Howdy, Stranger!

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

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

I 'had' hope.

2»

Comments

  • jpnolejpnole Tampa, FLPosts: 1,656Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by Cik_Asalin

    Re-read my post. Im not quitting just because of a nerf.  But this is yet another, for any intellectually honest mmo enthusiast that has really followed this game, but then again its' just me, another chink in the over lack of alot of little things that over-shadow their ability to launch a polished pve single-player-esque supposid massively-multiplayer game, aside from their huge miss on security.

     

    I really had no intention on being disinterested in this game, particularly based on my months of supported though cautiously optimistic support of Rift.

    Yes you are:

    "nerfs are deeper than I'm willing to accept. "  - taken directly from your post.

  • Darkheart00Darkheart00 Troy, MIPosts: 521Member

    Originally posted by Meridion

    Originally posted by lizardbones

     




    Originally posted by Loke666






    Originally posted by Meridion

    This is a PvE game.

    It's really funny how people expect PvE games to balance for PvP. It's got tons of quests, dungeons, dynamic PvE world contents, public quests, all the stuff you expect from a PvE game.

    It features no meaningful PvP except random world PvP without consequence and minigames. If you want a game for PvP, there are some really good ones out there.

    You're right though, I personally play a Sin/BS/Sab and Mages, especially up until around 35, are basically free kills because they lack any good CC and lack the burst to really crit you away, while other classes get 20 sec stunlocks somewhere around level 15, which is more than enough to bring a mage down.

    M







    It is really the devs fault. Most devs make a PvE game, add a little PvP in the last moment but then try to pretend that both matters as much. Most MMOs have the same problem.

    They could as well just cut out the PvP stuff instead, if you want a game with good PvP you need to do like DaoC and GW. They spent as much time on both already from the start and worked PvP into the mechanics.

    Of course other games suffer from the opposite problem and added the PvE as an afterthought, like WAR and DFO.









    Trion added the bare minimum PvP you could add to the game and never, at any point, advertised the game as a PvP game*. They basically said, "It exists for those that want it". People who expect something to be there when it doesn't exist will be disappointed. It doesn't matter if you're talking about meaningful Rift PvP or ferrets with opposable thumbs. Unrealistic expectations will never make you happy.



    * Unless you count the one sentence from a VP that was quickly retracted by people who actually knew better.

     

    Yea, I didn't follow the game as closely as most people I guess but I can't remember anybody ever adversiting this game as 'equally PvP and PvE'; At least my impression was always that the 'random' world invasions were the real bread and butter of Rift.

    And really, that's about the only thing in the game that scratches the border to innovation. At least until you realize that the invasions have 0 persistent effect on anything in the gameworld because Trion obviously wanted the game to be competetive in the mass market segment. 

    That's another discussion though, the world PvE _IS_ something new and grinding rifts can be fun with the right people and the right mindset. Of course though, when push comes to shove it's another theme park MMO lacking LotROs brilliance in lore and design, Age of Conans graphics and World of Warcrafts massive amount of content. It's still in the upper third of the 'MMORPG' pool...

    M

    EDIT: In this context I want to stress once more how the fact that worlds seem to get smaller instead of bigger since WoW is deeply disappointing; I thought seamless worlds with multiple racial starting areas and multiple major cities would become standard after WoW, but not one fantasy AAA title since then managed to deliver this? What's the problem there guys, monetary pressure to release early and develop as you go? I'm still waiting for WARs 6 capital cities...

    You do realize creating all that content costs money? WoW was one of most expensive games ever created (100 million+) only years later was it suprassed by GTA. Also multiple starting areas and zones dilute population remember how empty Exodar area? for game like Rift zone population is key for rifts.

    6 capital cities would have done nothing to save WAR heck one of the reasons the game failed was because there were 3 zones for each tier dilutes player population for PQs and RvR. i remember in tier 3s i went days without running into anyone.

  • Angier2758Angier2758 Mt. Prospect, ILPosts: 1,011Member

    Obviously if they up mage damage.. they should exclude chloro... since a) chloro is actually decent at its job and b) chloro's main problem in pvp is lack of any meaningful CC to get someone off them.......... so adding damage won't stop the ass kick train.

     

    Chloro basically performs amazingly well in standoff type pvp/bigger fights. 

