Originally posted by Anofalye Originally posted by Vengeful Originally posted by Anofalye
Personnally I would be in favor of DEBT (95% of the players care about these) and an amount of lives per months (now the 5% remaining will care), but I know FoH crybabies can't stand an amount of lives per month, it mean that they wouldn't be able to zerg anymore and that they would go down the shaft.
Or maybe it's just cause they don't want to be limited on the amount of time they can play? o.O
What if you have alot of time to play at the beginning of the month, and you die alot cause you're moving into a new zone, you waste your lives/month in the first week and can't play for 3 more weeks because you're out of lives?
All this system would do would make more people cheese content so they can keep playing. Arbitrary numbers of lives per month would limit game play, not enhance it from "oldschool mechanics"
An incremental penalty as they are doing now affect EVERY casual.
What I suggest affect only players with LOT of times, such peoples are not considering themselves casuals and are available to meet the challenge or start new toons, as needed.
While the casuals affected by an INCREMENTAL penalty, they may be too casuals to adapt.
PS: Not to forget a nice side aspect in game balancing for races, not all races need to have the same amount of lives...a side aspect, but a nice side aspect.
It would just change things from one extreme to the other. You'd still be limiting players and how they can play the game instead of letting the player decide what they want to do and how they want to play. I would say MOST players don't just stick with one play style or at least wish there were more available to them, and I for one, wouldn't like my option to be "start an alt"
Between Vanguard's Graduated Death Penalt and a Set number of lives per month, I'd got with Vanguard...and I'd be willing to bet that most everyone would agree with me...cause people just don't want to feel restricted and claustrophobic in the games they are playing, they want more options, not less.
...oh, hey...and "Freedom" is Sigil's lil' moto they've been tossing around, go figure.
Originally posted by Anofalye Originally posted by Vengeful Originally posted by Anofalye
Personnally I would be in favor of DEBT (95% of the players care about these) and an amount of lives per months (now the 5% remaining will care), but I know FoH crybabies can't stand an amount of lives per month, it mean that they wouldn't be able to zerg anymore and that they would go down the shaft.
Or maybe it's just cause they don't want to be limited on the amount of time they can play? o.O
What if you have alot of time to play at the beginning of the month, and you die alot cause you're moving into a new zone, you waste your lives/month in the first week and can't play for 3 more weeks because you're out of lives?
All this system would do would make more people cheese content so they can keep playing. Arbitrary numbers of lives per month would limit game play, not enhance it from "oldschool mechanics"
An incremental penalty as they are doing now affect EVERY casual.
What I suggest affect only players with LOT of times, such peoples are not considering themselves casuals and are available to meet the challenge or start new toons, as needed.
While the casuals affected by an INCREMENTAL penalty, they may be too casuals to adapt.
PS: Not to forget a nice side aspect in game balancing for races, not all races need to have the same amount of lives...a side aspect, but a nice side aspect.
It would just change things from one extreme to the other. You'd still be limiting players and how they can play the game instead of letting the player decide what they want to do and how they want to play. I would say MOST players don't just stick with one play style or at least wish there were more available to them, and I for one, wouldn't like my option to be "start an alt"
Between Vanguard's Graduated Death Penalt and a Set number of lives per month, I'd got with Vanguard...and I'd be willing to bet that most everyone would agree with me...cause people just don't want to feel restricted and claustrophobic in the games they are playing, they want more options, not less.
...oh, hey...and "Freedom" is Sigil's lil' moto they've been tossing around, go figure.
Originally posted by dink Well, you are almost right here. I don't think casual players want to be "the best" or have the best gear without it being challenging or investing effort in the game. They just want to be ABLE to be the best or be ABLE to get the best gear without changing their lives around a video game. A lot of us like playing MMOs, but simply don't want to have to join an uber guild, plan our lives around a raiding night, or feel like we are playing a game that penalizes so harshly. For adults who have about 10-20 hours/week of free-time, a death penalty that steals 3 of those hours is intolerable. Plus there are other options. You are completley correct about that part, and it is the reason that you don't see casual gamers in large numbers on Vanguard forums. Most of them don't know about the game, but even the ones that do know about it generally just read the FAQ and figure out that the game is definitely not for them. However, this game will NEVER stop hearing from them even though it is being designed for hardcore gamers with lots of timesinks and penalties. There will always be the hardcore gamer's friends who play it, or the people who pick it up because the game won't advertise (PENALTIES AND TIMESINKS GALORE!) on the box. That would be dumb of them. My guess is that even a game as intricate and feature-deep as Vanguard (well, if they get it all working and get the live game to look like the screenshots instead of what it looks like in action) will only survive in obscurity. . . It will be one of those slightly followed games like CoH/CoV with a core group that keeps the game in the black, but it will never be a success like WoW. . . or like it's upcoming competitors (who are taking a page out of WoW's book and removing timesinks from their games).
i cant say that i disagree with everything you wrote, but i think you underestimate how many people want a game like vanguard. also using coh/cov as your example was kind of funny because correct me if i am wrong but i thought that those games were casual friendly? what does vanguard and coh/cov have in common if anything at all?
you are right it wont have as many people playing as wow, and that is fine. but you mention how successful wow is and apparently fail to realize how item/raid centric that game is. wow is a huge time sink and not just the casuals but even the semi-casual complain about it.
but yet, somehow millions of people still play the game. i think if sigil pulls it off and the game has all the mechanics they say it will that it will have at least 300-400k playing the game sometime after release.
there will always be people that play your game 15 hours a day and plow through content to get all the gear before casual can.
and unless its a game that doesn't have alot of content the guy playing 15 hours per day will have more goodies and higher skill/level than any casual.
and the casuals will complain about not having all the goodies a hardcore has and the hardcore will complain that the "endgame" sucks or that there isn't enough content for them because they plowed through it in two months.
its a never ending cycle....and you will never be able to make both groups happy no matter what.
Originally posted by Anofalye Originally posted by Caliss where the risk if you don't loose anything... you have to be logical at some All that matter is WHAT is lost. 3 hours of "hardwork" lost is unbearable for nearly all my friends, while me, I hardly flinch, smile evilly and overcome it. Your attitude is negative on everyone else, the fact the majority of players are casuals and can't stand a 3 hours lost is too hard on you, you can't come to terms with it. Me I don't even flinch.Personnally I would be in favor of DEBT (95% of the players care about these) and an amount of lives per months (now the 5% remaining will care), but I know FoH crybabies can't stand an amount of lives per month, it mean that they wouldn't be able to zerg anymore and that they would go down the shaft.
i don't think the xp loss/debit is anywhere near as harsh as you think it will be. yeah in eq1 it was like that but i am pretty sure vanguards wont be as bad, i thought i read somewhere about this but cant seem to find it ATM.
