this forced the patent system to restrict patents to implementations and physical techniques, and not ideas or concepts.  That was a pretty major legal decision and set out a clear distinction between an idea and an invention.



    [Deleted User]Kyleran

    Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.

  • amithistamithist Member UncommonPosts: 28
    Dungeon Runner by NcSoft. It was fun and funny. I really miss it.
    maskedweasel

    image


  • SkuzSkuz Member UncommonPosts: 1,018
    edited February 2022
    Vanguard does have an emulator but it is still missing large parts of the game & the pace of development is glacially slow with a very small number of dedicated people doing any work on it, so it's a bit hit & miss but still worth a look.

    Wildstar should have been a bigger success than it was but I think people had gotten burned on past NC soft games getting nuked for no good reason so it never really gained traction, Comedy though can absolutely work in a game & Warhammer: Age of Reckoning had plenty of low-brow British-style comedy, so long as you played a Greenskin character at least.

    I would like a Tabula Rasa emulator to show up though, was one of the games I wanted to check out but never managed to get around to checking out.

    The Matrix Online was a lot of fun, though the combat completely let the game down that was not the game's real achilles heel, the fact every mission you did was in basically the exact same terrain meant the game got visually boring quickly, it basically did everything that City of Heroes did wrong (instead of 5 billion warehouses MXO had 5 billion apartment blocks) but didn't fix it while CoH eventually did.
    Kyleran
  • illutianillutian Member UncommonPosts: 343
    tzervo said:
    illutian said:
    kitarad said:
    illutian said:
    It should be mandated that if you close down servers, you are required to 'open source' the game that ran on them.

    Imagine being told (and legally enforced) you can't drive your car anymore because the dealer you bought it from is no more. A lawsuit wouldn't even need the lawyers for the Judge to rule in your favor.
    It would if you rented the car. In MMORPG we are renting the game according to the way the EULA is written.
    ...the laws need to be changed. 'Software' is no different than 'hardware'. I own my computer, I own my software. Because I paid for both.
    No, you paid for a license to access a live service for an amount of time (either duration of sub or as long as it is up).

    Noone sold you guarantees for perpetual access to that service or rights to its code. You do not own the software. That's just how live software services work, gaming or otherwise. 
    And this is why the law needs to be changed. As more software moves to 'live service'. The end-user is getting screwed.

    You'll agree with me the day you can't use your computer because the OS Maker, which moved to 'live service', decided your system wasn't going to be supported anymore and deactivated your 'license'. Even though, your system is still fully capable of being used in the capacity in which it was originally built for.

    Our greatest glory is not in never falling but in rising everytime we fall.

  • illutianillutian Member UncommonPosts: 343
    Mendel said:
    illutian said:
    It should be mandated that if you close down servers, you are required to 'open source' the game that ran on them.

    Imagine being told (and legally enforced) you can't drive your car anymore because the dealer you bought it from is no more. A lawsuit wouldn't even need the lawyers for the Judge to rule in your favor.

    I totally disagree with this.  It circumvents all the concepts of IP ownership.

    A car is a physical thing.  It will die on its own due to accidents, neglect, and plain old rust.  Software isn't totally physical, it's electronic.  The physical devices it is stored and operated on might deteriorate, but the software (code) can be replicated and executed on other devices.

    Your attempted analogy suggests that all old models should still be manufactured, even if that model didn't sell, was badly designed, or financially disastrous to the company.  It essentially gives a 'product' a life, and requires the 'originator' of that product a responsibility for life.

    Aside: Henry Ford had to fight to build cars because ALAM claimed that every automobile was subject to their patent of the idea of an automobile.  Eventually, this forced the patent system to restrict patents to implementations and physical techniques, and not ideas or concepts.  That was a pretty major legal decision and set out a clear distinction between an idea and an invention.



    No, my example, when applied to yours, would be more like: You're car is now 10yrs old. It's not allowed to be driven anymore. So the state comes and takes it away.

    The entire point is: If you shut down operation of software, you shouldn't be allowed to 'sit on it' forever.

    But, because of the way copyrights work, no one wants to 'give up' rights to anything they might be able to make a buck off in the future.

    Obviously, games like Warhammer Online are different because the 'lore' used is owned by a third party. A third party that's still actively using it.

    Our greatest glory is not in never falling but in rising everytime we fall.