     

    My brother plays a cleric and he basically heals and cc's people off me while dot up everything that moves, with him as my synthesis target. 

     

     

    BTW the people who don't understand why people are angry they are proposng a nerf to this class... it was only strong when left alone and people stayed in the same area.  Also it was a different class on the MMO scene.. like the riftstalker.  If chloro is made out to be a sub par healer.. its effectively not a healer anymore... and you lose flavorful class :(

     

    I really hate the tried and true cleric = heals mage/rogue = dps warrior = tank .... design :(

     

    Mages healing and rogues tanking = good for the genre.

  • Darkheart00Darkheart00 Troy, MIPosts: 521Member

    Originally posted by Angier2758

    Obviously if they up mage damage.. they should exclude chloro... since a) chloro is actually decent at its job and b) chloro's main problem in pvp is lack of any meaningful CC to get someone off them.......... so adding damage won't stop the ass kick train.

     

    Chloro basically performs amazingly well in standoff type pvp/bigger fights. 

     

    My brother plays a cleric and he basically heals and cc's people off me while dot up everything that moves, with him as my synthesis target. 

     

     

    BTW the people who don't understand why people are angry they are proposng a nerf to this class... it was only strong when left alone and people stayed in the same area.  Also it was a different class on the MMO scene.. like the riftstalker.  If chloro is made out to be a sub par healer.. its effectively not a healer anymore... and you lose flavorful class :(

     

    I really hate the tried and true cleric = heals mage/rogue = dps warrior = tank .... design :(

     

    Mages healing and rogues tanking = good for the genre.

    Problem with Chloro's was that they could AoE heal the whole group very effectively with minimal mana than any class right now in raid situations, most have said they would not mind reducing the aoe heals a bit in return if they increased, surviv and dps.

  • MeridionMeridion HeidelbergPosts: 1,490Member

    Originally posted by Darkheart00

    Originally posted by Meridion


    Originally posted by lizardbones

     




    Originally posted by Loke666






    Originally posted by Meridion

    This is a PvE game.

    It's really funny how people expect PvE games to balance for PvP. It's got tons of quests, dungeons, dynamic PvE world contents, public quests, all the stuff you expect from a PvE game.

    It features no meaningful PvP except random world PvP without consequence and minigames. If you want a game for PvP, there are some really good ones out there.

    You're right though, I personally play a Sin/BS/Sab and Mages, especially up until around 35, are basically free kills because they lack any good CC and lack the burst to really crit you away, while other classes get 20 sec stunlocks somewhere around level 15, which is more than enough to bring a mage down.

    M







    It is really the devs fault. Most devs make a PvE game, add a little PvP in the last moment but then try to pretend that both matters as much. Most MMOs have the same problem.

    They could as well just cut out the PvP stuff instead, if you want a game with good PvP you need to do like DaoC and GW. They spent as much time on both already from the start and worked PvP into the mechanics.

    Of course other games suffer from the opposite problem and added the PvE as an afterthought, like WAR and DFO.









    Trion added the bare minimum PvP you could add to the game and never, at any point, advertised the game as a PvP game*. They basically said, "It exists for those that want it". People who expect something to be there when it doesn't exist will be disappointed. It doesn't matter if you're talking about meaningful Rift PvP or ferrets with opposable thumbs. Unrealistic expectations will never make you happy.



    * Unless you count the one sentence from a VP that was quickly retracted by people who actually knew better.

     

    Yea, I didn't follow the game as closely as most people I guess but I can't remember anybody ever adversiting this game as 'equally PvP and PvE'; At least my impression was always that the 'random' world invasions were the real bread and butter of Rift.

    And really, that's about the only thing in the game that scratches the border to innovation. At least until you realize that the invasions have 0 persistent effect on anything in the gameworld because Trion obviously wanted the game to be competetive in the mass market segment. 

    That's another discussion though, the world PvE _IS_ something new and grinding rifts can be fun with the right people and the right mindset. Of course though, when push comes to shove it's another theme park MMO lacking LotROs brilliance in lore and design, Age of Conans graphics and World of Warcrafts massive amount of content. It's still in the upper third of the 'MMORPG' pool...