Originally posted by Anofalye Originally posted by Caliss where the risk if you don't loose anything... you have to be logical at some
All that matter is WHAT is lost. 3 hours of "hardwork" lost is unbearable for nearly all my friends, while me, I hardly flinch, smile evilly and overcome it. Your attitude is negative on everyone else, the fact the majority of players are casuals and can't stand a 3 hours lost is too hard on you, you can't come to terms with it. Me I don't even flinch. Personnally I would be in favor of DEBT (95% of the players care about these) and an amount of lives per months (now the 5% remaining will care), but I know FoH crybabies can't stand an amount of lives per month, it mean that they wouldn't be able to zerg anymore and that they would go down the shaft.
i don't think the xp loss/debit is anywhere near as harsh as you think it will be. yeah in eq1 it was like that but i am pretty sure vanguards wont be as bad, i thought i read somewhere about this but cant seem to find it ATM.
Originally posted by Vengeful Originally posted by Anofalye An incremental penalty as they are doing now affect EVERY casual.
What I suggest affect only players with LOT of times, such peoples are not considering themselves casuals and are available to meet the challenge or start new toons, as needed.
While the casuals affected by an INCREMENTAL penalty, they may be too casuals to adapt.
PS: Not to forget a nice side aspect in game balancing for races, not all races need to have the same amount of lives...a side aspect, but a nice side aspect.
It would just change things from one extreme to the other. You'd still be limiting players and how they can play the game instead of letting the player decide what they want to do and how they want to play. I would say MOST players don't just stick with one play style or at least wish there were more available to them, and I for one, wouldn't like my option to be "start an alt"
Between Vanguard's Graduated Death Penalt and a Set number of lives per month, I'd got with Vanguard...and I'd be willing to bet that most everyone would agree with me...cause people just don't want to feel restricted and claustrophobic in the games they are playing, they want more options, not less.
...oh, hey...and "Freedom" is Sigil's lil' moto they've been tossing around, go figure.
*shrug* The death penalty is not what bother me, I was merely answering a guy, and this INCREMENTAL system will penalised casuals, not that I mind that much, I ain't casual at all even if I rather bang my head in a wall than raid.
What you fail to understand, an amount of lives per month would affect less than 10% of the player base, which would be peoples like you and me. The average player would never get anywhere close to it. For one, I rather think toward other players desires than my own...and I would really love such a challenge myself.
With the amount of times I did play old EQ, I would be affected by this lives per month, it would be a constant concern, something to work around. You as well. But all my RL friends that did play EQ, none of them would be affected by it. Nope, not even 1 of them. They just don't play enough and they just all care a LOT about losing XP/DEBT.
It all come down to choices, to which player base you are catering to, having an INCREMENTAL system favor peoples with lot of time, just like me, at the expense of casuals and peoples with less time...it also favor uber guilds. Really, when a dev say the game focus on casuals, you shouldn't have a death system that favor peoples with TONS of time at the expanse of the peoples with less time. That is my opinion, and I am right. Argue all you want.
FREEDOM: LOL, that is the worst lie, there is NO freedom in a game where if you want to be the best grouper, you have to raid, solo, group and tradeskill, there is absolutely no freedom, this is a predetermined path and everyone will remember the activity they despite the most.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
What you fail to understand, an amount of lives per month would affect less than 10% of the player base, which would be peoples like you and me. The average player would never get anywhere close to it. For one, I rather think toward other players desires than my own...and I would really love such a challenge myself.
are you suggesting that there be a maximum number of deaths per month allowed for each character you make? sorry but if so that is a terrible idea from a business standpoint.
so even though most people will not exceed this you are basically stopping people from playing your game witch they play a monthly fee for.
i can understand implementing a server like this maybe but not forced upon, i just think that is a bad idea and willing to bet that no game ever uses a idea like this, well no successful one at least.
Originally posted by Amathe The problem with Sigil is that they will never be able to make a game that is fun for a casual player because they don't know how. Brad believes that the way these games should be made is that a select group of self-styled elite players (the "bleeding edge", he calls them) should have all the fun and all the goodies, and everyone else is merely there to fawn over them and pay Sigil's bills. If anyone other than elite players are having fun and feeling successful, Sigil regards that as poor design and a "dumbed down" game. So while I nod my head in recognition of the fact that they are - very belatedly - trying to adapt the game to a wider audience, I know they cannot part with certain core beliefs that will make this game a chore for anyone other than people who play 4-10 hours a day, every day of their lives. This could have been the best game ever. I was looking forward to playing it for many years. What a shame.
Simply not true, but I'm wiser then to get into a debate about it. Not like *anything* is gonna change your perspective at this point right? Better off not wasting breath.
'Core' gamers, who the game is aimed at are *not* the same as *hardcore* gamers, which is something I am sure you know but choose to ignore because it suits your point.
The only question I will ask is that *even* if this is 10% true as a fair overview of the design and philosophy of the game, why do you fear competition? Why does investment scare you?
If you have not the skill, social networks, or time time to succeed in a game, should everyone be limited to what you want to put in? Just because you cannot win, does that mean everyone should lose?
I'm so damn bored of the 8 year old/ casual gamer (who want the same thing) crowd dictating how a game should be. If people keep demanding McDonalds drop-in arcade MMO porn for people who cannot/ will not invest themselves into a community and yet demand equality with those who can/ will, thats all there will ever be.
You are the same reason that TV is full of crap, the charts are full of crap, the shops are full of crap. I want more then the lowest common denominator wrapped in colorful graphics, and so does Sigil I think.
I'm proud to be part of an already great community that supports a company like this. a company that belives the game they want to make is at least as important as the profit generated.
That means that EVERYONE will want the high risk mobs because they want the high risk loot.
Sounds to me like you're assuming everyone thinks (and plays) like you do. My playstyle is pretty conservative. When my healer sees a big, scary dragon, he say, quaveringly, "Um... guys...? Maybe we should just go back to town." which is completely in his character. Does he have any uber-gear? No way. But that's not why he's there, either. Not everyone is interested in high-risk, adrenaline-pumping, daring feats of legend. But that doesn't mean those people aren't part of the community.
Originally posted by Caliss Originally posted by dink
For adults who have about 10-20 hours/week of free-time, a death penalty that steals 3 of those hours is intolerable.