  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 18,719
    I don't think I've ever seen misguided player entitlement so clearly and explicitly expressed before this thread.
    [Deleted User]SensaicheyaneConstantineMerus
    "Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”

    ― Umberto Eco

    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

  • illutianillutian Member UncommonPosts: 343
    tzervo said:
    illutian said:

    The entire point is: If you shut down operation of software, you shouldn't be allowed to 'sit on it' forever.
    Why not? It's their IP. Unless there is a breach of consumer law (say you pay them for access and they close down after a few days and run with the money), it is theirs to use as they see fit. Even in that case it would be a matter of refunding or fines, definitely not of opening up ownership of code/IP. 
    If you aren't going to use something. Why should you be allowed to keep it, and block others from using it.


    ...and think beyond "it's their IP".

    Is it 'right' for someone to hold on to something they no longer intend to use, while others would. It could be anything, from something critical (like food) to unimportant in the grand scheme of things (like a sporting event ticket).

    (('Right' being more on the side of morality than on legal. But then, most laws are written based on the morals of 'right' and 'wrong'.))

    The requirement is simple: Sell it or give it away.

    Our greatest glory is not in never falling but in rising everytime we fall.

  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 18,719
    tzervo said:
    illutian said:
    tzervo said:
    illutian said:

    The entire point is: If you shut down operation of software, you shouldn't be allowed to 'sit on it' forever.
    Why not? It's their IP. Unless there is a breach of consumer law (say you pay them for access and they close down after a few days and run with the money), it is theirs to use as they see fit. Even in that case it would be a matter of refunding or fines, definitely not of opening up ownership of code/IP. 
    If you aren't going to use something. Why should you be allowed to keep it, and block others from using it.


    ...and think beyond "it's their IP".

    Is it 'right' for someone to hold on to something they no longer intend to use, while others would. It could be anything, from something critical (like food) to unimportant in the grand scheme of things (like a sporting event ticket).

    (('Right' being more on the side of morality than on legal. But then, most laws are written based on the morals of 'right' and 'wrong'.))

    The requirement is simple: Sell it or give it away.
    "Something critical" vs "something unimportant" makes a huge difference when debating morality. I find it more immoral trying to appropriate someone's IP than the owners exercising their right to something they developed.

    When thinking IP and morality, think also the time and energy of those people put into that venture. You could argue it is a waste, and I would probably agree (which is why I applauded Perpetuum devs for open sourcing their game), but that's it. 
    Especially for something that is 100% non essential like a bloody game.
    [Deleted User]cheyaneConstantineMerus
    "Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”

    ― Umberto Eco

    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

  • illutianillutian Member UncommonPosts: 343
    tzervo said:
    illutian said:
    tzervo said:
    illutian said:

    -snip-
    -snip-
    -snip-
    "Something critical" vs "something unimportant" makes a huge difference when debating morality. I find it more immoral trying to appropriate someone's IP than the owners exercising their right to something they developed.

    When thinking IP and morality, think also the time and energy of those people put into that venture. You could argue it is a waste, and I would probably agree (which is why I applauded Perpetuum devs for open sourcing their game), but that's it. 
    Appropriation implies "taken without compensation" (monetary or just credits). Which isn't what I'm advocating for.

    Our greatest glory is not in never falling but in rising everytime we fall.

  • illutianillutian Member UncommonPosts: 343
    tzervo said:
    illutian said:
    And this is why the law needs to be changed. As more software moves to 'live service'. The end-user is getting screwed.

    You'll agree with me the day you can't use your computer because the OS Maker, which moved to 'live service', decided your system wasn't going to be supported anymore and deactivated your 'license'. Even though, your system is still fully capable of being used in the capacity in which it was originally built for.
    I can use Linux, which was built as an open source community effort from the ground up. No law needs to change.

    The first paragraph proves that this is not about morality but about "want"s. 
    To me, Morals are just Wants with nobility status.

    But you are correct. This is a Want.
    [Deleted User]

    Our greatest glory is not in never falling but in rising everytime we fall.