    M

    EDIT: In this context I want to stress once more how the fact that worlds seem to get smaller instead of bigger since WoW is deeply disappointing; I thought seamless worlds with multiple racial starting areas and multiple major cities would become standard after WoW, but not one fantasy AAA title since then managed to deliver this? What's the problem there guys, monetary pressure to release early and develop as you go? I'm still waiting for WARs 6 capital cities...

    You do realize creating all that content costs money? WoW was one of most expensive games ever created (100 million+) only years later was it suprassed by GTA. Also multiple starting areas and zones dilute population remember how empty Exodar area? for game like Rift zone population is key for rifts.

    6 capital cities would have done nothing to save WAR heck one of the reasons the game failed was because there were 3 zones for each tier dilutes player population for PQs and RvR. i remember in tier 3s i went days without running into anyone.

    Yea well you know, most games before WoW featured multiple, if not capital, but multiple large cities. DaoC, SWG, UO, even Meridian 59; Was it too costly for the developers 'back then' (while back then is ridiculous since that was basically 10 years ago, not like the real 'back then' in the 50s or something) to implement this? Have three realms diluted DaoC population? Did massive landspace damage SWGs popularity before the CU-armageddon?

    No; I think the mindset was different back then, people created an MMORPG with the idea of creating a world for players to adventure in. To achieve this people needed to feel attached to their race, have a home, etc. ... Blizzard knows this, to this very day, proven by the fact that they included seperate starting zones for the new races and giving formerly homeless ones a starting zone... 

    In my opinion, and as much as I am far from an industry expert, I have played quite a bunch of these games for more than a decade now, the post-WoW AAA titles and formerly announced 'wowkillers' tanked because they failed to give the player the feeling of being in a world, part of a world, to give the races and classes the players have chosen identity and a certain concept. Part of what made LotRO so attractive was the fact that if you started a hobbit, you did hobbit things during your gameplay youth, as an elf, you did completely other things, etc. pp. 

    Creating a world is not some random 'bonus' nobody care about. Most of the players I have played with during these years were identifying themselves with the character/race/class they had chosen; Taking this away is taking away a fundamental appeal of MMORPGs and pushing them towards sologames.

    Rift is a prime example for this. You start off as a dwarf/elf/human/dark elf/giant or tuareg human. But neither faction nor race have any relevance. Nobody treats you different, no race specific locations, not even class specific quests. Even the dialogue rhetoric is flat to outright ridiculous, like an overexaggerated mockery of fantasy dialogue

    'The circlet of arcane power, athlatuhep the wicket demon holds it in the lair of despair, he has slept, for thousands of years, it is up to you (and an small number of healing and tanking friends that do all the work), chosen one, to retrieve it and save the world from utter destruction and doom. Good luck'

    I know I'm getting carried away here. It's just that I had expected, back in 2004, the genre to evolve towards something deeper and more original. I should have known that the mass market tsunami won't help any attempts to move MMORPG foward towards deep entertainment.

    M

  • XasapisXasapis VolosPosts: 5,561Member Uncommon

    Interesting comment, considering that the industry leader has long moved away from the world making design into the instanced everything design.

  • Darkheart00Darkheart00 Troy, MIPosts: 521Member

    Originally posted by Meridion

    Originally posted by Darkheart00


    Originally posted by Meridion


    Originally posted by lizardbones

     




    Originally posted by Loke666






    Originally posted by Meridion

    This is a PvE game.

    It's really funny how people expect PvE games to balance for PvP. It's got tons of quests, dungeons, dynamic PvE world contents, public quests, all the stuff you expect from a PvE game.

    It features no meaningful PvP except random world PvP without consequence and minigames. If you want a game for PvP, there are some really good ones out there.

    You're right though, I personally play a Sin/BS/Sab and Mages, especially up until around 35, are basically free kills because they lack any good CC and lack the burst to really crit you away, while other classes get 20 sec stunlocks somewhere around level 15, which is more than enough to bring a mage down.

    M







    It is really the devs fault. Most devs make a PvE game, add a little PvP in the last moment but then try to pretend that both matters as much. Most MMOs have the same problem.

    They could as well just cut out the PvP stuff instead, if you want a game with good PvP you need to do like DaoC and GW. They spent as much time on both already from the start and worked PvP into the mechanics.