Speak for yourself please. This is your opinion, don't think everybody share the same vision. I do think that if you want to take the risk from time to time and that you have the penalty, it's a reasonable system. As a casual you may not want to take risk of penalty all the time but then maybe you can be in the mood at some points and then this game will allow it. On the contrary i find their system clever. Not in the mood of having a great penalty ? ok today i'm not taking the risk but can still have fun ... in the mood for more adventure than usual ? let's go deep in this dungeon see if i can beat this challenge and let's be prepared to pay it if i suck. I like it.
What you fail to understand, an amount of lives per month would affect less than 10% of the player base, which would be peoples like you and me. The average player would never get anywhere close to it. For one, I rather think toward other players desires than my own...and I would really love such a challenge myself.
With the amount of times I did play old EQ, I would be affected by this lives per month, it would be a constant concern, something to work around. You as well. But all my RL friends that did play EQ, none of them would be affected by it. Nope, not even 1 of them. They just don't play enough and they just all care a LOT about losing XP/DEBT.
It all come down to choices, to which player base you are catering to, having an INCREMENTAL system favor peoples with lot of time, just like me, at the expense of casuals and peoples with less time...it also favor uber guilds. Really, when a dev say the game focus on casuals, you shouldn't have a death system that favor peoples with TONS of time at the expanse of the peoples with less time. That is my opinion, and I am right. Argue all you want.
FREEDOM: LOL, that is the worst lie, there is NO freedom in a game where if you want to be the best grouper, you have to raid, solo, group and tradeskill, there is absolutely no freedom, this is a predetermined path and everyone will remember the activity they despite the most.
-_-
I think you're missing something.
There will be Soloable mobs, casual named mobs with high threat levels that drop awesome or close to awesome gear. These Casual Players will be able to confront these mobs on their own time.
Additionally, players may play casually after work for an hour and a half, and experience small death penalties that consume little or no time. And, they can play on the weekend, while their spouse is out of time and they are shirking their yard work, run a dungeons for 4 or 5 hours and recieve comperable loot.
Conversely, the ones that are going for the highest threat mobs all the time, are going to be experiencing much harsher death penalties (by an order of magnitude) and will thusly have more roadblocks ahead of them.
It is about risk versus reward for all time commitment and play styles. If you want better or the best you have to risk more, if you don't want to risk more then your options are limited. And really, you have the freedom to choose what type of penalties you are subjecting yourself to EVERY TIME YOU PLAY by choosing what creatures/quests/dungeons you are participating in.
Originally posted by renfeld Originally posted by dink
That means that EVERYONE will want the high risk mobs because they want the high risk loot.
Sounds to me like you're assuming everyone thinks (and plays) like you do. My playstyle is pretty conservative. When my healer sees a big, scary dragon, he say, quaveringly, "Um... guys...? Maybe we should just go back to town." which is completely in his character. Does he have any uber-gear? No way. But that's not why he's there, either. Not everyone is interested in high-risk, adrenaline-pumping, daring feats of legend. But that doesn't mean those people aren't part of the community.
-Ren
You see, but Dink, Jonaku, and some of the other nay-sayers don't understand that not everyone is a power gamer. Some, perhaps many are.
I'm a min-maxer, always have been...can't keep myself from playing by the numbers, it makes me happy. In my DnD 3.5 Ed game I'm playing with my friends, I have a sissy ass Bard that can hit with his rapier (Damage Range of 1-6 + Modifiers) for 40 points Non Crit at level 7, with gear comparable to his level. It's all in the planning, really...
But... I mean...whose fault is it if you can't just allow yourself to enjoy a game and not worry about being the absolute best absolutely all the time. It's not the Devs fault, I'll tell you that much.
The only people who fear/ hate this game are the people who don't understand it, or of of course the people who are *paid* to troll forums to destroy competition... (sad but true)
Anyone who is sane, or not paid, would have looked at this, shrugged and moved on and not even bothered with these forumsy... the fact that some people 'care' so much about something they will *never play* speaks volumes.
To iillicite either a strong attack or a strong defense means that the parties involved have a vested interest.
Originally posted by vesavius The only people who fear/ hate this game are the people who don't understand it, or of of course the people who are *paid* to troll forums to destroy competition... (sad but true) Anyone who is sane, or not paid, would have looked at this, shrugged and moved on and not even bothered with these forumsy... the fact that some people 'care' so much about something they will *never play* speaks volumes. To iillicite either a strong attack or a strong defense means that the parties involved have a vested interest. yes?
No.
A player may just HOPE a LOT. I honestly think Vanguard would make such a great game, as long as there is non-raiding servers. My interest is about gaining a wonderful gaming experience. You can disagree, hate me, think I should go elsewhere, but I will still check the most promising titles and pinpoint any critical flaws they have, like enforced raiding.
However, I do believe that BioWare will save me, in a few years! I just hope I won't have only CoV to call a good MMO until then, and yes, if Vanguard would freaking stop it raiding nonsense, it would indeed be a very good game...but with raiding it is a nightmare and it value decrease to 0.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Originally posted by Vengeful -_- I think you're missing something. There will be Soloable mobs, casual named mobs with high threat levels that drop awesome or close to awesome gear. These Casual Players will be able to confront these mobs on their own time.
All this is pointless, completely wasted. Underdog no thanks.
Best groupers deserve to be groupers, not raiders. I am adamant about it, because raiders are just unworthy of any non-raiding reward since they are not doing these activities while they raid.
But just like a ganker requesting best loot in a PvP zone, you think it is right that raiders are the best at everything, so raiding is supreme and at the expanse of everything else.
As long as raiding grant 1 hp I can't access anywhere else and that this hp can be useful in grouping, this is unfair and unacceptable, period. Best groupers have to earn everything by grouping, not raiding or tradeskilling. End of discussion.
EDIT: I can't accept playing on a raiding server anymore than I would accept playing on a PvP server, these are harmful gameplays to what I love, which is PvE grouping. Yet, for some reason you understand that PvP ruins PvE, but you seem to be freaking incapable of understanding that raiding is just as freaking bad on grouping as PvP is. Raiding KILL grouping.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Originally posted by Anofalye Originally posted by vesavius The only people who fear/ hate this game are the people who don't understand it, or of of course the people who are *paid* to troll forums to destroy competition... (sad but true) Anyone who is sane, or not paid, would have looked at this, shrugged and moved on and not even bothered with these forumsy... the fact that some people 'care' so much about something they will *never play* speaks volumes. To iillicite either a strong attack or a strong defense means that the parties involved have a vested interest. yes?
No.
A player may just HOPE a LOT. I honestly think Vanguard would make such a great game, as long as there is non-raiding servers. My interest is about gaining a wonderful gaming experience. You can disagree, hate me, think I should go elsewhere, but I will still check the most promising titles and pinpoint any critical flaws they have, like enforced raiding.