  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 32,931
    illutian said:
    tzervo said:
    illutian said:

    The entire point is: If you shut down operation of software, you shouldn't be allowed to 'sit on it' forever.
    Why not? It's their IP. Unless there is a breach of consumer law (say you pay them for access and they close down after a few days and run with the money), it is theirs to use as they see fit. Even in that case it would be a matter of refunding or fines, definitely not of opening up ownership of code/IP. 
    If you aren't going to use something. Why should you be allowed to keep it, and block others from using it.


    ...and think beyond "it's their IP".

    Is it 'right' for someone to hold on to something they no longer intend to use, while others would. It could be anything, from something critical (like food) to unimportant in the grand scheme of things (like a sporting event ticket).

    (('Right' being more on the side of morality than on legal. But then, most laws are written based on the morals of 'right' and 'wrong'.))

    The requirement is simple: Sell it or give it away.
    If I make something and decide I want to license it out, then that's my right. "I" made it.

    If a company makes something it's their right to do the same. I completely disagree with your stance.


    [Deleted User]ConstantineMerus
    Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb." 

    Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w


    Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547

    Try the "Special Edition." 'Cause it's "Special." https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/64878/?tab=description

    Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo 
  • kitaradkitarad Member LegendaryPosts: 8,177
    Sovrath said:
    illutian said:
    tzervo said:
    illutian said:

    The entire point is: If you shut down operation of software, you shouldn't be allowed to 'sit on it' forever.
    Why not? It's their IP. Unless there is a breach of consumer law (say you pay them for access and they close down after a few days and run with the money), it is theirs to use as they see fit. Even in that case it would be a matter of refunding or fines, definitely not of opening up ownership of code/IP. 
    If you aren't going to use something. Why should you be allowed to keep it, and block others from using it.


    ...and think beyond "it's their IP".

    Is it 'right' for someone to hold on to something they no longer intend to use, while others would. It could be anything, from something critical (like food) to unimportant in the grand scheme of things (like a sporting event ticket).

    (('Right' being more on the side of morality than on legal. But then, most laws are written based on the morals of 'right' and 'wrong'.))

    The requirement is simple: Sell it or give it away.
    If I make something and decide I want to license it out, then that's my right. "I" made it.

    If a company makes something it's their right to do the same. I completely disagree with your stance.


    It is fine until what you create and spent your time and effort on gets 'taken' by others claiming we are not using it. All I see here is greed on the part of people advocating for removing the rights of the creators.
    [Deleted User]Sovrath

  • cheyanecheyane Member LegendaryPosts: 9,404
    illutian said:
    tzervo said:
    illutian said:

    The entire point is: If you shut down operation of software, you shouldn't be allowed to 'sit on it' forever.
    Why not? It's their IP. Unless there is a breach of consumer law (say you pay them for access and they close down after a few days and run with the money), it is theirs to use as they see fit. Even in that case it would be a matter of refunding or fines, definitely not of opening up ownership of code/IP. 
    If you aren't going to use something. Why should you be allowed to keep it, and block others from using it.


    ...and think beyond "it's their IP".

    Is it 'right' for someone to hold on to something they no longer intend to use, while others would. It could be anything, from something critical (like food) to unimportant in the grand scheme of things (like a sporting event ticket).

    (('Right' being more on the side of morality than on legal. But then, most laws are written based on the morals of 'right' and 'wrong'.))

    The requirement is simple: Sell it or give it away.
    I am curious how do you intend to enforce this? Put them in prison for trying to keep what they created is it. I'd sooner destroy it then give it to the likes of you.
    Garrus Signature
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 44,056
    illutian said:
    tzervo said:
    illutian said:
    kitarad said:
    illutian said:
    It should be mandated that if you close down servers, you are required to 'open source' the game that ran on them.

    Imagine being told (and legally enforced) you can't drive your car anymore because the dealer you bought it from is no more. A lawsuit wouldn't even need the lawyers for the Judge to rule in your favor.
    It would if you rented the car. In MMORPG we are renting the game according to the way the EULA is written.
    ...the laws need to be changed. 'Software' is no different than 'hardware'. I own my computer, I own my software. Because I paid for both.
    No, you paid for a license to access a live service for an amount of time (either duration of sub or as long as it is up).

    Noone sold you guarantees for perpetual access to that service or rights to its code. You do not own the software. That's just how live software services work, gaming or otherwise. 
    And this is why the law needs to be changed. As more software moves to 'live service'. The end-user is getting screwed.

