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!

It's easy to see now why/how MMOs have got so bad.

13

Comments

  • TuktzTuktz Atlanta, GAPosts: 299Member
    Originally posted by Gravarg
    I've always said real MMO players are sorta masochistic.  We want things to be hard and take (compared to today) ungodly amounts of time to do anything.  We want to be severely punished when we make mistakes and/or die.  We don't want to equip a piece of armor and it lasts forever.  We want more than running the same thing over and over again once you reach the final level.  We want complicated, time-consuming, and "only the most hardcoriest (if that's a word) will do it" crafting.  Imho, that's what a real mmo should be.  None of this logging in for 30 minutes and actually get something done.  If I log in for 30 minutes, I should barely be able to run from one town to the next :)

     

    Haha, I couldn't tell if that was sarcasm or not, but I actually do have fond memories of runnig from one town to another, getting lost ,and having a great adventure. =)

     

    I don't know if it's so much that we WANT things that take a long time, as we miss the ones that actually encourage you to socialize with your fellow gamers.

    Those early mmo's, while true had a lot of uneccessarily time consuming activities, also had a lot of components to them that encouraged, or required socialization in the game.

     

    I think over the past 5-7 years, mmo's have tried to eliminate/reduce a lot of the things a big majority of players considered time consuming and just a nuisance. However I think when they did this, they also got rid of the ones that encouraged/required socializing.

     

    I think there's some middle ground in there, which I hope CU find a good niche in. Don't make activites take retarded amounts of time to do, but also don't make them so easy you never have to talk to another play for anything.

    image
    MMO history - EVE GW2 SWTOR RIFT WAR COH/V EQ2 WOW DAOC
    Tuktz - http://www.heretic.shivtr.com/

  • ReklawReklaw Am.Posts: 6,474Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by WellzyC

     

    This is a niche MMO, the rules were laid out, and the vision was shared.

     

    But this got really popular really fast, and just looking at this forum alone you can see the influx of post wow era mmoers, who just started playing mmos after 2010  because their Xbox was getting old...are just complaining up a storm about this and that..

    I want fast travel,

    I want an action house,

    I want dungeon finders, loot drops,  tokens and quest, solo story lines,  pretty much everyting that the kids who play assasins creed and black ops want. Tons of shallow scripted content and anti community systems that dont belong in MMOS.

     

    It is soo easy to see how the devs that just want to sell copies can get sucked into this casual player crap. Becasue it just staggers me the amount of people who want an MMO to be just a socially shallow crapshoot.

     

    MJ is a G*d damn savior..  Stick to your guns sir.

    Hmm I play Assasins Creed and Black OPS, but I play them for completely different reasons then why I play MMORPG's. So not really sure why you placed these game in your OP. OR even a reference to kids.

    One has to understand that this is the way it is with games these day's. This genre has grown so much bigger then what it was in the old. Sure mainstream internet made it allot bigger. But we can't blame those who are new to this genre of post wow'rs to have expectation of what they know.

    Don't forget most of us old school'rs act the same as we hold on to what we knew and what made us fall in "gamers" love with this genre.

    You see this genre as being bad. I have 2 nephews age 14 and 19 (brothers) they came to me telling  they started Star Was The old Replublic together, they never set foot into a MMO before, they mostly play single/multiplayer FPS games and as far I know The Witcher 1 is the only action RPG they played and they didn't really enjoyed the game. Yet they were amazed with SWtOR. They talked about forming groups, doing heroics, just exploring the planets, overall all the things they could do in the game. Even though I did enjoy SWtOR for several months it just fell short to me expectations of my needs for a Star Wars MMORPG.

    However I do hope MJ makes your wishes come true. Me....too long of a gamer and Camelot Unchained has shown to little to even begin getting somewhat excited. Don't get me wrong I do believe MJ's vision of what he "wants" to. But it's a completely different story what he's able to actually deliver. If he's able to deliver 51% of what he wants the game might become a big "niche" succes.