However, I do believe that BioWare will save me, in a few years! I just hope I won't have only CoV to call a good MMO until then, and yes, if Vanguard would freaking stop it raiding nonsense, it would indeed be a very good game...but with raiding it is a nightmare and it value decrease to 0.
for a start, i don't hate anyone online, 'cause thats just silly...
secondly, i also love Bioware. they have made some great single palyer games and the sooner they produce a MMORPG with the same philosophy the better.
thirdly, CoV is a good *arcade* game that happens to be a persistant world.
Fourthy, why are you scared of competition? Just because you personally cannot compete, does that mean everyone else should be restricted by your play style or times?
'core' is not the same as 'hardcore'.
this game is for those who want more then 8 year old/ casaul gamer crap. You don't have to like it, but what do gain by flaming it? Honest critisicism is fine, but hate posts for a game you will never invest in is stupid.
for a start, i don't hate anyone online, 'cause thats just silly... secondly, i also love Bioware. they have made some great single palyer games and the sooner they produce a MMORPG with the same philosophy the better. thirdly, CoV is a good *arcade* game that happens to be a persistant world. Fourthy, why are you scared of competition? Just because you personally cannot compete, does that mean everyone else should be restricted by your play style or times? 'core' is not the same as 'hardcore'. this game is for those who want more then 8 year old/ casaul gamer crap. You don't have to like it, but what do gain by flaming it? Honest critisicism is fine, but hate posts for a game you will never invest in is stupid.
Remove raiding and I would love it.
Because I don't want to raid I am 8 year old or casual? Afterlife is mostly crowded by casuals, so was FoH. They just have tons of time, casuals nonetheless, following a few real dedicated leader, that is all.
I am not scared of competition, I want a good game with 0 raiding enforced on me, and since all these devs seem unable to understand, I try to explain on the FEW who might be able to. But I doubt it.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Originally posted by Anofalye Originally posted by vesavius
for a start, i don't hate anyone online, 'cause thats just silly... secondly, i also love Bioware. they have made some great single palyer games and the sooner they produce a MMORPG with the same philosophy the better. thirdly, CoV is a good *arcade* game that happens to be a persistant world. Fourthy, why are you scared of competition? Just because you personally cannot compete, does that mean everyone else should be restricted by your play style or times? 'core' is not the same as 'hardcore'. this game is for those who want more then 8 year old/ casaul gamer crap. You don't have to like it, but what do gain by flaming it? Honest critisicism is fine, but hate posts for a game you will never invest in is stupid.
Remove raiding and I would love it.
Because I don't want to raid I am 8 year old or casual? Get lost!
I have enjoyed *many* *many* games without being in the top 20% of raiders... why? because I have formed strong social networks and relationships that have made the games that you hate fun. I don't define Vangaurd by raiding, i define it by risk and reward, and, not by least, the people.
the point you are reallly miising is that it really dosent matter if *you* love it or not... you are pretty much irrelevant to be honest. This simply isnt for you... This is for people who want something better then the WoW model. I am sick of the NCsoft/ WoW McDonalds lowest comman denominator MMO Porn approach.
Like I have said before, i am *proud* to support a company that needs to make a game on the basis that they would love to play it themselves rather then to make a huge profit...
and no... i am not gonna get lost... that also is just silly and has no value.
the point you are reallly miising is that it really dosent matter if *you* love it or not... you are pretty much irrelevant to be honest. This simply isnt for you... This is for people who want something better then the WoW model. I am sick of the NCsoft/ WoW McDonalds lowest comman denominator MMO Porn approach.
LOL, WOW, VANGUARD and CoH have 1 point in comon: They enforce raiding.
I might be irrelevant and you might not care, but I can freely speak my mind and say it loud.
RAIDING kills grouping.
Talk your chinese philosophy of life as much as you want, for real peoples with real objectives:
RAIDING kill grouping.
EDIT: Everyone has a right to DREAM to reach the top, the fact they reach it or not is irrelevant, they dream they can.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Originally posted by vesavius The only people who fear/ hate this game are the people who don't understand it, or of of course the people who are *paid* to troll forums to destroy competition... (sad but true) Anyone who is sane, or not paid, would have looked at this, shrugged and moved on and not even bothered with these forumsy... the fact that some people 'care' so much about something they will *never play* speaks volumes. To iillicite either a strong attack or a strong defense means that the parties involved have a vested interest. yes?
Vesavius,
You are systematically answering every post about Vanguard, old and new, all of a sudden. Your account is created back in 2004 and you have a total of 22 posts.
Yet you come accusing other peoples of having a vested interest in the game? No company would afford nearly 4k posts of advertisement, it would just not be marketing wise and better spent on banners. LOL, if someone has a vested interest in the game, I think you are.
We are a friday night, so you prolly come back from work and are now answering messages, community work it must be.
If someone on this site has a vested interest and is not a gamer, it is YOU sir. I think you pretty much describe yourself as the person having vested interest in making money rather than making a FUN game. Under a cool looking demeanor, you are offensive and aggresive toward other peoples.
Suit yourself, I know you are like a ghost, here today, but not back before a LONG time, maybe your take turns on answering online forums?
As to myself, I become a Game Designer in some tiny small company that will never grow big enough to make MMOs. I may even add that I become a Game Designer because the Vision(tm) anger me. Talk about dedication and be shy about it if you want! Me, I will just drink beer in the meanwhile!
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Originally posted by Anofalye Originally posted by vesavius
the point you are reallly miising is that it really dosent matter if *you* love it or not... you are pretty much irrelevant to be honest. This simply isnt for you... This is for people who want something better then the WoW model. I am sick of the NCsoft/ WoW McDonalds lowest comman denominator MMO Porn approach.
okies... for one, shouting dosent make your point any kore vaild or heard yes?
LOL, WOW, VANGUARD and CoH have 1 point in comon: They enforce raiding.
One point in common dosent define a game or indeed make them similar... EQ1 and WoW have many many points in common, but that isnt the point i am making... You don't see this? 'lol'?
I might be irrelevant and you might not care, but I can freely speak my mind and say it loud.
you are indeed free to do both, I am noone to stop you, but I wonder why you would bother...
RAIDING kills grouping.
then don't play... why waste your time discussing a game you 'know' already you will hate? Take a deep breath and move on.
Talk your chinese philosophy of life as much as you want, for real peoples with real objectives:
if your don't agree, it's easier to use worthless catch phrases then actually validating your views yes?
RAIDING kill grouping.
in your unfounded (as far as you have 'proven' to my eyes...) silly opinion, but not in my personal experience. To debate this with you would be wortheless, simply because you have a set in stone opinion that I am not gonna shift whatever...