    You'll agree with me the day you can't use your computer because the OS Maker, which moved to 'live service', decided your system wasn't going to be supported anymore and deactivated your 'license'. Even though, your system is still fully capable of being used in the capacity in which it was originally built for.
    Already happened, Microsoft stopped supporting Win 7 which rendered my older but still quite serviceable gaming laptop mostly useless to play more modern games, especially as other companies all began to drop their support as well.

    It happens, all good things one day must come to an end.



    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • illutianillutian Member UncommonPosts: 343
    tzervo said:
    illutian said:
    tzervo said:
    "Something critical" vs "something unimportant" makes a huge difference when debating morality. I find it more immoral trying to appropriate someone's IP than the owners exercising their right to something they developed.

    When thinking IP and morality, think also the time and energy of those people put into that venture. You could argue it is a waste, and I would probably agree (which is why I applauded Perpetuum devs for open sourcing their game), but that's it. 
    Appropriation implies "taken without compensation" (monetary or just credits). Which isn't what I'm advocating for.
    Credits are not enough when those devs are out of work. Or the owner's investment is gone. Monetary compensation from where? Taxes? Which country's? Is it justified? Who decides how much this IP is worth? Even if, this should still be the owner's prerogative. 
    The monetary compensation is a company buying the IP. The credit is if it the company gave it away. Should have specified that; sorry.

    The law would only be there to compel the company to chose either option OR continue making use of the IP.

    Our greatest glory is not in never falling but in rising everytime we fall.

  • UngoodUngood Member LegendaryPosts: 7,534
    Kyleran said:
    illutian said:
    tzervo said:
    illutian said:
    kitarad said:
    illutian said:
    It should be mandated that if you close down servers, you are required to 'open source' the game that ran on them.

    Imagine being told (and legally enforced) you can't drive your car anymore because the dealer you bought it from is no more. A lawsuit wouldn't even need the lawyers for the Judge to rule in your favor.
    It would if you rented the car. In MMORPG we are renting the game according to the way the EULA is written.
    ...the laws need to be changed. 'Software' is no different than 'hardware'. I own my computer, I own my software. Because I paid for both.
    No, you paid for a license to access a live service for an amount of time (either duration of sub or as long as it is up).

    Noone sold you guarantees for perpetual access to that service or rights to its code. You do not own the software. That's just how live software services work, gaming or otherwise. 
    And this is why the law needs to be changed. As more software moves to 'live service'. The end-user is getting screwed.

    You'll agree with me the day you can't use your computer because the OS Maker, which moved to 'live service', decided your system wasn't going to be supported anymore and deactivated your 'license'. Even though, your system is still fully capable of being used in the capacity in which it was originally built for.
    Already happened, Microsoft stopped supporting Win 7 which rendered my older but still quite serviceable gaming laptop mostly useless to play more modern games, especially as other companies all began to drop their support as well.

    It happens, all good things one day must come to an end.



    wait till they discover that modern cars are becoming a service, where you will need to continue to pay for updates on your cars onboard computer system, and if you fail to pay your sub, many of your cars features will cease to function.

    No doubt this will also lead to the car having a life span, and once that year and model is discontinued, so too will the updates, requiring you to trade it in, if you want a functioning car.

    Ain't the future great! 
    MadBomber13Kyleran
    Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.

  • achesomaachesoma Member RarePosts: 1,768
    kitarad said:
    I liked Wildstar a lot I hated the combat though. It was terrible as a healer trying to aim and heal and avoid the shit tonne of moving red designs all around me. 
    Yes, I think their "telegraphic" combat was what ruined their chances of success. They should've made a hybrid with tab-targeting abilities. And not ALL abilities needed a telegraph on the ground. I mean I am hitting the bad guy in front of me. And the whole game you had keep staring the ground as if you are looking for your keys or something. 

    I agree. Ranged classes in particular were at disadvantage since most of the key abilities had to be stationary to use but mechanics required constant movement. It made no sense. Warrior and Stalker were fun to play though.
    ConstantineMerus
    Preaching Pantheon to People at PAX  PAX East 2018 Day 4 - YouTube
  • olepiolepi Member EpicPosts: 3,053
    I tend to use the Monopoly analogy. I bought the Monopoly game, I own it now. I can change the rules, make up new rules, use the money for an entirely different purpose, etc.