    Of course other games suffer from the opposite problem and added the PvE as an afterthought, like WAR and DFO.









    Trion added the bare minimum PvP you could add to the game and never, at any point, advertised the game as a PvP game*. They basically said, "It exists for those that want it". People who expect something to be there when it doesn't exist will be disappointed. It doesn't matter if you're talking about meaningful Rift PvP or ferrets with opposable thumbs. Unrealistic expectations will never make you happy.



    * Unless you count the one sentence from a VP that was quickly retracted by people who actually knew better.

     

    Yea, I didn't follow the game as closely as most people I guess but I can't remember anybody ever adversiting this game as 'equally PvP and PvE'; At least my impression was always that the 'random' world invasions were the real bread and butter of Rift.

    And really, that's about the only thing in the game that scratches the border to innovation. At least until you realize that the invasions have 0 persistent effect on anything in the gameworld because Trion obviously wanted the game to be competetive in the mass market segment. 

    That's another discussion though, the world PvE _IS_ something new and grinding rifts can be fun with the right people and the right mindset. Of course though, when push comes to shove it's another theme park MMO lacking LotROs brilliance in lore and design, Age of Conans graphics and World of Warcrafts massive amount of content. It's still in the upper third of the 'MMORPG' pool...

    M

    EDIT: In this context I want to stress once more how the fact that worlds seem to get smaller instead of bigger since WoW is deeply disappointing; I thought seamless worlds with multiple racial starting areas and multiple major cities would become standard after WoW, but not one fantasy AAA title since then managed to deliver this? What's the problem there guys, monetary pressure to release early and develop as you go? I'm still waiting for WARs 6 capital cities...

    You do realize creating all that content costs money? WoW was one of most expensive games ever created (100 million+) only years later was it suprassed by GTA. Also multiple starting areas and zones dilute population remember how empty Exodar area? for game like Rift zone population is key for rifts.

    6 capital cities would have done nothing to save WAR heck one of the reasons the game failed was because there were 3 zones for each tier dilutes player population for PQs and RvR. i remember in tier 3s i went days without running into anyone.

    Yea well you know, most games before WoW featured multiple, if not capital, but multiple large cities. DaoC, SWG, UO, even Meridian 59; Was it too costly for the developers 'back then' (while back then is ridiculous since that was basically 10 years ago, not like the real 'back then' in the 50s or something) to implement this? Have three realms diluted DaoC population? Did massive landspace damage SWGs popularity before the CU-armageddon?

    No; I think the mindset was different back then, people created an MMORPG with the idea of creating a world for players to adventure in. To achieve this people needed to feel attached to their race, have a home, etc. ... Blizzard knows this, to this very day, proven by the fact that they included seperate starting zones for the new races and giving formerly homeless ones a starting zone... 

    In my opinion, and as much as I am far from an industry expert, I have played quite a bunch of these games for more than a decade now, the post-WoW AAA titles and formerly announced 'wowkillers' tanked because they failed to give the player the feeling of being in a world, part of a world, to give the races and classes the players have chosen identity and a certain concept. Part of what made LotRO so attractive was the fact that if you started a hobbit, you did hobbit things during your gameplay youth, as an elf, you did completely other things, etc. pp. 

    Creating a world is not some random 'bonus' nobody care about. Most of the players I have played with during these years were identifying themselves with the character/race/class they had chosen; Taking this away is taking away a fundamental appeal of MMORPGs and pushing them towards sologames.

    Rift is a prime example for this. You start off as a dwarf/elf/human/dark elf/giant or tuareg human. But neither faction nor race have any relevance. Nobody treats you different, no race specific locations, not even class specific quests. Even the dialogue rhetoric is flat to outright ridiculous, like an overexaggerated mockery of fantasy dialogue

    'The circlet of arcane power, athlatuhep the wicket demon holds it in the lair of despair, he has slept, for thousands of years, it is up to you (and an small number of healing and tanking friends that do all the work), chosen one, to retrieve it and save the world from utter destruction and doom. Good luck'

    I know I'm getting carried away here. It's just that I had expected, back in 2004, the genre to evolve towards something deeper and more original. I should have known that the mass market tsunami won't help any attempts to move MMORPG foward towards deep entertainment.