Originally posted by vesavius Originally posted by Anofalye
okies... for one, shouting dosent make your point any kore vaild or heard yes? Agrressive and nasty will help you make your point with a 100% accuracy.
LOL, WOW, VANGUARD and CoH have 1 point in comon: They enforce raiding. One point in common dosent define a game or indeed make them similar... EQ1 and WoW have many many points in common, but that isnt the point i am making... You don't see this? 'lol'? Add EQ1 and EQ2 to the list, they all enforce raiding. I think it is YOU that doesn't see this point.
I might be irrelevant and you might not care, but I can freely speak my mind and say it loud. you are indeed free to do both, I am noone to stop you, but I wonder why you would bother... Because I see the potential for FUN, yet all MMOs come and enfoce raiding, there will be a good MMO somewhere that won't enforce raiding, eventually, until that time I am trapped.
RAIDING kills grouping. then don't play... why waste your time discussing a game you 'know' already you will hate? Take a deep breath and move on. Name me 1 MMO that doesn't enforce raiding or PvP.
Talk your chinese philosophy of life as much as you want, for real peoples with real objectives: if your don't agree, it's easier to use worthless catch phrases then actually validating your views yes? You say some vague stuff about not been in the top 20% players, but the fact is, most peoples care about THAT, reaching the TOP. If you are a chinese ying and yang type and doesn't want to be the best good for you, I am not above that, I want to be the best or at least try, and if been the best mean raiding in all MMOs there is a freaking problem.
RAIDING kill grouping. in your unfounded (as far as you have 'proven' to my eyes...) silly opinion, but not in my personal experience. To debate this with you would be wortheless, simply because you have a set in stone opinion that I am not gonna shift whatever... Peoples focus on getting raids worked, abandon group, leave group, doesn't group, they want the best tools, and these are not given inside grouping, but inside raiding, it is killing grouping. Raiding kills grouping just as badly as PvP enforced on everyone kill PvE. Differents gameplays, differents logics. But a GANKER would agree that having all the best loot in PvP is fine and as it should be, like old UO, old school stuff...he will tell you that all PvP safe zones are a nonsense...just as you are telling me that raiding isn't bad on grouping. But raiding kills grouping.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Originally posted by Anofalye Originally posted by vesavius Originally posted by Anofalye
okies... for one, shouting dosent make your point any kore vaild or heard yes? Agrressive and nasty will help you make your point with a 100% accuracy.
LOL, WOW, VANGUARD and CoH have 1 point in comon: They enforce raiding. One point in common dosent define a game or indeed make them similar... EQ1 and WoW have many many points in common, but that isnt the point i am making... You don't see this? 'lol'? Add EQ1 and EQ2 to the list, they all enforce raiding. I think it is YOU that doesn't see this point. You mean you have a point? Sorry, musta dropped off.
I might be irrelevant and you might not care, but I can freely speak my mind and say it loud. you are indeed free to do both, I am noone to stop you, but I wonder why you would bother... Because I see the potential for FUN, yet all MMOs come and enfoce raiding, there will be a good MMO somewhere that won't enforce raiding, eventually, until that time I am trapped. This game simply won't fill that potentiol for you, that much is obvious, so why labour the point? you have saind your peice... Like I say, time to take a breath and move on. your owrk here is done yes? Simply put, you don't have to ply it...
RAIDING kills grouping. then don't play... why waste your time discussing a game you 'know' already you will hate? Take a deep breath and move on. Name me 1 MMO that doesn't enforce raiding or PvP. erm... why would I even try? Like I say, if you hate it so much, just don't play... I fail to understand how what you say is a relevant answer to my response.
Talk your chinese philosophy of life as much as you want, for real peoples with real objectives: if your don't agree, it's easier to use worthless catch phrases then actually validating your views yes? You say some vague stuff about not been in the top 20% players, I don't are personally if *i* am in the top 20% of the server... thats not vague... eh? but the fact is, most peoples care about THAT, reaching the TOP. Thats *their* issue, or should I say *yours*? quit projecting your needs/ wants onto us all. If you are a chinese ying and yang type and doesn't want to be the best good for you, yay, *now* your starting to get it!! I am not above that, I want to be the best or at least try, and if been the best mean raiding in all MMOs there is a freaking problem. Bleh... no, it seems you don't...
RAIDING kill grouping. in your unfounded (as far as you have 'proven' to my eyes...) silly opinion, but not in my personal experience. To debate this with you would be wortheless, simply because you have a set in stone opinion that I am not gonna shift whatever... Peoples focus on getting raids worked, abandon group, leave group, doesn't group, they want the best tools, and these are not given inside grouping, but inside raiding, it is killing grouping. Raiding kills grouping just as badly as PvP enforced on everyone kill PvE. Differents gameplays, differents logics. But a GANKER would agree that having all the best loot in PvP is fine and as it should be, like old UO, old school stuff...he will tell you that all PvP safe zones are a nonsense...just as you are telling me that raiding isn't bad on grouping. But raiding kills grouping. Sorry, was that even English? Less ranting, more objective clear thought and expression please?
Insult me, be as arrogant as you want. I taste something good in EQ. It was ruined by raiding. I want more of it. I wont stop until I find it back.
Move on? *shrug* I will, when I find a game to hold my interest, but until then, I am spending time on forums, talking and pinpointing good points and flaws.
Ask your friend Brad, if someone telling him to move on after he experience PvP in online gaming would have satieted him? It wouldn't. I don't have the talent to bring out a PvE MMO about grouping, so I do the second most logical step to it, I check for it and I praise it forthcoming if I see it.
Insult my english skills all you want, the fact we are talking in english and not in my native tongue is all that matter now, if you can't grasp what I say, you can blame yourself. Unless it is the usual elitist attitude to denigrate other that I found in old EQ uber guilds, in which case it would only lessen your opinion to irrelevance.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Originally posted by Anofalye Vesavus got better at taunt(255)! yay! I love skill ups!
Insult me, be as arrogant as you want. I taste something good in EQ. It was ruined by raiding. I want more of it. I wont stop until I find it back. This isnt about being arrogant, it's about debating passionate beliefs in something we care about yes? I actually like your search for somthing better, but i just fail to see why attacking a game you will never play will make it come any quicker...
Move on? *shrug* I will, when I find a game to hold my interest, but until then, I am spending time on forums, talking and pinpointing good points and flaws. Like I say, attacking a game that you will never play will *not* make your dream game come on any sooner... If you don't actually intend of being part of the community, find a game out there that maybe excites you and inspires you to post postitive thoughts, rather then trolling negativity just because you know you will get a knee jerk reaction from people who actually care.