    The same is true of most single-player computer games. I have old CD's/DvD's of games, and I can still play them. I might have to keep an old computer around to play them on, but I "own" the game.

    Online games, like MMO's, are different. They require a server providing a service. I don't own the server. If they take it down, the game is gone. So most online games specify that you are using a service for a fee. They can change, or take down the service at anytime, with the caveat that they might have to refund some of the money already paid for a service that they aren't going to provide.

    So what irritates me the most are single-player games that still require you to be on the net and to sign on.
    Sovrath

    ------------
    2024: 47 years on the Net.


  • illutianillutian Member UncommonPosts: 343
    tzervo said:
    illutian said:
    The monetary compensation is a company buying the IP. The credit is if it the company gave it away. Should have specified that; sorry.

    The law would only be there to compel the company to chose either option OR continue making use of the IP.
    Then the biggest problem is who decides on the value.

    If it is the owner then this is exactly how things work today anyway - see Crowfall selling itself to another company just recently. If it is the government, I do not think it is the government's place to do that - this is a dangerous notion.
    It'd be as it is now: Value is what you're willing to pay and accept as pay. The only difference is there'd be a loaming "we're going to lose it anyways; lets agree on a price".

    Absolutely do  not want a government body deciding the value. Only that you can't just hold on to it "forever" (it's ~95yrs for Corporate copyrights).

    So, in reality, after looking into this. I suppose what I'm really saying is the "shelf life" of a copyright should be reduced considerably if it's 'abandoned'.

    Right now, all Corporate copyrights (as mentioned above) last 95yrs from publication.

    So, in 2102, someone can go and remake Tabula Rasa 1:1, and NCSoft can't sue them for copyright infringement.
    ...I think that's a bit of excessive amount of time to wait for an IP that has clearly been abandoned.

    Our greatest glory is not in never falling but in rising everytime we fall.

  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 32,931
    Kyleran said:
    illutian said:
    tzervo said:
    illutian said:
    kitarad said:
    illutian said:
    It should be mandated that if you close down servers, you are required to 'open source' the game that ran on them.

    Imagine being told (and legally enforced) you can't drive your car anymore because the dealer you bought it from is no more. A lawsuit wouldn't even need the lawyers for the Judge to rule in your favor.
    It would if you rented the car. In MMORPG we are renting the game according to the way the EULA is written.
    ...the laws need to be changed. 'Software' is no different than 'hardware'. I own my computer, I own my software. Because I paid for both.
    No, you paid for a license to access a live service for an amount of time (either duration of sub or as long as it is up).

    Noone sold you guarantees for perpetual access to that service or rights to its code. You do not own the software. That's just how live software services work, gaming or otherwise. 
    And this is why the law needs to be changed. As more software moves to 'live service'. The end-user is getting screwed.

    You'll agree with me the day you can't use your computer because the OS Maker, which moved to 'live service', decided your system wasn't going to be supported anymore and deactivated your 'license'. Even though, your system is still fully capable of being used in the capacity in which it was originally built for.
    Already happened, Microsoft stopped supporting Win 7 which rendered my older but still quite serviceable gaming laptop mostly useless to play more modern games, especially as other companies all began to drop their support as well.

    It happens, all good things one day must come to an end.



    Also, it's not realistic for them to support many different operating systems long after they have supposedly been replaced. Especially if newer software is made to run on the newer operating system.
    [Deleted User]Kyleran
    Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb." 

    Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w


    Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547

    Try the "Special Edition." 'Cause it's "Special." https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/64878/?tab=description

    Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo 
  • ConstantineMerusConstantineMerus Member EpicPosts: 3,338
    So if I ever have kids, and decide not to use them, will you guys keep them?

    Thanks!
    [Deleted User]
    Constantine, The Console Poster

    • "One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Carl Jung
  • FunkyMunky42FunkyMunky42 Member UncommonPosts: 18
    Interesting...Never called them Emulators before, just called them....Glances around secretly.... whispers "private servers".

    Seriously though, the games I would like to see emulated? 2 of them are really just earlier versions of games that are still running. SWtOR and LOtRO. And no, not "classic" servers, lotro sort of already has those, but bona-fide clients as they were back in their early days. For SWtOR it would be prior to the Revan expansion (Hutt Cartel expansion), and for Lotro it would be up through Moria.
Sign In or Register to comment.