    I have no idea about it's release date, figuring between 4 and 6 years?. Sure I want the depth we had from the old games but I sure as hell want today's or even over 4 to 6 years visuals that amaze me. Sure I am a spoiled gamer aka graphics whore, shouldn't I? I mean gaming since Pong all stages of consoles till ps2 and every personal and homecomputer I can think of till this stage where I have my gaming rig and my work system.

    Technoly wise I believe MJ could achieve both depth and a visual pleasing game, but at this point as said he hasn't shown enough to become excited or even consider him a savior.

  • RocketeerRocketeer NachrodtPosts: 1,304Member
    Originally posted by GreenHell

    I have to agree with EasymodeX. His points are well made. It's a sad reflection on the CU community when the responses he gets are "this game isn't for you."

     

    Well, but maybe it really isn't? I mean seriously and not in a "go away" kind of way.

    Not because he makes bad points, but reasonable ones. Those things ain't the kind of stuff you happen to forget adding to your game and going OOPS after launch, these things are intentionally left out of the design for the game. For bad or good, if you don't agree with design descisions maybe your not the target for the design.

    Doesn't even say anything about wether its a good or bad design, just that its not meeting your tastes.

    Originally posted by Reklaw

    I have no idea about it's release date, figuring between 4 and 6 years?. Sure I want the depth we had from the old games but I sure as hell want today's or even over 4 to 6 years visuals that amaze me. Sure I am a spoiled gamer aka graphics whore, shouldn't I? I mean gaming since Pong all stages of consoles till ps2 and every personal and homecomputer I can think of till this stage where I have my gaming rig and my work system.

    Alot closer. Alpha 2014, betas 2015, launch 2015-2016 i believe.

  • mistmakermistmaker viennaPosts: 231Member Uncommon

    diablo 2 and every other old internet game were much more mmorpg than nowadays mmorpg, and the sadest part, those games werent even mmorpgs. mechcommander, age of empires and some co-op rpgs ... the purpose was always playing with other humans.

     

    guess, the fascinating is gone, its nothing special anymore. for us c64 gamers it was something special to play with others online. now all people want to play online alone. thats kinda strange. my first mmorpg was AO and i miss the community. never was a night i did not group with random people doing missions and you know what? people communicated in the chat, with strangers!!! there was joking. people stayed hours together. 

     

    those days are gone and those mass mmo'ers will never know the good old days. its always bad when companys find out how to make big money with a mass....

     

     

  • TokenaruTokenaru Austin, TXPosts: 58Member
    I would like to apologize if I came off as trolling I recieved a warning today.  What I merely meant was I hope all games make it in this genre but with so much competition in the mmo market I would need to see some sort of visual evidence that this game is being developed before pledging anything, Once again if I came off as a troll I apologize to this community.
  • EasymodeXEasymodeX No, VAPosts: 149Member

    A reasonable person doesn't end up enjoying or disliking a game because of one or two fringe design decisions.

    I'm a reasonable person.

    Someone telling me to not play the game because of one or two fringe design decisions is not a reasonable person.

    That's my perspective*.

    * I may be wrong though and some people around here may actually believe that an AH will make or break the game (ROFLMFAO).  Or that a tool to search for groups beyond 10 pages of  "LFG LFG LFG LFG LFG LFG LFG LFG" spam will ruin the game (LOL).

  • BladestromBladestrom edinburghPosts: 4,941Member Uncommon
    Yep I'm sure everyone agrees. The arguements in this forum are often made for arguements sake.

    rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar

    Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D

  • OdamanOdaman Satesboro, GAPosts: 194Member

    I'd be happy with consignment merchants, even if it makes you run to the stall. It's a better solution than going around right clicking every stall. I also have to agree with the point made about NPCs behind the stalls.... that does seem counter productive. You're not fostering a community by forcing them to run around to what equates to a merchant in any other game except a player gets the money.  

    Spellcrafting and alchemy fostered more community than anything, if something similar to those systems into the game it'll meet the goal of community to an extent. 

    I do think there's something nice in the idea of hunting a crafter to make awesome gear. At the same time, I know that that's just a nice spin and there's a very slim chance it'll turn out that way, and if it does i'll be stuck chatting up some rping pedo on the top of a mountain. Ok the last part wasn't really serious, just wow/gw2 flashbacks of the region chats.