Ask your friend Brad, if someone telling him to move on after he experience PvP in online gaming would have satieted him? It wouldn't. I don't have the talent to bring out a PvE MMO about grouping, so I do the second most logical step to it, I check for it and I praise it forthcoming if I see it *If* he is my friend, it is only because he has actually bothered to personally reply to posts I have made and communicate his dreams and hopes to us all. I can only wish every MMORPG dev took as much care...
Insult my english skills all you want, the fact we are talking in english and not in my native tongue is all that matter now, if you can't grasp what I say, you can blame yourself. Unless it is the usual elitist attitude to denigrate other that I found in old EQ uber guilds, in which case it would only lessen your opinion to irrelevance. I am not attacking your english skills as a second language... I am merely stating that I really didnt understand the point you was making... Like I say though, I have never been uber, but I enjoy the games I play nonetheless
Comments
Or maybe it's just cause they don't want to be limited on the amount of time they can play? o.O
What if you have alot of time to play at the beginning of the month, and you die alot cause you're moving into a new zone, you waste your lives/month in the first week and can't play for 3 more weeks because you're out of lives?
All this system would do would make more people cheese content so they can keep playing. Arbitrary numbers of lives per month would limit game play, not enhance it from "oldschool mechanics"
An incremental penalty as they are doing now affect EVERY casual.
What I suggest affect only players with LOT of times, such peoples are not considering themselves casuals and are available to meet the challenge or start new toons, as needed.
While the casuals affected by an INCREMENTAL penalty, they may be too casuals to adapt.
PS: Not to forget a nice side aspect in game balancing for races, not all races need to have the same amount of lives...a side aspect, but a nice side aspect.
It would just change things from one extreme to the other. You'd still be limiting players and how they can play the game instead of letting the player decide what they want to do and how they want to play. I would say MOST players don't just stick with one play style or at least wish there were more available to them, and I for one, wouldn't like my option to be "start an alt"
Between Vanguard's Graduated Death Penalt and a Set number of lives per month, I'd got with Vanguard...and I'd be willing to bet that most everyone would agree with me...cause people just don't want to feel restricted and claustrophobic in the games they are playing, they want more options, not less.
...oh, hey...and "Freedom" is Sigil's lil' moto they've been tossing around, go figure.
Or maybe it's just cause they don't want to be limited on the amount of time they can play? o.O
What if you have alot of time to play at the beginning of the month, and you die alot cause you're moving into a new zone, you waste your lives/month in the first week and can't play for 3 more weeks because you're out of lives?
All this system would do would make more people cheese content so they can keep playing. Arbitrary numbers of lives per month would limit game play, not enhance it from "oldschool mechanics"
An incremental penalty as they are doing now affect EVERY casual.
What I suggest affect only players with LOT of times, such peoples are not considering themselves casuals and are available to meet the challenge or start new toons, as needed.
While the casuals affected by an INCREMENTAL penalty, they may be too casuals to adapt.
PS: Not to forget a nice side aspect in game balancing for races, not all races need to have the same amount of lives...a side aspect, but a nice side aspect.
It would just change things from one extreme to the other. You'd still be limiting players and how they can play the game instead of letting the player decide what they want to do and how they want to play. I would say MOST players don't just stick with one play style or at least wish there were more available to them, and I for one, wouldn't like my option to be "start an alt"
Between Vanguard's Graduated Death Penalt and a Set number of lives per month, I'd got with Vanguard...and I'd be willing to bet that most everyone would agree with me...cause people just don't want to feel restricted and claustrophobic in the games they are playing, they want more options, not less.
...oh, hey...and "Freedom" is Sigil's lil' moto they've been tossing around, go figure.
i cant say that i disagree with everything you wrote, but i think you underestimate how many people want a game like vanguard. also using coh/cov as your example was kind of funny because correct me if i am wrong but i thought that those games were casual friendly? what does vanguard and coh/cov have in common if anything at all?
you are right it wont have as many people playing as wow, and that is fine. but you mention how successful wow is and apparently fail to realize how item/raid centric that game is. wow is a huge time sink and not just the casuals but even the semi-casual complain about it.
but yet, somehow millions of people still play the game. i think if sigil pulls it off and the game has all the mechanics they say it will that it will have at least 300-400k playing the game sometime after release.
there will always be people that play your game 15 hours a day and plow through content to get all the gear before casual can.
and unless its a game that doesn't have alot of content the guy playing 15 hours per day will have more goodies and higher skill/level than any casual.
and the casuals will complain about not having all the goodies a hardcore has and the hardcore will complain that the "endgame" sucks or that there isn't enough content for them because they plowed through it in two months.
its a never ending cycle....and you will never be able to make both groups happy no matter what.
i don't think the xp loss/debit is anywhere near as harsh as you think it will be. yeah in eq1 it was like that but i am pretty sure vanguards wont be as bad, i thought i read somewhere about this but cant seem to find it ATM.
i don't think the xp loss/debit is anywhere near as harsh as you think it will be. yeah in eq1 it was like that but i am pretty sure vanguards wont be as bad, i thought i read somewhere about this but cant seem to find it ATM.
maybe what you are looking for :-)
http://vanguardsoh.com/forums/showthread.php?t=61227
It would just change things from one extreme to the other. You'd still be limiting players and how they can play the game instead of letting the player decide what they want to do and how they want to play. I would say MOST players don't just stick with one play style or at least wish there were more available to them, and I for one, wouldn't like my option to be "start an alt"
Between Vanguard's Graduated Death Penalt and a Set number of lives per month, I'd got with Vanguard...and I'd be willing to bet that most everyone would agree with me...cause people just don't want to feel restricted and claustrophobic in the games they are playing, they want more options, not less.
...oh, hey...and "Freedom" is Sigil's lil' moto they've been tossing around, go figure.
*shrug* The death penalty is not what bother me, I was merely answering a guy, and this INCREMENTAL system will penalised casuals, not that I mind that much, I ain't casual at all even if I rather bang my head in a wall than raid.
What you fail to understand, an amount of lives per month would affect less than 10% of the player base, which would be peoples like you and me. The average player would never get anywhere close to it. For one, I rather think toward other players desires than my own...and I would really love such a challenge myself.
With the amount of times I did play old EQ, I would be affected by this lives per month, it would be a constant concern, something to work around. You as well. But all my RL friends that did play EQ, none of them would be affected by it. Nope, not even 1 of them. They just don't play enough and they just all care a LOT about losing XP/DEBT.