    M

    A lot of zones in UO,DAoC,SWG were simply empty or simple copy and paste jobs that is what set Blizzard apart since they true spent great deal of time and money to make sure the content is fully fleshed. I simply don't see the point of large empty zone or vanilla city just to convoy the size (AoC/VG). If you want to make something big make sure its done well. SWTOR seems to be doing that.

     

    As for SWG, it  was never that popular and NGE saved the game from spiraling into the abyss (check the population stats SWG was losing population and after CU/NGE decline slowed)

  • Cik_AsalinCik_Asalin SoCal, CAPosts: 3,033Member

    Coming back to 'my' topic; I am the consumer.  Some people get it and some do not.  "I" choose where to out-lay my entertainment dollars and there is some mounting uncertainty with the Trion development path or lack of direction that has "me" as an entertainment consumer concerned about "my" dollar.

     

    Since my dollar might be better spent elsewhere soon, I did cancel my Founders-Club 3-month sub and am happier to be a month-month subscriber as I read through and follow about what Trion wants to be or appeal to when they grow-up.

     

    So I am going to still be cautiously optomisitic, but not so-much-so as to pay for a 3-month or 6-month sub in advance.

     

    Founders club members pay 10 cents less per day for a day of entertainment versus non-founders club members that are paying monthly. It really isn't that much, honestly.



    Since I feel that Trion seems to be very unpredictable and potentially unreliable in terms of whether the entertainment game is worth a mid to long-term investment, but the immediate-term might still offer more entertainment than any non-sub single-player game or B2P game (GW2 isnt out) on the market today.



    It actually relives me to feel as though I can take a 5-day break, or so, over the course of a month, at intermittent times, and still not miss-out on anything entertainment-wise or value-wise. However, if there is something that concerns me about any of the above, I can cancel immediately and not feel as though I'm feeding something I dont want to pay for and stop it more immediately than having a 3-month or 6-month sub.



    So that's my take. I'm meeting Trion 1/2-way, and taking more of a controlling consumer-centric position as it relates to my subscription.

  • xpowderxxpowderx Radcliff, KYPosts: 2,131Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by Kyleran

    Actually as a Cleric I would have applauded the moves for entirely selfish reasons.  Rift is one of the few games that I've seen LFG spam that says "LFM to run Dungeon XYZ, NO CLERICS".  When questioned its because the raid has more than enough healers/off healers and its felt Cleric DPS sucks no matter how much into combat we spec.  Sadness.

    I noticed this as well. Although I play a Reaver/Paladin I noticed Bards are wanted over clerics

  • crazynannycrazynanny PopowoPosts: 173Member

    I wonder if the game even needs such players as OP. "QQ my class got nerfed I ragequit/stop my sub". Maybe play after the changes first, then post, then You won't look like yet another WoW kid? Especially when alpha patch notes also have:



    * Mages: Reduced pushback on all non-healing Mage spells.
    * Mages: Increased the base damage on all damaging Mage abilities.
    * Increased the amount of Armor on Cloth items.

  • XasapisXasapis VolosPosts: 5,561Member Uncommon

    I believe the OP will be happy to read the changes applied on the test alpha server regarding mages in general:

    http://forums.riftgame.com/showthread.php?137034-Alpha-1.1-Update-Notes-Now-Available!

  • Soki123Soki123 Kelowna, BCPosts: 1,479Member Uncommon

    I played a Zerker back in the day in DAOC. If anyone remembers the LA nerf. Basically, zerkers destroyed everything, then nerfed and people whined and cried. I continued to play my zerker and still did very well, you just have to learn to adjust. That said, my main is a Pyro, and I ve had a blast with him, now they re getting buffed, it s like DAOC but the opposite for me. If they tone it down again, I don t care, I m not too concerned about that, I actually play to have fun, not to be the best.

  • Cik_AsalinCik_Asalin SoCal, CAPosts: 3,033Member

    Originally posted by Xasapis

    I believe the OP will be happy to read the changes applied on the test alpha server regarding mages in general:

    http://forums.riftgame.com/showthread.php?137034-Alpha-1.1-Update-Notes-Now-Available!

    I think I might.  That, and as a Necro/Chloro, the addition to "Empty the Crypts" not eating a "Channel" but as a 20-second dot takes some of the edge off the initial concern of previously thought magery oversight by Trion.