  • RocketeerRocketeer NachrodtPosts: 1,304Member
    Originally posted by Odaman

    I'd be happy with consignment merchants, even if it makes you run to the stall. It's a better solution than going around right clicking every stall. I also have to agree with the point made about NPCs behind the stalls.... that does seem counter productive. You're not fostering a community by forcing them to run around to what equates to a merchant in any other game except a player gets the money.  

    Spellcrafting and alchemy fostered more community than anything, if something similar to those systems into the game it'll meet the goal of community to an extent. 

    I do think there's something nice in the idea of hunting a crafter to make awesome gear. At the same time, I know that that's just a nice spin and there's a very slim chance it'll turn out that way, and if it does i'll be stuck chatting up some rping pedo on the top of a mountain. Ok the last part wasn't really serious, just wow/gw2 flashbacks of the region chats.

    I think the idea behind the "front-poach-npc-vendors" in your house is to encourage being able to sell items you have in stock without being present(i.e. imagine a mixed timezone server, you might never meet certain crafters because they are in a different timezone).

    How well that works out would be dependent on options you can set these NPCs too. For example if they employ your friendlist to apply discounts, ignore list to block sales(or surcharge :D) and maybe a request mailbox where you could order things build, ideally where you have to pay part of it in advance.

    If you then connect these NPCs via a global search thingy ... well thats pretty close to how EvE does it(you have to fly to a station to collect your purchases there aswell). If it works for EvE ... especially considering both a "crafting centric" economies.

    But it certainly has to do more than "just" be a bunch of npc selling crap in an inconvinient way.

  • jmcdermottukjmcdermottuk LiverpoolPosts: 976Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by EasymodeX

    Ok first off it isn't 1 miscellaneous subsystem you disagreed with. You talked about an AH, a dungeon finder, and solo content or storyline. That's 3 areas of disagreement.

    1.  The AH is the only significant topic of discussion.

    As I posted previously, there will be little to no PvE in the game so no loot to place on the AH. All crafted gear is the way CSE is going so I would think that most would be made to order. That was certainly my experience in DAoC. Yours may have been different.

    2.  The dungeon finder is pretty extremely obvious that it will end up in the game, although you probably have a different set of mental assumptions going into the words "dungeon finder" than I use.  I am looking more at the group finding system in Warhammer.  And if you're against that, you're an idiot.

    You are now making assumptions on the meaning I assign to the words Dungeon Finder. As I previously posted, I don't see why a simple LFG channel doesn't suffice but that's neither here nor there. I'm not stating my preferrence but pointing out what the game developer has said. I'd also like to take this opportunity to thank you for once more insulting me. Again.

    3.  Tutorial WILL be in CU, if CU is released.  I'm merely suggesting that a few voiceovers are added with some structured direction.  This seems extremely obvious to me, unless you really want CU to fail 2 months after release.  PvP in MMOs decays due to mechanics or end-game, or whatever.  But it DIES from lack of population, and making the game hard to pick up for a casual player that likes PvP is shooting yourself in the foot.

    Ok, I haven't seen any information on a tutorial from the devs but MJ has stated he isn't interested in casual players. The game will be subscription because he doesn't want a turn over of casual F2P players. Again, this isn't something I'm approving of or advocating, I'm just stating what MJ has said.

     

    Nobody has told you to fuck off.

    Telling me that an RvR game is not for me is that, in as many words.

    Based on things you wrote in your post it appeared that the game lacked features you considered important. It's not unreasonable to assume that under such circumstances the game didn't suit you. I would never resort to telling someone to fuck off, as that is both rude and disrespectful.

     

    You've stated your disagreements with the game, and Sovrath and I have suggested that perhaps, given your attitude towards the lack of certain features that you consider important being missing, that you would not like the game.

    You make a lot of assumptions.

    As do you. What I think Dungeon Finder means. Your superiority to me as a gamer, and I quote "Son, I'm older school than you". My being a troll and fanboi when I have never once offered an opinion about the design philosophy of the game. I've always stuck to commenting on how Mark Jacobs has said he will make the game, nothing more. I would also offer that any assumption I made as a result of your post was reasonable, given the information you wrote.

     

    You do know that myopic and blind are practically the same, right?

    I was going to add a sidenote "(although these are semi-redundant)", but myopia only covers side-vision, so I figured they were different enough that I'd let it go without adding the parenthetical and disrupting the flow of adjectives.  It had a nice cadence.

    It did indeed, I was being sarcastic.

     

    At the risk of further invoking your ire I suggest you take a chill pill and calm down.

    I'm pretty chill.  You'll know when I'm actually angry when I make more than 1 spelling/grammar mistake in a post, along with some all caps.

    I'm just being honest with my reaction, instead of filtering it.  This tends to get more honest responses.

    You see, I feel pretty insulted that a random poster on the internets would tell me that CU is "not for me" because of a disagreement on what is essentially a miscellaneous subsytem.

    You'll forgive me for saying that you didn't seem very chill, given the insults and condescending nature of some of your replies. You appeared rather angry. I based my assumption on your post. You may have qualified it to 1 subsystem now but your initial post had multiple systems you disagreed with. I responded to the first post as a whole.

    I also feel insulted, because you actually did insult me. I am, in your words, a no job, no life asshat and an idiot. I also lack the gaming credentials to be considered worthy to engage you because you are older school than me, in your opinion. That's a pretty big assumption when you have no idea who I am or my gaming background.

    Because that is what the AH is.  That message to me basically says that the other party is a complete fanboy when they can't coherently discuss the merits / problems with one subsystem of the game.  This is exacerbated by the fact that the only tangential justification behind the "no-AH" is a poorly thought-out statement by MJ, and the delusion that "oldschool is good because oldschool" circular reasoning spouted on this forum.

    Once again we come back to me stating MJ's philosphy, not my own opinion about the game. If you want my opinion, I don't think an AH is that important due to the lack of PvE loot. I wouldn't object if there was an AH in the game. I'm indefferent to the matter. None of that matters though. MJ is making the game the way he wants it made and I doubt very much if anything we say will sway him. That's why I offered no opinion of my own. That's also why there's little point in discussing the merits or problems of these features or the lack thereof.

    Under that logic, we should go with max range 9s AOE no-cooldown stun too, because that's so oldschool it gives me a throbbing hard-on.  Oh, and de-leveling.  That's fun guys because oldschool.  Corpse looting too.  And 2D sprites!

    Please, no more throbbing hard-ons. I have enough problems sleeping at night without that mental picture.

    CU is about RvR.  The AH is not RvR, and it is not PvP.  It's a tool to make trading more efficient.

    I won't argue that point. I will say that MJ feels that it leads to less interaction between the players, which is probably accurate. I think he's trying to leave out systems that he considers a hinderance to community forming.

    I've long been of the opinion that LFD tools have a negative impact on server communities, especially cross server ones. Not so sure about the AH.

     

  • EasymodeXEasymodeX No, VAPosts: 149Member

    As I posted previously, there will be little to no PvE in the game so no loot to place on the AH. All crafted gear is the way CSE is going so I would think that most would be made to order. That was certainly my experience in DAoC. Yours may have been different.

    My experience in DAOC and other MMORPGs indicates that crafted items are sold pre-made (whether via player shops or the AH) as well, although these are usually at a higher price than getting something made directly by providing mats.

    Hence, for casual purchases there's zero difference between an AH or a player shop system in terms of social interaction.

    The fact that trade for items will exist means that an AH is simply a less tedious method of trading than player shops.

    The only way to actually get more player interaction out of trading is to eliminate both player shops AND the AH, meaning all trade will be direct via chat and walking up to someone to trade.  I doubt players would favor that degree of inconvenience.

     

    You are now making assumptions on the meaning I assign to the words Dungeon Finder.

    No, I stated that you probably have a different set of assumptions than I do -- where mine amounts to a graphical LFG system.