It all come down to choices, to which player base you are catering to, having an INCREMENTAL system favor peoples with lot of time, just like me, at the expense of casuals and peoples with less time...it also favor uber guilds. Really, when a dev say the game focus on casuals, you shouldn't have a death system that favor peoples with TONS of time at the expanse of the peoples with less time. That is my opinion, and I am right. Argue all you want.
FREEDOM: LOL, that is the worst lie, there is NO freedom in a game where if you want to be the best grouper, you have to raid, solo, group and tradeskill, there is absolutely no freedom, this is a predetermined path and everyone will remember the activity they despite the most.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
are you suggesting that there be a maximum number of deaths per month allowed for each character you make? sorry but if so that is a terrible idea from a business standpoint.
so even though most people will not exceed this you are basically stopping people from playing your game witch they play a monthly fee for.
i can understand implementing a server like this maybe but not forced upon, i just think that is a bad idea and willing to bet that no game ever uses a idea like this, well no successful one at least.
Simply not true, but I'm wiser then to get into a debate about it. Not like *anything* is gonna change your perspective at this point right? Better off not wasting breath.
'Core' gamers, who the game is aimed at are *not* the same as *hardcore* gamers, which is something I am sure you know but choose to ignore because it suits your point.
The only question I will ask is that *even* if this is 10% true as a fair overview of the design and philosophy of the game, why do you fear competition? Why does investment scare you?
If you have not the skill, social networks, or time time to succeed in a game, should everyone be limited to what you want to put in? Just because you cannot win, does that mean everyone should lose?
I'm so damn bored of the 8 year old/ casual gamer (who want the same thing) crowd dictating how a game should be. If people keep demanding McDonalds drop-in arcade MMO porn for people who cannot/ will not invest themselves into a community and yet demand equality with those who can/ will, thats all there will ever be.
You are the same reason that TV is full of crap, the charts are full of crap, the shops are full of crap. I want more then the lowest common denominator wrapped in colorful graphics, and so does Sigil I think.
I'm proud to be part of an already great community that supports a company like this. a company that belives the game they want to make is at least as important as the profit generated.
-Ren
For adults who have about 10-20 hours/week of free-time, a death penalty that steals 3 of those hours is intolerable.
Speak for yourself please. This is your opinion, don't think everybody share the same vision. I do think that if you want to take the risk from time to time and that you have the penalty, it's a reasonable system. As a casual you may not want to take risk of penalty all the time but then maybe you can be in the mood at some points and then this game will allow it. On the contrary i find their system clever. Not in the mood of having a great penalty ? ok today i'm not taking the risk but can still have fun ... in the mood for more adventure than usual ? let's go deep in this dungeon see if i can beat this challenge and let's be prepared to pay it if i suck. I like it.
My thoughts exactly! Well said, Caliss.
What you fail to understand, an amount of lives per month would affect less than 10% of the player base, which would be peoples like you and me. The average player would never get anywhere close to it. For one, I rather think toward other players desires than my own...and I would really love such a challenge myself.
With the amount of times I did play old EQ, I would be affected by this lives per month, it would be a constant concern, something to work around. You as well. But all my RL friends that did play EQ, none of them would be affected by it. Nope, not even 1 of them. They just don't play enough and they just all care a LOT about losing XP/DEBT.
It all come down to choices, to which player base you are catering to, having an INCREMENTAL system favor peoples with lot of time, just like me, at the expense of casuals and peoples with less time...it also favor uber guilds. Really, when a dev say the game focus on casuals, you shouldn't have a death system that favor peoples with TONS of time at the expanse of the peoples with less time. That is my opinion, and I am right. Argue all you want.
FREEDOM: LOL, that is the worst lie, there is NO freedom in a game where if you want to be the best grouper, you have to raid, solo, group and tradeskill, there is absolutely no freedom, this is a predetermined path and everyone will remember the activity they despite the most.
-_-
I think you're missing something.
There will be Soloable mobs, casual named mobs with high threat levels that drop awesome or close to awesome gear. These Casual Players will be able to confront these mobs on their own time.
Additionally, players may play casually after work for an hour and a half, and experience small death penalties that consume little or no time. And, they can play on the weekend, while their spouse is out of time and they are shirking their yard work, run a dungeons for 4 or 5 hours and recieve comperable loot.
Conversely, the ones that are going for the highest threat mobs all the time, are going to be experiencing much harsher death penalties (by an order of magnitude) and will thusly have more roadblocks ahead of them.
It is about risk versus reward for all time commitment and play styles. If you want better or the best you have to risk more, if you don't want to risk more then your options are limited. And really, you have the freedom to choose what type of penalties you are subjecting yourself to EVERY TIME YOU PLAY by choosing what creatures/quests/dungeons you are participating in.
-Ren
You see, but Dink, Jonaku, and some of the other nay-sayers don't understand that not everyone is a power gamer. Some, perhaps many are.
I'm a min-maxer, always have been...can't keep myself from playing by the numbers, it makes me happy. In my DnD 3.5 Ed game I'm playing with my friends, I have a sissy ass Bard that can hit with his rapier (Damage Range of 1-6 + Modifiers) for 40 points Non Crit at level 7, with gear comparable to his level. It's all in the planning, really...
But... I mean...whose fault is it if you can't just allow yourself to enjoy a game and not worry about being the absolute best absolutely all the time. It's not the Devs fault, I'll tell you that much.
The only people who fear/ hate this game are the people who don't understand it, or of of course the people who are *paid* to troll forums to destroy competition... (sad but true)
Anyone who is sane, or not paid, would have looked at this, shrugged and moved on and not even bothered with these forumsy... the fact that some people 'care' so much about something they will *never play* speaks volumes.
To iillicite either a strong attack or a strong defense means that the parties involved have a vested interest.
yes?
No.
A player may just HOPE a LOT. I honestly think Vanguard would make such a great game, as long as there is non-raiding servers. My interest is about gaining a wonderful gaming experience. You can disagree, hate me, think I should go elsewhere, but I will still check the most promising titles and pinpoint any critical flaws they have, like enforced raiding.
However, I do believe that BioWare will save me, in a few years!
I just hope I won't have only CoV to call a good MMO until then, and yes, if Vanguard would freaking stop it raiding nonsense, it would indeed be a very good game...but with raiding it is a nightmare and it value decrease to 0.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
All this is pointless, completely wasted. Underdog no thanks.
Best groupers deserve to be groupers, not raiders. I am adamant about it, because raiders are just unworthy of any non-raiding reward since they are not doing these activities while they raid.
But just like a ganker requesting best loot in a PvP zone, you think it is right that raiders are the best at everything, so raiding is supreme and at the expanse of everything else.