     

    But I am still going to be more comfortable with paying month-to-month and taking a few days off here and there without feeling as though I'm locked into a 3 or 6-month money-drop any more.

     

    I understand that there is change and fluidity to every mmo entertainment outlet, but there is still many little things that gnaw away at me that surrounds less appeal than I had hoped in terms of the challenge to reward ratios, crafting and merchandising, community and player centricity of game-play and the overall shallowness and meaninglessness of PvPvE.

  • tkoreapertkoreaper Castroville, TXPosts: 401Member Common

    Grow up and quit acting like you're the only one that got "nerfed". It's very annoying to see people cry about nerfs when really if they had any logical understanding at all, they would see it not as a nerf, but simply a change. A lot fo the supposed "nerfs" are made up for by increasing damage somewhere else, moving higher tier talents down the tree, or by changing other talents. People need to look at the WHOLE picture and quit crying about a few abilities that had their damage lowered or recieved a longer CD.

  • DrakynnDrakynn The Pas, MBPosts: 2,030Member

    Originally posted by tkoreaper

    Grow up and quit acting like you're the only one that got "nerfed". It's very annoying to see people cry about nerfs when really if they had any logical understanding at all, they would see it not as a nerf, but simply a change. A lot fo the supposed "nerfs" are made up for by increasing damage somewhere else, moving higher tier talents down the tree, or by changing other talents. People need to look at the WHOLE picture and quit crying about a few abilities that had their damage lowered or recieved a longer CD.

    this.

    Especially when it comes ot DPS warriors,if you look at the changes as a whole and not at individual changes and I'm reading things right then if specced right a DPS warriro will find their DPS has actually increased not decreased,especially in terms of sustained DPS over burst.

    Also people need to keep in mind that all these patch ntoes are alpha serer patch ntoes and subject to change before pushing to live servers.That's what test servers are for to test proposed changes and new content BEFORE going live.

  • Professor78Professor78 TamworthPosts: 588Member

    Lol quitting because of a nerf. You are playing the wrong type of games if that is the case, as thats what mmorpg's do.

    Core i7(d0)on Foxconn Bloodrage, 6gb Tri DDR3,GTX 680, 120gb OCZ Vertex 2 SSD, 640gb Caviar Black, Windows 7, HAF 932 case, 24" Full HD Dell, Logitech G19, Rat 9, 50mb BB.

  • Cik_AsalinCik_Asalin SoCal, CAPosts: 3,033Member

    hehe. Yea. I need to grow-up. Interesting on how once an optomist for Rift, and now a cautiously optomistic consumer makes for fanboi rage.  Particularly when I offered a compromise of paying for a sub on a monthly basis instead of a confident outlay of cash for a 3-month or 6-month stint when Trion hasn't earned it, in my opinion.  So. . .imho:

     

    - yes I'm immature as baited into agreeing to be by other posters.  i feel so used *grin*

    - yes I cancelled my founders, and this game is not worth a 3-month or 6-month pre-purchase outlay of cash for the sake of 'hope'.

    - the Trion Corporate "slip" of posting a portion of nerfs was a mistake on their part.

    - game-play impactful changes are going to affect some players differnetly than others.

    - the overall easiness and shallowness of the heavily pve-centricity game-play without genuinely realizing any game-play value that transcends what I've already done in other games over the past 6-years is turning the favor of familiarity into the branding of borish.

    - but then again, admittedly, I will sub on an intermittent month to month basis to enjoy what I do about the game for a transient period or for a more prolonged period, depending on Trions development direction. 

  • drake_hounddrake_hound HuelvaPosts: 773Member

    I am not saying that , I think you are passionate enough to care .

    Just it´s not working like it was doing in the past .

     

    So you need to rethink strategy to show them you care about a product .

    That you gotten attached to the toon , is already a huge sign you like the game .

    You need to say ok , this nerf maybe too much , this nerf ok I understand .

    This nerf NO WAAIIIIIII in hell it should be done cause of this reason .

     

    That is what I am trying to say .

    Look you got more attached to the game then me . Even if they nerfed or deleted all my toons .

    I wouldn´t care , but then again I stop playing games , that I invested 5+ years left behind more experience and gold or bases , then anything else .

2»
Sign In or Register to comment.