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!

open-world and supports up to 2000 players

12357

Comments

  • KyelthisKyelthis Phoenix, AZPosts: 284Member
    I just hope they do the PvP areas like DAoC and Warhammer did it. Honestly, those 2 games had some of the best PvP systems in place of any MMO I've played, although they had their hiccups especially at launch. RvR zones are the way to go for a modern MMO and if they can honestly make it so thousands of players can be fighting in the same zone without the servers crashing or spike-lagging like mad, I'll be happy.
  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    War was alright during 1.2 and 1.3, but it didn't do it as good as daoc or planetside.
    At launch it had cc and engine problems, then the bright wizard love in, bit it became a decent enough game. Bioware ruined it with 1.4 though with its stupid wow style wtfpwn gear, rez in keeps and dress as a rat.
  • deakondeakon birminghamPosts: 583Member
    Originally posted by Caliburn101
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    Caliburn
    Why would it crash? Planetside 2 has simmilar player numbers per continent and doesn't crash. Daoc & planetside 1 managed perfectly well too.


     

    Let me be as clear as possible then;

    2000 people in a zone max.

    200 people on your screen max.

    When the 2000 people come together for the 'final push' in defence or attack to take the throne - FAR MORE than 200 will be crowding your screen...

    ... crash...

    ... or do you think 1800 of them will voluntarily leave the last phases of the battle to a select 200?...

    ... or that the zone will be split into 10 different areas which have objectives which all have to be taken simultaneously to win?...

    ... no?...

    ... me neither.

    Your assuming there is just one big objective in the middle rather than lots spread out around the map

     

    Its already been said you need to capture and hold multiple keeps etc in order to "win" so there wont be a centralised "push" as it were because if you have your whole team on one keep one of the factions will just break off and capture those you have left alone

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    Well not only that, but not everyone in the zone will be doing the rvr.

    Some people will be up mountains and down caves mining ore and hunting for treasure, others will be lieing in wait to gank them.
  • KyelthisKyelthis Phoenix, AZPosts: 284Member
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    War was alright during 1.2 and 1.3, but it didn't do it as good as daoc or planetside.
    At launch it had cc and engine problems, then the bright wizard love in, bit it became a decent enough game. Bioware ruined it with 1.4 though with its stupid wow style wtfpwn gear, rez in keeps and dress as a rat.

    Yeah, I actually quit WAR right before the whole Skaven thing, but aside from the terrible PvE they had in the game, the RvR (non-zerg) was the saving grace for me and is what kept me in the game so long. Solo roaming with my Witch Hunter and my White Lion reminded me so much of my Infiltrator in DAoC. I just hope that TESO can fufill my PvP itch when it's released. 

  • NitthNitth AustraliaPosts: 3,684Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by deakon
    Originally posted by Caliburn101 Originally posted by ShakyMo Caliburn Why would it crash? Planetside 2 has simmilar player numbers per continent and doesn't crash. Daoc & planetside 1 managed perfectly well too.  
    Let me be as clear as possible then; 2000 people in a zone max. 200 people on your screen max. When the 2000 people come together for the 'final push' in defence or attack to take the throne - FAR MORE than 200 will be crowding your screen... ... crash... ... or do you think 1800 of them will voluntarily leave the last phases of the battle to a select 200?... ... or that the zone will be split into 10 different areas which have objectives which all have to be taken simultaneously to win?... ... no?... ... me neither.
    Your assuming there is just one big objective in the middle rather than lots spread out around the map

     

    Its already been said you need to capture and hold multiple keeps etc in order to "win" so there wont be a centralised "push" as it were because if you have your whole team on one keep one of the factions will just break off and capture those you have left alone


    Your joking right? Time and time again games have shown human nature in the majority is to ZERG

    image
    TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development

  • deakondeakon birminghamPosts: 583Member
    Originally posted by Nitth

     


    Originally posted by deakon

    Originally posted by Caliburn101

    Originally posted by ShakyMo Caliburn Why would it crash? Planetside 2 has simmilar player numbers per continent and doesn't crash. Daoc & planetside 1 managed perfectly well too.  
    Let me be as clear as possible then; 2000 people in a zone max. 200 people on your screen max. When the 2000 people come together for the 'final push' in defence or attack to take the throne - FAR MORE than 200 will be crowding your screen... ... crash... ... or do you think 1800 of them will voluntarily leave the last phases of the battle to a select 200?... ... or that the zone will be split into 10 different areas which have objectives which all have to be taken simultaneously to win?... ... no?... ... me neither.
    Your assuming there is just one big objective in the middle rather than lots spread out around the map

     

     

    Its already been said you need to capture and hold multiple keeps etc in order to "win" so there wont be a centralised "push" as it were because if you have your whole team on one keep one of the factions will just break off and capture those you have left alone


     

    Your joking right? Time and time again games have shown human nature in the majority is to ZERG

    Yes people will zerg but there will be more than one battle to zerg, and the chances of all 3 factions all zerging the exact same objective with 100% of their forces at the same time is very unlikely

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    Gotta love all these people that never played daoc assuming it played like gw2 (or even worse swtor / tsw)
  • Rthuth434Rthuth434 uniondale, NYPosts: 346Member
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    Gotta love all these people that never played daoc assuming it played like gw2 (or even worse swtor / tsw)

    gotta love the ones who think TESO will be exactly like dAOC even more.

     

    rofl, 4 ex daoc devs in gw2(2 heavily involved in the RVR) while matt frior alone who really was responsible for the gear grind that turned everyone off to the game and delivered them straight to blizzard is on TESO.

     

    DAoC will not return this day. probably never sadly.

     

    EDIT: all i'm saying is it's not going back to the way it was...no matter what names these studios want to drop these days.

  • jtcgsjtcgs New Port Richey, ILPosts: 1,777Member
    Originally posted by deakon

    Yes people will zerg but there will be more than one battle to zerg, and the chances of all 3 factions all zerging the exact same objective with 100% of their forces at the same time is very unlikely

     I have half a mind to try to convience my entire guild to get this game and plan out to get 300-400 of us to ALL ATTACK THE SAME PLACES to ruin as many of your experiences as possible for defending this idiotic plan of theirs with such a blind defense. The game is in BETA, NOW is the time to wake them up to this fact and get them to CHANGE it before its too late.

    If an idea is bad, SAY ITS BAD, dont defend it just because you may or may not like the game as a whole. It IS OK to say you like 95% of a game and still speak out about the 5% you DONT THINK IS A GOOD IDEA and this is NOT a good idea. They are making the entire game around these central PvP zones which makes it the single most important aspect of the game...to have 2000 player cap, yet limit what can been on screem to 200 smacks of a very large WTFH kinda stupid idea is this?!?

    Once very large guilds learn of this cap, they WILL EXPLOIT IT by having their people stay together and let OTHERs take the other objectives...

    And once again to everyone else...this is NOT an OPEN WORLD GAME. They are calling instances CAMPAIGNS, changing the word instance to something else does not change the fact that it is INSTANCED.

    “I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson

  • FearumFearum Cinnaminson, NJPosts: 1,166Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by deakon

    Yes people will zerg but there will be more than one battle to zerg, and the chances of all 3 factions all zerging the exact same objective with 100% of their forces at the same time is very unlikely

     I have half a mind to try to convience my entire guild to get this game and plan out to get 300-400 of us to ALL ATTACK THE SAME PLACES to ruin as many of your experiences as possible for defending this idiotic plan of theirs with such a blind defense. The game is in BETA, NOW is the time to wake them up to this fact and get them to CHANGE it before its too late.

    If an idea is bad, SAY ITS BAD, dont defend it just because you may or may not like the game as a whole. It IS OK to say you like 95% of a game and still speak out about the 5% you DONT THINK IS A GOOD IDEA and this is NOT a good idea. They are making the entire game around these central PvP zones which makes it the single most important aspect of the game...to have 2000 player cap, yet limit what can been on screem to 200 smacks of a very large WTFH kinda stupid idea is this?!?

    Once very large guilds learn of this cap, they WILL EXPLOIT IT by having their people stay together and let OTHERs take the other objectives...

    And once again to everyone else...this is NOT an OPEN WORLD GAME. They are calling instances CAMPAIGNS, changing the word instance to something else does not change the fact that it is INSTANCED.

     Your large guild would lose everything else in Cyrodiil if you all go to one spot, so that tactic is not really viable. So your not ruining anyones game playing like that, your actually helping the enemy by playing bad.

  • Rthuth434Rthuth434 uniondale, NYPosts: 346Member
    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by deakon

    Yes people will zerg but there will be more than one battle to zerg, and the chances of all 3 factions all zerging the exact same objective with 100% of their forces at the same time is very unlikely

     I have half a mind to try to convience my entire guild to get this game and plan out to get 300-400 of us to ALL ATTACK THE SAME PLACES to ruin as many of your experiences as possible for defending this idiotic plan of theirs with such a blind defense. The game is in BETA, NOW is the time to wake them up to this fact and get them to CHANGE it before its too late.

    If an idea is bad, SAY ITS BAD, dont defend it just because you may or may not like the game as a whole. It IS OK to say you like 95% of a game and still speak out about the 5% you DONT THINK IS A GOOD IDEA and this is NOT a good idea. They are making the entire game around these central PvP zones which makes it the single most important aspect of the game...to have 2000 player cap, yet limit what can been on screem to 200 smacks of a very large WTFH kinda stupid idea is this?!?

    Once very large guilds learn of this cap, they WILL EXPLOIT IT by having their people stay together and let OTHERs take the other objectives...

    And once again to everyone else...this is NOT an OPEN WORLD GAME. They are calling instances CAMPAIGNS, changing the word instance to something else does not change the fact that it is INSTANCED.

    exactly. the setup is identical to the first guild wars with the difference being that seemingly you'll be seemlessly put in the same DISTRICT(that's what anet called it in 2005) as your guild friends. no need to switch manually.

  • deakondeakon birminghamPosts: 583Member
    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by deakon

    Yes people will zerg but there will be more than one battle to zerg, and the chances of all 3 factions all zerging the exact same objective with 100% of their forces at the same time is very unlikely

     I have half a mind to try to convience my entire guild to get this game and plan out to get 300-400 of us to ALL ATTACK THE SAME PLACES to ruin as many of your experiences as possible for defending this idiotic plan of theirs with such a blind defense. The game is in BETA, NOW is the time to wake them up to this fact and get them to CHANGE it before its too late.

    If an idea is bad, SAY ITS BAD, dont defend it just because you may or may not like the game as a whole. It IS OK to say you like 95% of a game and still speak out about the 5% you DONT THINK IS A GOOD IDEA and this is NOT a good idea. They are making the entire game around these central PvP zones which makes it the single most important aspect of the game...to have 2000 player cap, yet limit what can been on screem to 200 smacks of a very large WTFH kinda stupid idea is this?!?

    Once very large guilds learn of this cap, they WILL EXPLOIT IT by having their people stay together and let OTHERs take the other objectives...

    And once again to everyone else...this is NOT an OPEN WORLD GAME. They are calling instances CAMPAIGNS, changing the word instance to something else does not change the fact that it is INSTANCED.

    I'm not saying the system is perfect, I was pointing out that having 2000 players all in the same place at the same time is unlikely

     

    What would you suggest they do, limit cyrodil to 200 people? Because the map would be pretty darn empty if they did that

     

    And to your last point, about campaigns, they are a replacement for servers, the fact that the zone is the size of oblivion, holds up to 2k players and is persistant makes it open world

  • BetaguyBetaguy Halifax, NSPosts: 2,590Member
    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by deakon

    Yes people will zerg but there will be more than one battle to zerg, and the chances of all 3 factions all zerging the exact same objective with 100% of their forces at the same time is very unlikely

     I have half a mind to try to convience my entire guild to get this game and plan out to get 300-400 of us to ALL ATTACK THE SAME PLACES to ruin as many of your experiences as possible for defending this idiotic plan of theirs with such a blind defense. The game is in BETA, NOW is the time to wake them up to this fact and get them to CHANGE it before its too late.

    If an idea is bad, SAY ITS BAD, dont defend it just because you may or may not like the game as a whole. It IS OK to say you like 95% of a game and still speak out about the 5% you DONT THINK IS A GOOD IDEA and this is NOT a good idea. They are making the entire game around these central PvP zones which makes it the single most important aspect of the game...to have 2000 player cap, yet limit what can been on screem to 200 smacks of a very large WTFH kinda stupid idea is this?!?

    Once very large guilds learn of this cap, they WILL EXPLOIT IT by having their people stay together and let OTHERs take the other objectives...

    And once again to everyone else...this is NOT an OPEN WORLD GAME. They are calling instances CAMPAIGNS, changing the word instance to something else does not change the fact that it is INSTANCED.

     Please, lol. Anymous is dead bub, join a real group.

    image

  • jtcgsjtcgs New Port Richey, ILPosts: 1,777Member
    Originally posted by Fearum

     Your large guild would lose everything else in Cyrodiil if you all go to one spot, so that tactic is not really viable. So your not ruining anyones game playing like that, your actually helping the enemy by playing bad.

     No you dont get it, this is a DUMB IDEA THAT CAN BE CHANGED NOW and by blindly defending it you are ASKING for bad things to happen, and they WILL HAPPEN. Also, what you are refusing to understand is that if they limited what can be on screen to 200, when there are 300, you WONT SEE 100 OF THEM.

    We wont be helping the enemy, we will be exploiting a limit that YOU ARE DEFENDING. the 100 extra people WILL BE THERE and people will be dieing to those they cannot see, it will cause massive lag for everyone, and odds are, judging by early DaoC that also had a stupid limit like this there will be SERVER CRASHES. So, how about just waking up, getting the Devs to see this future issue NOW and getting it changed BEFORE release...it took 6 damn months for them to fix the server crash issue in DaoC, an issue that was pointed out to them during BETA 1, but sadly, while trying to point it out to them, crazy blind *#$@#! shut it down with blind defense.

    So, here you are, defending this crazy stupid idea, just because its in a game you are lookin forward to basically going to make everyone have to deal with PISS POOR PvP, massive exploiting and server issues that will drive players away after release.

    What the hell ever happened to the idea of wanting something you like to be even better by pointing out the damn flaws so its removed?!? dealing in black and white doesnt make sense...There is no, either like all of the game or hate all of the game, open your mouth, point out the flaws, get them fixed BEFORE release.

    “I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson

  • jtcgsjtcgs New Port Richey, ILPosts: 1,777Member
    Originally posted by deakon

    And to your last point, about campaigns, they are a replacement for servers, the fact that the zone is the size of oblivion, holds up to 2k players and is persistant makes it open world

     Is there more than one copy of a zone? its an instance. You can even switch from one to the other. amount of people or persistant has nothing to do with the defenition of the word.

    “I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson

  • deakondeakon birminghamPosts: 583Member
    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by deakon

    And to your last point, about campaigns, they are a replacement for servers, the fact that the zone is the size of oblivion, holds up to 2k players and is persistant makes it open world

     Is there more than one copy of a zone? its an instance. You can even switch from one to the other. amount of people or persistant has nothing to do with the defenition of the word.

    How is it any different from having different servers tho, both have multiple copies of the same content and there is a cost attached to switching

  • The Megaserver concept essentially makes every zone "instanced" because there's going to be tonnes of copies of each zone, which players can flip flop inbetween. This mechanic is in place instead of dividing all "copies" of zones into a server of their own.

    Cyrodil is also copied many times so all players of the game don't come into the same version of Cyrodil. It's going to have a more persistent feel due to the campaign system. You'll essentially be fighting in the same "version" of Cyrodil much like you're fighting in the same version of Wintergrasp in WoW. The difference being that after the campaign has ended with some result and possibly some reasonable looting period of "peace" is ended a new copy of the instance will spawn with new rivals meeting each other.

    Bottom line, it's instanced but it'll have a sense of persistence through each campaign.

  • MaelwyddMaelwydd CrawleyPosts: 1,123Member
    Originally posted by deakon
    And to your last point, about campaigns, they are a replacement for servers, the fact that the zone is the size of oblivion, holds up to 2k players and is persistant makes it open world

    A campaign in not a replacement for a server. It is an instance located on a server but does n't replace the entire server, just the cetral Cyrodil province. It is also not open world.

    Imagine 2 friends meet up and just happen to both have joined campaigns, although different ones. They both walk to the edge of Cryodil and as they cross over they disappear from each other. The first guy goes to his campaign (Instance) and the 2nd guy goes to his campaign (instance). The world outside doesn't change but the campaign area of Cryodil does.

    That is 100% instancing and 100% not open world. The minute 2 people standing side by side are seperated they are instanced and non open world. There really isn't any argument about that (well you can argue it but you just don't understand the technology or are just ignorant).