As long as raiding grant 1 hp I can't access anywhere else and that this hp can be useful in grouping, this is unfair and unacceptable, period. Best groupers have to earn everything by grouping, not raiding or tradeskilling. End of discussion.
EDIT: I can't accept playing on a raiding server anymore than I would accept playing on a PvP server, these are harmful gameplays to what I love, which is PvE grouping. Yet, for some reason you understand that PvP ruins PvE, but you seem to be freaking incapable of understanding that raiding is just as freaking bad on grouping as PvP is. Raiding KILL grouping.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
No.
A player may just HOPE a LOT. I honestly think Vanguard would make such a great game, as long as there is non-raiding servers. My interest is about gaining a wonderful gaming experience. You can disagree, hate me, think I should go elsewhere, but I will still check the most promising titles and pinpoint any critical flaws they have, like enforced raiding.
However, I do believe that BioWare will save me, in a few years!
I just hope I won't have only CoV to call a good MMO until then, and yes, if Vanguard would freaking stop it raiding nonsense, it would indeed be a very good game...but with raiding it is a nightmare and it value decrease to 0.
for a start, i don't hate anyone online, 'cause thats just silly...
secondly, i also love Bioware. they have made some great single palyer games and the sooner they produce a MMORPG with the same philosophy the better.
thirdly, CoV is a good *arcade* game that happens to be a persistant world.
Fourthy, why are you scared of competition? Just because you personally cannot compete, does that mean everyone else should be restricted by your play style or times?
'core' is not the same as 'hardcore'.
this game is for those who want more then 8 year old/ casaul gamer crap. You don't have to like it, but what do gain by flaming it? Honest critisicism is fine, but hate posts for a game you will never invest in is stupid.
Remove raiding and I would love it.
Because I don't want to raid I am 8 year old or casual? Afterlife is mostly crowded by casuals, so was FoH. They just have tons of time, casuals nonetheless, following a few real dedicated leader, that is all.
I am not scared of competition, I want a good game with 0 raiding enforced on me, and since all these devs seem unable to understand, I try to explain on the FEW who might be able to. But I doubt it.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Remove raiding and I would love it.
Because I don't want to raid I am 8 year old or casual? Get lost!
I have enjoyed *many* *many* games without being in the top 20% of raiders... why? because I have formed strong social networks and relationships that have made the games that you hate fun. I don't define Vangaurd by raiding, i define it by risk and reward, and, not by least, the people.
the point you are reallly miising is that it really dosent matter if *you* love it or not... you are pretty much irrelevant to be honest. This simply isnt for you... This is for people who want something better then the WoW model. I am sick of the NCsoft/ WoW McDonalds lowest comman denominator MMO Porn approach.
Like I have said before, i am *proud* to support a company that needs to make a game on the basis that they would love to play it themselves rather then to make a huge profit...
and no... i am not gonna get lost... that also is just silly and has no value.
the point you are reallly miising is that it really dosent matter if *you* love it or not... you are pretty much irrelevant to be honest. This simply isnt for you... This is for people who want something better then the WoW model. I am sick of the NCsoft/ WoW McDonalds lowest comman denominator MMO Porn approach.
LOL, WOW, VANGUARD and CoH have 1 point in comon: They enforce raiding.
I might be irrelevant and you might not care, but I can freely speak my mind and say it loud.
RAIDING kills grouping.
Talk your chinese philosophy of life as much as you want, for real peoples with real objectives:
RAIDING kill grouping.
EDIT: Everyone has a right to DREAM to reach the top, the fact they reach it or not is irrelevant, they dream they can.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Vesavius,
You are systematically answering every post about Vanguard, old and new, all of a sudden. Your account is created back in 2004 and you have a total of 22 posts.
Yet you come accusing other peoples of having a vested interest in the game? No company would afford nearly 4k posts of advertisement, it would just not be marketing wise and better spent on banners. LOL, if someone has a vested interest in the game, I think you are.
We are a friday night, so you prolly come back from work and are now answering messages, community work it must be.
If someone on this site has a vested interest and is not a gamer, it is YOU sir. I think you pretty much describe yourself as the person having vested interest in making money rather than making a FUN game. Under a cool looking demeanor, you are offensive and aggresive toward other peoples.
Suit yourself, I know you are like a ghost, here today, but not back before a LONG time, maybe your take turns on answering online forums?
As to myself, I become a Game Designer in some tiny small company that will never grow big enough to make MMOs. I may even add that I become a Game Designer because the Vision(tm) anger me. Talk about dedication and be shy about it if you want! Me, I will just drink beer in the meanwhile!
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
the point you are reallly miising is that it really dosent matter if *you* love it or not... you are pretty much irrelevant to be honest. This simply isnt for you... This is for people who want something better then the WoW model. I am sick of the NCsoft/ WoW McDonalds lowest comman denominator MMO Porn approach.
okies... for one, shouting dosent make your point any kore vaild or heard yes?
LOL, WOW, VANGUARD and CoH have 1 point in comon: They enforce raiding.
One point in common dosent define a game or indeed make them similar... EQ1 and WoW have many many points in common, but that isnt the point i am making... You don't see this? 'lol'?
I might be irrelevant and you might not care, but I can freely speak my mind and say it loud.
you are indeed free to do both, I am noone to stop you, but I wonder why you would bother...
RAIDING kills grouping.
then don't play... why waste your time discussing a game you 'know' already you will hate? Take a deep breath and move on.
Talk your chinese philosophy of life as much as you want, for real peoples with real objectives:
if your don't agree, it's easier to use worthless catch phrases then actually validating your views yes?
RAIDING kill grouping.
in your unfounded (as far as you have 'proven' to my eyes...) silly opinion, but not in my personal experience. To debate this with you would be wortheless, simply because you have a set in stone opinion that I am not gonna shift whatever...
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Vesavus got better at taunt(255)!
Insult me, be as arrogant as you want. I taste something good in EQ. It was ruined by raiding. I want more of it. I wont stop until I find it back.
Move on? *shrug* I will, when I find a game to hold my interest, but until then, I am spending time on forums, talking and pinpointing good points and flaws.
Ask your friend Brad, if someone telling him to move on after he experience PvP in online gaming would have satieted him? It wouldn't. I don't have the talent to bring out a PvE MMO about grouping, so I do the second most logical step to it, I check for it and I praise it forthcoming if I see it.
Insult my english skills all you want, the fact we are talking in english and not in my native tongue is all that matter now, if you can't grasp what I say, you can blame yourself. Unless it is the usual elitist attitude to denigrate other that I found in old EQ uber guilds, in which case it would only lessen your opinion to irrelevance.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren