Original Darkfall going to launch again: RipperX video

Gyva02

Check it out guys, 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Vd2gKLWWqg

Maurgrim

Still open world pew pew Arena game?

Axehilt

Launch.  You keep using that word.  I do not think it means what you think it means.

SEANMCAD

I have a wait and see view.

3rd party changing any of the code could go well or could go bad, but at least we are talking about the original darkfall not DF:UO

Amaranthar

I'll be watching too.
There were lots of cheats that need to be fixed.
Two things that bothered me the most were the PvP and the dungeons.

The PvP was wide open and seemed to lack depth on the social structures that could be used to keep it from turning the game into nothing more than an arena. This is something I'm going to be watching closely, as I think that can be done but is full of traps.

On dungeons, I hated both that you dropped into them through some gate, and then had to work your way through it to get out. I much prefer the old fashioned entrances that you could turn around and leave if you needed to. I never went past the very entrance before my time was up, so I can't judge the dungeons themselves.

There will be a lot to look at for me before I decide.

Axehilt

Arena. You keep using that word.  I do not think it means what you think it means.

(Arena implies an enclosed area where competition occurs, so why are people calling DF an arena game?  It's an open world PVP game.  Basically the exact opposite of an arena.  And given that actual arena combat is very popular among players, Darkfall not being an arena game was one of the many ways it failed.)

Mad+Dog

Played df1 Feb 09 till server went down, BUT let it just die now.

Amaranthar

Axehilt said:

Arena. You keep using that word.  I do not think it means what you think it means.

(Arena implies an enclosed area where competition occurs, so why are people calling DF an arena game?  It's an open world PVP game.  Basically the exact opposite of an arena.  And given that actual arena combat is very popular among players, Darkfall not being an arena game was one of the many ways it failed.)

I really don't care what you mean by a word in game context. I used it to make a point.
If all industry people are like you and insist on not grasping what we gamers say and instead argue that what we said doesn't make sense in your context, well, that explains a lot.

Axehilt

Amaranthar said:

I really don't care what you mean by a word in game context. I used it to make a point.
If all industry people are like you and insist on not grasping what we gamers say and instead argue that what we said doesn't make sense in your context, well, that explains a lot.

What's this mysterious context in which the meaning of arena is suddenly reversed?  In all contexts, and especially games, arena is the same thing:

• Before videogames existed, arena meant an enclosed area for public entertainment.
• Early in gaming, arena meant the same thing.  Quake 1 Rocket Arena (1997) involved competitive matches in enclosed arenas.
• Later, arena still meant the same thing. WOW Arenas being the most relevant example.
  

Even assuming there was a context in which the meaning of arena was reversed (and let's face it: there isn't), we're discussing MMORPGs where the meaning of arena is as clear as ever: an enclosed area for competition.

So don't get bent out of shape when you mis-use words and are frustrated by people not understanding you as you fail to make a point.  Instead, use the right words.

Mardukk

Arena meaning shallow with no built in consequences.  There, fixed it for you.  The arena crowd typically has very different tastes than the mmo open world sandbox crowd.  This game attracts two very different types of gamers that constantly push back against each other.  


I hate macros and thus I didnt play dfo.  I really enjoyed dfuw but the population has dried up due to mismanagement by the company and no real alignment system.  With no alignments or consequences for randomly making everyone you see kill on sight, they have made a game that has cut out 99% of the mmo playerbase.  Most pve people are too scared to even try the game.  As a person doesnt really enjoy pvp I bit the bullet and put up with the occasional death for the fredoom in the open world.  It actually felt like a big seamless world with risk vs reward...imagine that in an mmo.

Axehilt

Mardukk said:

Arena meaning shallow with no built in consequences.  There, fixed it for you.  The arena crowd typically has very different tastes than the mmo open world sandbox crowd.  This game attracts two very different types of gamers that constantly push back against each other.  

I hate macros and thus I didnt play dfo.  I really enjoyed dfuw but the population has dried up due to mismanagement by the company and no real alignment system.  With no alignments or consequences for randomly making everyone you see kill on sight, they have made a game that has cut out 99% of the mmo playerbase.  Most pve people are too scared to even try the game.  As a person doesnt really enjoy pvp I bit the bullet and put up with the occasional death for the fredoom in the open world.  It actually felt like a big seamless world with risk vs reward...imagine that in an mmo.

That's never been what arena has meant.

Darkfall being shallow had nothing to do with its consequences. Chess lacks consequences for losing, and yet nobody sufficiently acquainted with the concept of game depth would call it shallow.

Darkfall being shallow was the result of being open world.  Most good PVP games reward a broad set of player skills, and because of that they're deep.  Open world PVP games place a huge emphasis on simply having more numbers, which acts as a trump card -- so even if the underlying combat was deep (which it sort of wasn't in DF's case) that depth doesn't actually get a chance to happen because one very easy decision (bring more friends) dominates combat.

Calling PVE players "scared" isn't going to goad those players into playing the game, so why bother with the insult?  You're not going to trick them into making a mistake by calling them scared.  They enjoy PVE and have literally zero incentive to play a game with awful PVP mechanics.

For that matter the majority of PVP players have no incentive to play a game with awful PVP mechanics, which is why even though open world PVP is extremely casual (has a lower skill requirement than typical PVP) it's still less popular.

General-Zod

Axehilt said:

Mardukk said:

Arena meaning shallow with no built in consequences.  There, fixed it for you.  The arena crowd typically has very different tastes than the mmo open world sandbox crowd.  This game attracts two very different types of gamers that constantly push back against each other.  

I hate macros and thus I didnt play dfo.  I really enjoyed dfuw but the population has dried up due to mismanagement by the company and no real alignment system.  With no alignments or consequences for randomly making everyone you see kill on sight, they have made a game that has cut out 99% of the mmo playerbase.  Most pve people are too scared to even try the game.  As a person doesnt really enjoy pvp I bit the bullet and put up with the occasional death for the fredoom in the open world.  It actually felt like a big seamless world with risk vs reward...imagine that in an mmo.

That's never been what arena has meant.

Darkfall being shallow had nothing to do with its consequences. Chess lacks consequences for losing, and yet nobody sufficiently acquainted with the concept of game depth would call it shallow.

Darkfall being shallow was the result of being open world.  Most good PVP games reward a broad set of player skills, and because of that they're deep.  Open world PVP games place a huge emphasis on simply having more numbers, which acts as a trump card -- so even if the underlying combat was deep (which it sort of wasn't in DF's case) that depth doesn't actually get a chance to happen because one very easy decision (bring more friends) dominates combat.

Calling PVE players "scared" isn't going to goad those players into playing the game, so why bother with the insult?  You're not going to trick them into making a mistake by calling them scared.  They enjoy PVE and have literally zero incentive to play a game with awful PVP mechanics.

For that matter the majority of PVP players have no incentive to play a game with awful PVP mechanics, which is why even though open world PVP is extremely casual (has a lower skill requirement than typical PVP) it's still less popular.

Is that really so far from the truth Axehilt?

By no means am I implying that people that play open world pvp are the only one's who exhibit bravery. I believe often times open world pvp games lack the aesthetics to hold the attention of someone used to pve mmo's.

But Zod Damn, Axehilt...
Every Pvp game thread, review, follow-up, you name it there is always a few who will post the comment "Nope, not for me. Looks like a gankfest-greifers-paradise-better-add-sum-pve-servers-or-i'm-not-gunna-play (catches breath)-Imma-die-horribly-and-lose-all-my-stuff-on-the-first-day-10 minutes-after-I-create-my-character-because-the-game-has-PvP-and-I-know-ill-be-a-victim." Everybody is entitled to their opinion but raising your hand and letting everybody know that you're a vegetarian while being seated in steakhouse is a little um, douchey.

Nobody is trying to "trick" or "coerce" player's into playing a game that they have no interest in. The players not interested in the game are the same ones killing the game by "noob ganking" and greifing because they have no investment in "X" pvp mmo. They do their nefarious deed then log off and play the game they really care about.

BTW Darkfall has a ton of 1v(2,3,4,5) videos, you should check them out.

VengeSunsoar

And yet somehow we knew what he meant. 

thinktank001

Axehilt said:

Arena. You keep using that word.  I do not think it means what you think it means.

(Arena implies an enclosed area where competition occurs, so why are people calling DF an arena game?  It's an open world PVP game.  Basically the exact opposite of an arena.  And given that actual arena combat is very popular among players, Darkfall not being an arena game was one of the many ways it failed.)

AV's choice of development made it nothing more than a large arena game.  The choices they made were all designed around " getting players into the action ".   There was nothing " worldly " about the game mechanics implemented in it's original release. 


I haven't followed too much after the initial announcements of the original DF's re-release, but of the two companies that are looking to resurrect this project;  New Dawn appears to be taking the better path by pushing the game towards world building.


 

Maurgrim

Why I keep saying It's an area game, well its simple, basicly 99% of the playerbase engage in pvp hence its pretty much like an arena game in a big world.

General-Zod

Maurgrim said:

Why I keep saying It's an area game, well its simple, basicly 99% of the playerbase engage in pvp hence its pretty much like an arena game in a big world.

Wait... what?

So pvp in a big world = Arena?

Soooo does this apply to other games as well like Archage?

Axehilt

General-Zod said:

Is that really so far from the truth Axehilt?

By no means am I implying that people that play open world pvp are the only one's who exhibit bravery. I believe often times open world pvp games lack the aesthetics to hold the attention of someone used to pve mmo's.

But Zod Damn, Axehilt...
Every Pvp game thread, review, follow-up, you name it there is always a few who will post the comment "Nope, not for me. Looks like a gankfest-greifers-paradise-better-add-sum-pve-servers-or-i'm-not-gunna-play (catches breath)-Imma-die-horribly-and-lose-all-my-stuff-on-the-first-day-10 minutes-after-I-create-my-character-because-the-game-has-PvP-and-I-know-ill-be-a-victim." Everybody is entitled to their opinion but raising your hand and letting everybody know that you're a vegetarian while being seated in steakhouse is a little um, douchey.

Nobody is trying to "trick" or "coerce" player's into playing a game that they have no interest in. The players not interested in the game are the same ones killing the game by "noob ganking" and greifing because they have no investment in "X" pvp mmo. They do their nefarious deed then log off and play the game they really care about.

BTW Darkfall has a ton of 1v(2,3,4,5) videos, you should check them out.

I wasn't calling it wrong.  One of the most common uses of the words "bravery" and "coward" in gaming is to goad people into foolish mistakes.

The "play to lose" mindset is very common nowadays, and people are always trying to fabricate some imaginary concept of what weapons in a game are honorable and which aren't. Then when I beat these opponents, they hurl insults because I used what was effective instead of what they arbitrarily considered honorable.

So it's not about the term being used incorrectly, it's about how pointless it is to use the term that way.  While you might goad someone into a poor weapon choice, you're definitely not going to goad them into a game they don't like.So I'm not saying it's wrong to toss that term around like that.  I'm saying it's useless to do so (in this case it isn't even about weapon choice, it's about game preference; you might goad someone into playing a game they dislike.)

Not sure what you meant by players not interested in a game being the ones that kill it by "noob ganking". Insofar as players can be considered to "kill a game", the set of people responsible is everyone who isn't playing.  The ones actually in the game, who might gank and grief, are part of the game because the game rules allow it and aren't killing the game (because it's a problem with the game rules if they allow and enable that sort of behavior; it's the game killing the game, not those players.)

I'm sure there are people where if you showed them 20 videos in a row of people winning the lottery, they would rush out and buy lottery tickets. But as intelligent people, we understand the odds and aren't suckered into that.

That's why it's bizarre to point out that sometimes uneven fights are won (1v2, 1v3, etc).  Like the lottery, nobody here is saying it's never won. I'm only pointing out that the typical experience is crappy and not worth it.

Besides which, if you enjoy winning uneven fights, that still happens in fair PVP (and happens a whole lot more because those other genres typically have higher skill caps and fewer non-skill elements; on any given night of FPS gaming it's extremely likely that I'll have gone on a 5-20 killstreak at some point, and some of those will be risky gambits where it's me alone against a bunch of respawning opponents.  But like those open world PVP videos it's usually not actually noteworthy since the players dying in those situations are typically scrubs and so it's not a particularly interesting matchup.)