  • GhostshadowsGhostshadows PyongyangPosts: 70Member
    Mega Server tech is like STO type servers guys....oh geeze and imagine Ilum

    People take the internet too serious...go out get some sun and cool off

  • PyrateLVPyrateLV Las Vegas, NVPosts: 1,096Member Common

    Zoning, Instancing, Phasing, Mirroring...

    How is any of this "Open World"??????

    Most of the ESO Fanbots are so obtuse its frightening

    Tried: EQ2 - AC - EU - HZ - TR - MxO - TTO - WURM - SL - VG:SoH - PotBS - PS - AoC - WAR - DDO - SWTOR
    Played: UO - EQ1 - AO - DAoC - NC - CoH/CoV - SWG - WoW - EVE - AA - LotRO - DFO - STO - FE - MO - RIFT
    Playing: Skyrim
    Following: The Repopulation
    I want a Virtual World, not just a Game.
    ITS TOO HARD! - Matt Firor (ZeniMax)

  • deakondeakon birminghamPosts: 583Member
    Originally posted by Maelwydd
    Originally posted by deakon
    And to your last point, about campaigns, they are a replacement for servers, the fact that the zone is the size of oblivion, holds up to 2k players and is persistant makes it open world

    A campaign in not a replacement for a server. It is an instance located on a server but does n't replace the entire server, just the cetral Cyrodil province. It is also not open world.

    Imagine 2 friends meet up and just happen to both have joined campaigns, although different ones. They both walk to the edge of Cryodil and as they cross over they disappear from each other. The first guy goes to his campaign (Instance) and the 2nd guy goes to his campaign (instance). The world outside doesn't change but the campaign area of Cryodil does.

    That is 100% instancing and 100% not open world. The minute 2 people standing side by side are seperated they are instanced and non open world. There really isn't any argument about that (well you can argue it but you just don't understand the technology or are just ignorant).

    Your missing my point entirly, your campaign (instance) is designed to be your "home", not just an instance that can be swapped at a whim like the rest of the pve world, so yes campaigns are server replacements

    Instancing in cyrodil is there to replace servers because there are no servers to limit the player count in that zone, the reason why its a server replacement on cyrodil but not the rest of the world (which is also instanced) is due to the fact that its persistant and you get locked to that instance (campaign), so theres a permanence to them which isnt there in the rest of the world.

    So to break it down it will be persistant have up to 2k players and your locked to it. That is pretty much the exact same restrictions as it would be if it was seperated by server instad of an instance, so i really dont see how one is open world and the other not if they both have the exact same restrictions/benafits

     

  • NitthNitth AustraliaPosts: 3,684Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by deakon Yes people will zerg but there will be more than one battle to zerg, and the chances of all 3 factions all zerging the exact same objective with 100% of their forces at the same time is very unlikely
     I have half a mind to try to convience my entire guild to get this game and plan out to get 300-400 of us to ALL ATTACK THE SAME PLACES to ruin as many of your experiences as possible for defending this idiotic plan of theirs with such a blind defense. The game is in BETA, NOW is the time to wake them up to this fact and get them to CHANGE it before its too late.

    If an idea is bad, SAY ITS BAD, dont defend it just because you may or may not like the game as a whole. It IS OK to say you like 95% of a game and still speak out about the 5% you DONT THINK IS A GOOD IDEA and this is NOT a good idea. They are making the entire game around these central PvP zones which makes it the single most important aspect of the game...to have 2000 player cap, yet limit what can been on screem to 200 smacks of a very large WTFH kinda stupid idea is this?!?

    Once very large guilds learn of this cap, they WILL EXPLOIT IT by having their people stay together and let OTHERs take the other objectives...

    And once again to everyone else...this is NOT an OPEN WORLD GAME. They are calling instances CAMPAIGNS, changing the word instance to something else does not change the fact that it is INSTANCED.


    <3 Thankyou

    image
    TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    It's the mega server that's the stupid idea. Not having cyrodil as a rvr area.
  • Ice-QueenIce-Queen USA, GAPosts: 2,451Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    It's the mega server that's the stupid idea. Not having cyrodil as a rvr area.

    ^^This^^

    I wish they'd just go with servers.

    image

    What happens when you log off your characters????.....
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFQhfhnjYMk
    Dark Age of Camelot

Sign In or Register to comment.