Well, I'm back to WoW Vanilla WoW that is. Where life is hard again, I've been playing for days and only got to level 18 on my Druid. I had to take two harvestings, Herblism and Skining because I'll need 90 gold by level 40. Life in Darkshore is hard, at times I have to wait for someone to come along to help. But you know what.....I'm making friends, this is something I have not seen in several years. " I have a friends list ", none of that auto group crap. I was out of town for a month and found that I just could not log into GW2. Why?....That is not an mmo. It's a game with others around you, bottom line !
Today I should be able to do the Deadmines as a Tank and I'm somewhat new to tanking, so I hope I do well. If it's a total desaster I'll re-spec as a healer. Without the dungeon finder I should be ok to find groups fast being a tank or a healer, along with using the social panel > who to search out others.
The server I'm on is only to level 60, but thats ok, It will take me forever to get their. Try gogling Emralddream. I'm sooo sick of what we have today. They are not mmo's.
Somis this an official vanilla wow server, what is the rule set. I left WOW before battlegrounds, i level to 60 and done all the content that was their at the time then left. I had a hunter which i really like, have they introduced the named pets that you use to get.
Im spent hours in one zone waiting for this cat that had a faster attack speed than other cats of that level.
I've actually played Vanguard since beta which really is a world and is a vast game that really takes you back to the days of EQ.
I would give vanilla WOW a go though just for a break though, is the server low population then.
Very populated...........And It's a community too, so you can't be a Ass Hat.
Any links to information.
If its the same one I looked in to I passed on it. They couldn't do line of sight in the game so any npc can attack through walls etc. Was to much of a game breaker for me.
Well, I'm back to WoW Vanilla WoW that is. Where life is hard again, I've been playing for days and only got to level 18 on my Druid. I had to take two harvestings, Herblism and Skining because I'll need 90 gold by level 40. Life in Darkshore is hard, at times I have to wait for someone to come along to help. But you know what.....I'm making friends, this is something I have not seen in several years. " I have a friends list ", none of that auto group crap. I was out of town for a month and found that I just could not log into GW2. Why?....That is not an mmo. It's a game with others around you, bottom line !
Today I should be able to do the Deadmines as a Tank and I'm somewhat new to tanking, so I hope I do well. If it's a total desaster I'll re-spec as a healer. Without the dungeon finder I should be ok to find groups fast being a tank or a healer, along with using the social panel > who to search out others.
The server I'm on is only to level 60, but thats ok, It will take me forever to get their. Try gogling Emralddream. I'm sooo sick of what we have today. They are not mmo's.
Somis this an official vanilla wow server, what is the rule set. I left WOW before battlegrounds, i level to 60 and done all the content that was their at the time then left. I had a hunter which i really like, have they introduced the named pets that you use to get.
Im spent hours in one zone waiting for this cat that had a faster attack speed than other cats of that level.
I've actually played Vanguard since beta which really is a world and is a vast game that really takes you back to the days of EQ.
I would give vanilla WOW a go though just for a break though, is the server low population then.
Very populated...........And It's a community too, so you can't be a Ass Hat.
Any links to information.
If its the same one I looked in to I passed on it. They couldn't do line of sight in the game so any npc can attack through walls etc. Was to much of a game breaker for me.
So this is not an official Blizzard WOW vanilla server then?
Well, I'm back to WoW Vanilla WoW that is. Where life is hard again, I've been playing for days and only got to level 18 on my Druid. I had to take two harvestings, Herblism and Skining because I'll need 90 gold by level 40. Life in Darkshore is hard, at times I have to wait for someone to come along to help. But you know what.....I'm making friends, this is something I have not seen in several years. " I have a friends list ", none of that auto group crap. I was out of town for a month and found that I just could not log into GW2. Why?....That is not an mmo. It's a game with others around you, bottom line !
Today I should be able to do the Deadmines as a Tank and I'm somewhat new to tanking, so I hope I do well. If it's a total desaster I'll re-spec as a healer. Without the dungeon finder I should be ok to find groups fast being a tank or a healer, along with using the social panel > who to search out others.
The server I'm on is only to level 60, but thats ok, It will take me forever to get their. Try gogling Emralddream. I'm sooo sick of what we have today. They are not mmo's.
Somis this an official vanilla wow server, what is the rule set. I left WOW before battlegrounds, i level to 60 and done all the content that was their at the time then left. I had a hunter which i really like, have they introduced the named pets that you use to get.
Im spent hours in one zone waiting for this cat that had a faster attack speed than other cats of that level.
I've actually played Vanguard since beta which really is a world and is a vast game that really takes you back to the days of EQ.
I would give vanilla WOW a go though just for a break though, is the server low population then.
Very populated...........And It's a community too, so you can't be a Ass Hat.
Any links to information.
If its the same one I looked in to I passed on it. They couldn't do line of sight in the game so any npc can attack through walls etc. Was to much of a game breaker for me.
So this is not an official Blizzard WOW vanilla server then?
Official? It was a emu server and from what I could see a pretty good one. Like I said though the line of sight issue was to much of a game breaker for me. Maybe it has changed since the last time I looked which was about a year ago.
Not to be rude or anything I don't mean to disrepect you or anyone else when I say this. If you and whoever else agrees with your feeling. Feel so strongly about it why aren't you willing to put up your own money to see it happen? It's easy to say "Hey developers/publishers this it what I want from games". When you aren't putting up your own time or money to make it happen. Not trying to pick a fight or anything, but thats all I constantly hear all the time. Complaints about the MMO genre. Armchair developers who have never worked on a game a day in their life that believe they can do it better. People that sat in a guild with a few hundred people, and then believe they know what everyone wants. People that have played alot of MMO's and believe they can do it better. Yet when it's all said in done, they want someone else to create what they believe is "the perfect MMO".
There is plenty of interest with the new kickstarter stuff thats been happening lately. There are plenty of writers looking to prove their worth. Plenty of game designers/programmers that are looking for somewhere to start. Plenty of untapped artist out there. I mean if you all can really do something better, why not get the ball rolling there. Why expect developers/publishers that have disappointed you so much in the past, to fork out money like that.
I know your post wasn't "pro-sandbox" thing. Though as someone else said earlier in this thread. How many of you (not refering to you OP) have supported any of the sandboxes that have came out? Answer is probably not alot. Sandbox people are just too picky about things IMHO. The response you get from them when you ask them have they supported any of the recent or earlier sandboxes. Always boils down to some lame excuse of it not having this, that, or the other. Then the "oh it has a few bugs" people that refuse to play it for that minor reason. So honestly as a developer/publisher who has to pay employees, has expenses, may or may not have a family to feed, and investors to answer to. Why should I gamble on a fickle group of players. That at best since the days of UO have proven to be "niche".
So basically what you are saying is that if a customer wants something they need to make it themselves or pay to have it done? I guess the whole theory of consumer-producer system is completely lost on you?
This is how it works. A producer gauges the market and tries to see where the demand is. He then creates a product to fit that demand to make a profit. A customer is only obliged to somehow communicate to a producer what he wants and then buy the said product, he is under no obligation whatsoever to create it himself. That is not how the market works.
Kickstarter is an abbhoration. It basically feeds on peoples hopes so they give up their money for a non existant product. How it normally would work is that the producer will get investors who pay a certain amount of money for a piece of the company and that is how they fund a project, alternatively it can be a loan with something as collateral. But an investor is not the consumer so again the consumer has no obligation whatsoever to fund a project, only to buy a finished product and be willing to communicate to the producer what he wants which is exactly what the OP is doing.
Originally posted by Whitebeards Originally posted by lizardbones
There really aren't that many sandbox or 'world' games to choose from. It could be argued that you have Eve, and that's it. What if you want a game with a world, but you don't like Eve? What if the other games that have worlds just suck? Does that mean the OP should suffer through those cr@ppy games to prove a point? It's not relevant whether the OP plays GW2 or not. What's relevant is how well they've argued their point. It's the argument that matters, attacking the person instead of the argument is just bad form. I think they've argued their point poorly. Simply put, a lot of people want games, not worlds. Their use of the term, "We" was poorly chosen. Finally, analogies are just a poor way to get your point across. If your audience doesn't agree with or understand what you're saying without an analogy, using an analogy isn't going to help. I have over 500 hours invested in GW2. How would you feel if i start preachign you all about sad state of themeparks in 2012 and then ask you a question 'why' and 'if we will ever get a world'? i would be such a hypocrite not to realise that i am actually part of the problem i am complaining about.
Ii think answer is obvious because people buy and support such games including OP according to whom GW2 is a shallow themepark MMO with one saving grace that is B2P.
And i fail to see where i attacked OP? telling him to practise what he preaches is an attack? well matter of prespective i guess.
It really depends on how you presented your point of view and what your point of view actually was. It would seem really odd if you said that theme parks are a horrible blight on society, and yet you played 500 hours of GW2. At the same time, it would give you lots of material to make your point.
Now, if your point is that playing theme parks contributes to the very problem you're preaching against, then I'd say you have a schizophrenic point of view. I would ask why you continue to play a game that you see as the source of a problem you're arguing against. I would really wonder about that, but you could still present a really good argument against playing theme park games.
Getting past all that, it's the argument you're making that's relevant. It doesn't matter how I feel and it doesn't matter what you play or don't play. The only important part of the discussion is the topic being discussed. Did you make a good point, in your post in favor of or against your point of view?
I don't think the OP made a very good argument. I think there is a good point in their post about worlds versus games, but they didn't do a very good job presenting it. The biggest issue is the use of the word, "We", since it seems people in general are fine with games and are fine without worlds.
Apologies for using 'attack'. That is a bit too strong a word. You were presenting the idea that the person posting the argument invalidated the argument, without actually invalidating the argument itself. 'Attack' was just the easiest word to use. So again, apologies.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
We the consumers are to blame. Players like mmo's like WoW (a game) and companies ran with it. Forever changing the face of world gaming.
Thank God Sandbox MMO's are making a comback.
Actually not. Just because I like, and buy, chocolate does not prevent me from liking and wanting to buy liqourice. Like wise just because I like to play single player games and ThemeParks does not prevent me from not liking and wanting sandbox MMOs.
It is not an either or. It is perfectly possible to like several things. It is the responsibility of companies to see if there is a demand and then create a product for that demand. They have to sometimes take a risk and produce something even though they dont have 100% proof that people will buy it in the volumes they expect. If it was that easy then everyone would be creating successful multimillion dollar companies.
Originally posted by Metentso Remember EQ "You are in our world now". Developers where the Gods in that world. We adapted to what they chosed, not the other way around like today.
Today's way is more fun.
Why would i want to play a game when the devs decide i have to stare at a spellbook for 10 min? I vote with my time & money.
We the consumers are to blame. Players like mmo's like WoW (a game) and companies ran with it. Forever changing the face of world gaming.
Thank God Sandbox MMO's are making a comback.
"Blame"? It is what it is.
So what if people like WOW more than EQ and UO. The old days are not coming back. It is called progress. MMOs are much better games today.
Yes and so is the music 0_0 oh wait ......
Personally i am not a music fan .. so i don't really care what is happening to the music industry.
The fact that MMO is moving in this direction is because that is what masses of players respond to. I don't see a reason not to put in more features to facilitate online play (like LFD) and more good single player game features (like difficulty levels) when that is what make games fun for many.
The same problem i really have with this thread..much like the one started two weeks ago..with almost the same name...is the use of We. Im sure you have plenty of people who agree with you, but to use "WE" implies that Everyone agrees with you. Maybe for furture referance..the Poster should start with a " I dont want games..I want a world" as his title. Just my 2 cents...feel free to whine and complain to each other now about how modern games suck.
No matter how cynical you become, its never enough to keep up - Lily Tomlin
Originally posted by apocoluster The same problem i really have with this thread..much like the one started two weeks ago..with almost the same name...is the use of We. Im sure you have plenty of people who agree with you, but to use "WE" implies that Everyone agrees with you. Maybe for furture referance..the Poster should start with a " I dont want games..I want a world" as his title. Just my 2 cents...feel free to whine and complain to each other now about how modern games suck.
The problem with all this bellyaching, is that you don't just want a 'virtual world', you want the perfect virtual world. For whatever particular preferences you have. While complaining about any others that miss on a thing or two.
Virtual Worlds type games are harder to run and harder to balance. They are still required to show a profit, to keep the dev team in place. The 'usual suspects' of UO and SWG had tremendous problems, whether you liked them or not. Believe me, every week at Origin, the developers were running around trying to deal with some new exploit or flaw that was now being abused. In UO at one point you could besiege cities by piling furniture up around them.
Nothing against the concept, it's great that there are all sorts of different games out there. But this idea that 'everyone' wants a particular type of sandbox is not easily supported. There are even sandboxy worlds out there, but you will hear continual complaints about problems with them. I mean, you could go play Eve, or Salem, A Tale in the Desert or any number of other similar games.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
I think that its high time for game companies that want to make MMOs to understand one simple thing about MMO player :
We dont want games - we want worlds.
We have millions of games - Halo , Super Mario , Starcraft , Monkey Island , Baldurs Gate ... to note few genre stars.
Now they want to take these games and add multiplayer aspect - and slap brand this MMORPG.
This my friends is the themepark world. And the direction its moving ( we are seeing mmofps , mmo platformer , mmo sport , even mmo adventure - beside more traditional mmorpg approach )
But this is not what we are here for ... not what we wanted...
When I played games before the era of internet , this was not what I dreamed of - Super Mario with oter people playing.
No.
What I dreamed was Ultima Online
This dream was shared in developer community that was young and not GREED oriented as today.
And than it stopped. Because its easier to just make a game and add multiplayer element.
And we have what we have today. Shallow abominations. Most laughable of which would be MMOs that came 2012. Basically Single player games with other people running around.
This. That much is obvious - will not fly anymore.
We want worlds.
You can call it sandbox. I call it Virtual world simulation games.
Worlds that have its rules , its economy , its inhabitants , its dangers , its politics - and than we are put inside - and become part of them.
Sadly only good and sucessful modern example of this is EVE online.
The game that caters bit to much to agressive player.... but there is so much potential around.
Will we ever see it ?
Yes, you will. One week ago I was combing through this site feeling the exact way you do. Remembering the good old days of UO. No game out there comes anywhere close. However, I was hoping against hope to find some game under development that would perhaps have some measure of what UO was. I came across a post in this site, (forgive me I can't remember exactly which thread) that spoke about a new game under development whose creators were inspired by UO and wanted to create the same non-linear, skill-based world full of opportunities for players to play their own way, at their own pace.
I went to the website link and read all about it. It has all the UO elements with the beautifully rendered 3-D graphics that UO lacks. It is not a theme-park. It is a Sandbox. It has a mature and growing following and a development team committed to bringing forth an old school game inspired by UO.
The game has recently been added to the mmorpg.com gamelist. I know that GreedMonger is the game old school players like me have been looking for for years. The title is deceiving. Go to the site with an open mind and see for yourself why the fan-base is growing exponentially every day.
Originally posted by apocoluster The same problem i really have with this thread..much like the one started two weeks ago..with almost the same name...is the use of We. Im sure you have plenty of people who agree with you, but to use "WE" implies that Everyone agrees with you. Maybe for furture referance..the Poster should start with a " I dont want games..I want a world" as his title. Just my 2 cents...feel free to whine and complain to each other now about how modern games suck.
Exactly. I want games, not worlds.
I'm cool if my game has a world in it. I'm not going to treat it like a virtual escape though, I think anyone who does that is an idiot.
Originally posted by apocoluster The same problem i really have with this thread..much like the one started two weeks ago..with almost the same name...is the use of We. Im sure you have plenty of people who agree with you, but to use "WE" implies that Everyone agrees with you. Maybe for furture referance..the Poster should start with a " I dont want games..I want a world" as his title. Just my 2 cents...feel free to whine and complain to each other now about how modern games suck.
Exactly. I want games, not worlds.
I'm cool if my game has a world in it. I'm not going to treat it like a virtual escape though, I think anyone who does that is an idiot.
I agree. I don't object to have a world in my game. However, it should not impede convenience and fun. If that means i have to walk 20 min before something cool happens, i will pass.
I think that its high time for game companies that want to make MMOs to understand one simple thing about MMO player :
We dont want games - we want worlds.
We have millions of games - Halo , Super Mario , Starcraft , Monkey Island , Baldurs Gate ... to note few genre stars.
Now they want to take these games and add multiplayer aspect - and slap brand this MMORPG.
This my friends is the themepark world. And the direction its moving ( we are seeing mmofps , mmo platformer , mmo sport , even mmo adventure - beside more traditional mmorpg approach )
But this is not what we are here for ... not what we wanted...
When I played games before the era of internet , this was not what I dreamed of - Super Mario with oter people playing.
No.
What I dreamed was Ultima Online
This dream was shared in developer community that was young and not GREED oriented as today.
And than it stopped. Because its easier to just make a game and add multiplayer element.
And we have what we have today. Shallow abominations. Most laughable of which would be MMOs that came 2012. Basically Single player games with other people running around.
This. That much is obvious - will not fly anymore.
We want worlds.
You can call it sandbox. I call it Virtual world simulation games.
Worlds that have its rules , its economy , its inhabitants , its dangers , its politics - and than we are put inside - and become part of them.
Sadly only good and sucessful modern example of this is EVE online.
The game that caters bit to much to agressive player.... but there is so much potential around.
Will we ever see it ?
Yes, you will. One week ago I was combing through this site feeling the exact way you do. Remembering the good old days of UO. No game out there comes anywhere close. However, I was hoping against hope to find some game under development that would perhaps have some measure of what UO was. I came across a post in this site, (forgive me I can't remember exactly which thread) that spoke about a new game under development whose creators were inspired by UO and wanted to create the same non-linear, skill-based world full of opportunities for players to play their own way, at their own pace.
I went to the website link and read all about it. It has all the UO elements with the beautifully rendered 3-D graphics that UO lacks. It is not a theme-park. It is a Sandbox. It has a mature and growing following and a development team committed to bringing forth an old school game inspired by UO.
The game has recently been added to the mmorpg.com gamelist. I know that GreedMonger is the game old school players like me have been looking for for years. The title is deceiving. Go to the site with an open mind and see for yourself why the fan-base is growing exponentially every day.
"crafting focus"? Looks like i will pass. Also it is a kictstarter .. so we don't even know if the game will actually be released. If they actually release the game, more power to them.
This is EXACTLY why I loved RIFT when it first came out. The danger of towns being taken over by monsters was constant, making it so you had to work with players to protect them. I LOVED it.
Comments
If its the same one I looked in to I passed on it. They couldn't do line of sight in the game so any npc can attack through walls etc. Was to much of a game breaker for me.
So this is not an official Blizzard WOW vanilla server then?
Official? It was a emu server and from what I could see a pretty good one. Like I said though the line of sight issue was to much of a game breaker for me. Maybe it has changed since the last time I looked which was about a year ago.
So basically what you are saying is that if a customer wants something they need to make it themselves or pay to have it done? I guess the whole theory of consumer-producer system is completely lost on you?
This is how it works. A producer gauges the market and tries to see where the demand is. He then creates a product to fit that demand to make a profit. A customer is only obliged to somehow communicate to a producer what he wants and then buy the said product, he is under no obligation whatsoever to create it himself. That is not how the market works.
Kickstarter is an abbhoration. It basically feeds on peoples hopes so they give up their money for a non existant product. How it normally would work is that the producer will get investors who pay a certain amount of money for a piece of the company and that is how they fund a project, alternatively it can be a loan with something as collateral. But an investor is not the consumer so again the consumer has no obligation whatsoever to fund a project, only to buy a finished product and be willing to communicate to the producer what he wants which is exactly what the OP is doing.
My gaming blog
exactly. real, proper games.... set in real, proper online open virtual worlds.
---------------------------
Corpus Callosum
---------------------------
I have over 500 hours invested in GW2. How would you feel if i start preachign you all about sad state of themeparks in 2012 and then ask you a question 'why' and 'if we will ever get a world'? i would be such a hypocrite not to realise that i am actually part of the problem i am complaining about.
Ii think answer is obvious because people buy and support such games including OP according to whom GW2 is a shallow themepark MMO with one saving grace that is B2P.
And i fail to see where i attacked OP? telling him to practise what he preaches is an attack? well matter of prespective i guess.
It really depends on how you presented your point of view and what your point of view actually was. It would seem really odd if you said that theme parks are a horrible blight on society, and yet you played 500 hours of GW2. At the same time, it would give you lots of material to make your point.
Now, if your point is that playing theme parks contributes to the very problem you're preaching against, then I'd say you have a schizophrenic point of view. I would ask why you continue to play a game that you see as the source of a problem you're arguing against. I would really wonder about that, but you could still present a really good argument against playing theme park games.
Getting past all that, it's the argument you're making that's relevant. It doesn't matter how I feel and it doesn't matter what you play or don't play. The only important part of the discussion is the topic being discussed. Did you make a good point, in your post in favor of or against your point of view?
I don't think the OP made a very good argument. I think there is a good point in their post about worlds versus games, but they didn't do a very good job presenting it. The biggest issue is the use of the word, "We", since it seems people in general are fine with games and are fine without worlds.
Apologies for using 'attack'. That is a bit too strong a word. You were presenting the idea that the person posting the argument invalidated the argument, without actually invalidating the argument itself. 'Attack' was just the easiest word to use. So again, apologies.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
We the consumers are to blame. Players like mmo's like WoW (a game) and companies ran with it. Forever changing the face of world gaming.
Thank God Sandbox MMO's are making a comback.
Actually not. Just because I like, and buy, chocolate does not prevent me from liking and wanting to buy liqourice. Like wise just because I like to play single player games and ThemeParks does not prevent me from not liking and wanting sandbox MMOs.
It is not an either or. It is perfectly possible to like several things. It is the responsibility of companies to see if there is a demand and then create a product for that demand. They have to sometimes take a risk and produce something even though they dont have 100% proof that people will buy it in the volumes they expect. If it was that easy then everyone would be creating successful multimillion dollar companies.
My gaming blog
Today's way is more fun.
Why would i want to play a game when the devs decide i have to stare at a spellbook for 10 min? I vote with my time & money.
"Blame"? It is what it is.
So what if people like WOW more than EQ and UO. The old days are not coming back. It is called progress. MMOs are much better games today.
Yes and so is the music 0_0 ....... oh wait
Personally i am not a music fan .. so i don't really care what is happening to the music industry.
The fact that MMO is moving in this direction is because that is what masses of players respond to. I don't see a reason not to put in more features to facilitate online play (like LFD) and more good single player game features (like difficulty levels) when that is what make games fun for many.
Are you one of those 'your world is too mainstream' folks?
Hey, I'm hip on Justin Beiber as much as the next guy.
I'm a unique and beautiful snowflake.
I like games, myself. Something I can roll through in a month or so, or stay for longer if the end-game raid and gear grind is entertaining.
No matter how cynical you become, its never enough to keep up - Lily Tomlin
Exactly. I want games, not worlds.
Because Paul Anka and Fabian never existed.....? Sturgeon's Law, there's always a preponderance of ****.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
The problem with all this bellyaching, is that you don't just want a 'virtual world', you want the perfect virtual world. For whatever particular preferences you have. While complaining about any others that miss on a thing or two.
Virtual Worlds type games are harder to run and harder to balance. They are still required to show a profit, to keep the dev team in place. The 'usual suspects' of UO and SWG had tremendous problems, whether you liked them or not. Believe me, every week at Origin, the developers were running around trying to deal with some new exploit or flaw that was now being abused. In UO at one point you could besiege cities by piling furniture up around them.
Nothing against the concept, it's great that there are all sorts of different games out there. But this idea that 'everyone' wants a particular type of sandbox is not easily supported. There are even sandboxy worlds out there, but you will hear continual complaints about problems with them. I mean, you could go play Eve, or Salem, A Tale in the Desert or any number of other similar games.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Yes, you will. One week ago I was combing through this site feeling the exact way you do. Remembering the good old days of UO. No game out there comes anywhere close. However, I was hoping against hope to find some game under development that would perhaps have some measure of what UO was. I came across a post in this site, (forgive me I can't remember exactly which thread) that spoke about a new game under development whose creators were inspired by UO and wanted to create the same non-linear, skill-based world full of opportunities for players to play their own way, at their own pace.
I went to the website link and read all about it. It has all the UO elements with the beautifully rendered 3-D graphics that UO lacks. It is not a theme-park. It is a Sandbox. It has a mature and growing following and a development team committed to bringing forth an old school game inspired by UO.
Here is the link. See for yourself. http://www.greedmonger.com/
The game has recently been added to the mmorpg.com gamelist. I know that GreedMonger is the game old school players like me have been looking for for years. The title is deceiving. Go to the site with an open mind and see for yourself why the fan-base is growing exponentially every day.
I'm cool if my game has a world in it. I'm not going to treat it like a virtual escape though, I think anyone who does that is an idiot.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
I agree. I don't object to have a world in my game. However, it should not impede convenience and fun. If that means i have to walk 20 min before something cool happens, i will pass.
"crafting focus"? Looks like i will pass. Also it is a kictstarter .. so we don't even know if the game will actually be released. If they actually release the game, more power to them.