Kyarra

I liked the original Darkfall, pvp and all. But I still say they need to either open up a PVE server, or mirror my favorite game, SWG, and have a TEF system in place. That would make me want to play this game again. I did like to explore in it, but didn't like being ganked and all my hard work stolen from me in an instant.

Dvora

IMO DFO's main issues were

- crappy pve.  PVP mmos still need PVE in order to draw a large enough player base.  Horrible AI and not enough mobs overall in DF.

-macroing because of heavy grind.  If you didnt macro you were garbage.  PVP sandboxes should not need the excessive grind DF started out with.  Apparently it was reduced at some point but I doubt it was reduced enough.

-too much dependance on ping.  This obviously might not be a problem for everybody but it was for me.  Swing and the player isnt where the client shows = you lose most fights.  Not sure what fixes this other than more localized servers and better internet infrastructure.

-In concept I like full loot, if the game is built right, gear is easy enough to replace etc.  Inventory only looting like Shadowbane though is enough to attract more people and not drive as many away.  Population is key.

-Hacks.  Happens everywhere but it seems Darkfall had more checks performed client side than really should be in a full loot pvp game.  Security reduced for lighter server load.. didn't really pay off.

IsilithTehroth

While the game was kinda  arena'ish due to the game revolving around pvp, the game offered the most dynamic and rewarding pvp I've known to date with great risk vs rewards; whether through territory conquest, bragging rights or loot.

Many small intricate things made darkfall fun; despite its flaws such as pvp centric and grindy. Such as mounts being kill able and steal able, ships being the same way, drag and drop inventory system, player housing and the like.

Many things could have been improved like racial wars and non pvp things and not having to use macros(i never did).

The game was the best pvp game out there, but many people just don't like what full loot entails and the huge grind it had, which was fixed later in the game.

Wizardry

Too empty,,i don't want to walk around looking at an empty world,empty town/forts.

It NEEDS to be a game living world,the concept is so empty,they should have went with an Apocalypse theme and just make a few zombie skins and call her a day.

The original owners might have thought the game was 75 % done,to me it is about 25% done and barely 25%,i am being lenient.It needs about 2 years of development content to be a decent game.

General-Zod

Axehilt said:

General-Zod said:

Is that really so far from the truth Axehilt?

By no means am I implying that people that play open world pvp are the only one's who exhibit bravery. I believe often times open world pvp games lack the aesthetics to hold the attention of someone used to pve mmo's.

But Zod Damn, Axehilt...
Every Pvp game thread, review, follow-up, you name it there is always a few who will post the comment "Nope, not for me. Looks like a gankfest-greifers-paradise-better-add-sum-pve-servers-or-i'm-not-gunna-play (catches breath)-Imma-die-horribly-and-lose-all-my-stuff-on-the-first-day-10 minutes-after-I-create-my-character-because-the-game-has-PvP-and-I-know-ill-be-a-victim." Everybody is entitled to their opinion but raising your hand and letting everybody know that you're a vegetarian while being seated in steakhouse is a little um, douchey.

Nobody is trying to "trick" or "coerce" player's into playing a game that they have no interest in. The players not interested in the game are the same ones killing the game by "noob ganking" and greifing because they have no investment in "X" pvp mmo. They do their nefarious deed then log off and play the game they really care about.

BTW Darkfall has a ton of 1v(2,3,4,5) videos, you should check them out.

I wasn't calling it wrong.  One of the most common uses of the words "bravery" and "coward" in gaming is to goad people into foolish mistakes.

The "play to lose" mindset is very common nowadays, and people are always trying to fabricate some imaginary concept of what weapons in a game are honorable and which aren't. Then when I beat these opponents, they hurl insults because I used what was effective instead of what they arbitrarily considered honorable.

So it's not about the term being used incorrectly, it's about how pointless it is to use the term that way.  While you might goad someone into a poor weapon choice, you're definitely not going to goad them into a game they don't like.So I'm not saying it's wrong to toss that term around like that.  I'm saying it's useless to do so (in this case it isn't even about weapon choice, it's about game preference; you might goad someone into playing a game they dislike.)

Not sure what you meant by players not interested in a game being the ones that kill it by "noob ganking". Insofar as players can be considered to "kill a game", the set of people responsible is everyone who isn't playing.  The ones actually in the game, who might gank and grief, are part of the game because the game rules allow it and aren't killing the game (because it's a problem with the game rules if they allow and enable that sort of behavior; it's the game killing the game, not those players.)

I'm sure there are people where if you showed them 20 videos in a row of people winning the lottery, they would rush out and buy lottery tickets. But as intelligent people, we understand the odds and aren't suckered into that.

That's why it's bizarre to point out that sometimes uneven fights are won (1v2, 1v3, etc).  Like the lottery, nobody here is saying it's never won. I'm only pointing out that the typical experience is crappy and not worth it.

Besides which, if you enjoy winning uneven fights, that still happens in fair PVP (and happens a whole lot more because those other genres typically have higher skill caps and fewer non-skill elements; on any given night of FPS gaming it's extremely likely that I'll have gone on a 5-20 killstreak at some point, and some of those will be risky gambits where it's me alone against a bunch of respawning opponents.  But like those open world PVP videos it's usually not actually noteworthy since the players dying in those situations are typically scrubs and so it's not a particularly interesting matchup.)

Players interested in a mmo usually venture out to see what the game has to offer, try to be helpful, do things that positively impact their reputation. Players not interested or have no investment in the game "act out", they don't venture out to experience the game, they wait in the starter zone and look for the quickest and easiest way to entertain themselves which is usually griefing. Once the griefers are done they log out and play the mmo really they care about. That's why FTP and PVP doesn't work well together.

Ganking is a normal part of the game and it shouldn't be viewed has negative. Everybody at some point has to die to another player, its part of the game. You are less likely to have insults thrown at you if you die to a player in a mmo rather than a FPS game. 

But like those open world PVP videos it's usually not actually noteworthy since the players dying in those situations are typically scrubs and so it's not a particularly interesting matchup.)

I just wanted to point out that one skilled player that knows what their doing can win against multiple opponents. Whether it's entertaining or not, depends entirely on the person watching.

Axehilt

General-Zod said:

Players interested in a mmo usually venture out to see what the game has to offer, try to be helpful, do things that positively impact their reputation. Players not interested or have no investment in the game "act out", they don't venture out to experience the game, they wait in the starter zone and look for the quickest and easiest way to entertain themselves which is usually griefing. Once the griefers are done they log out and play the mmo really they care about. That's why FTP and PVP doesn't work well together.

Ganking is a normal part of the game and it shouldn't be viewed has negative. Everybody at some point has to die to another player, its part of the game. You are less likely to have insults thrown at you if you die to a player in a mmo rather than a FPS game. 

Eh, "what the game offers" is in part unrestricted open world PVP.  Players are going to do whatever the game rules let them do, and if the game rules don't discourage ganking (and actively encourage it by giving you the other player's loot) then it's no surprise that quite a lot of players end up doing that.  It's not players' faults, it's the game rules' fault that this happens.

F2P and PVP don't work well together?  So LoL, TF2, DOTA2, etc aren't doing well for themselves?  Look it has nothing to do with F2P + PVP and everything to do with allowing (and rewarding) players for that kind of behavior.

I agree that ganking shouldn't necessarily be painted as negative, and apologize if anything I've said made it seem that way.  My attitude is that anything within the game rules is legal (and therefore not negative), but if the game rules suck then they deserve the criticism.  The players are just playing the way the game wants them to play, it's the design that sucks.

Jownz

Can't wait for Agon to come back online!

A1learjet

Mad+Dog said:

Played df1 Feb 09 till server went down, BUT let it just die now.

If they can improve on the old system and bring it to a new audience why not? If you look starting with Gloria Victus theres still a market for this style game and if it can be Improved  upon why not?

Amaranthar

A1learjet said:

Mad+Dog said:

Played df1 Feb 09 till server went down, BUT let it just die now.

If they can improve on the old system and bring it to a new audience why not? If you look starting with Gloria Victus theres still a market for this style game and if it can be Improved  upon why not?

I agree, but lets hope it's a much better game. It was lacking in PvE as some said, on top of other issues.
It could do well enough to stay in business even as a PvP arena world, but it could do a lot better if they add in some natural feeling controls to wide open ganking a la a working justice system.
There is a lot to like, but a PvP arena-world will always hold a game back from other potential game play to a large degree.