     

    I'm not stating my preferrence but pointing out what the game developer has said.

    The game developer is probably referencing WoW where the context includes: (a) instantiated PvE, (b) cross-server pools of players (e.g. no community), (c) instant teleportation into the instance.  These assumptions are not included in what I was referring to, which, as I said, was more along the lines of WAR's "I AM LFG", and "LIST OF OPEN GROUPS" (in addition to the usual LFG in chat).  Those particular aspects of WoW's dungeon finder do, in some ways, degrade the community / social aspect.

     

    Ok, I haven't seen any information on a tutorial from the devs but MJ has stated he isn't interested in casual players.

    Hopefully he's referring to the casual WoW PvE crowd, and not casual RvR/PvP players.

    Because if casual RvR players leave CU, it will die.

     

    Based on things you wrote in your post it appeared that the game lacked features you considered important.

    Those items happened to be the ones I disagreed with from the OP.  I did independently generate a list of subsystems that were important to me that I found disagreeable.  Nice assumption though.

     

    I'd also like to take this opportunity to thank you for once more insulting me. Again.

    Well it's good to see you have an opinion to call your own rather than simply throwing MJ at me and telling me to play another game.

  • StilerStiler Athens, TNPosts: 599Member
    Originally posted by EasymodeX

    I want an action house,

    I started playing MMOs with UO.

    I want a goddamn auction house unless MJ can really really really really really spin shitty player shops as something worth a damn without causing me hassle when I want to buy something.  I don't mind player shops in addition to an AH (a la Aion), but no AH = bad mojo.

    I want dungeon finders,

    Group finder / raid finder will be important for an RvR-based game where grouping is mandatory.  Naturally, it should have selection criteria based on PvP aspects, like "keeps | skirmish", "small group | large group", etc.  But, it will be important to improve the casual player experience.

    solo story lines,

    A solo story line will be mandatory in order to get any non-hardcore player into the game.  I even want one and I consider myself a pretty avid fan of RvR.

    However, it should be more of a "RvR bootcamp solo storyline" where the [optional] intro sequence introduces you to the RvR mechanics in a relatively stable manner.  E.g. like Nordland.  In other words, distill down the "intro level 1 - 50" into 2 hours of "PvP intro" content.

    AH's destroy the sense of community that player shops/crafters have.

    Why look/browse at player shops, where a crafter may have "x" item slightly higher price, instead of the AH?

    Why would sellers USE shops instead of  an auction house since a shop would hav ea limited consumer base whereas the AH would be global?

    The only way to have an AH and still "keep" what makes player shops fun, is to do like SWG did iwth their auction house.

    Let it be ONLY for cheap items/resources. There was a (small) limit to the price of an item you could place on the AH, so gear and other items that costed more weren't viable to be placed on the AH. So player shops/vendors were the main way you found your armour/weapons and things.

  • EasymodeXEasymodeX No, VAPosts: 149Member

    AH's destroy the sense of community that player shops/crafters have.

    Player shops destroy the sense of community that direct trading has.

     

    The only way to have an AH and still "keep" what makes player shops fun, is to do like SWG did iwth their auction house.

    What makes player shops fun?

    Clicking through 87 stalls to find what you're looking for?  The text spam on the screen?  Seeing 50 naked bots on the screen when you enter town?

    Ok I can get the last one.

    Player shops are bots.  I'd rather click 1 consolidated bot than run around and click through 50 bots.

     

    Man this thread is weird.  It's like no one's played Aion or L2 or FF14 where they actually had player shops.

    It's like no one gets that the DAOC consignment model is 99% the same as the AH.

    So funny.

  • FearumFearum Cinnaminson, NJPosts: 1,166Member Uncommon

    AH's have their place in games that are designed to have them, this one sounds like its not designing around an AH for tradable goods and you will have to seek out people who can craft said goods. How is this bad? I don't know because it fits the game design, sitting in a AH playing the market does not fit in here. If you want to be a market player you have to attively do so. Saying you want an AH just because game X and Y have it does not fit here.

    For an example, say you want a nice sword and the town you are in has lots of crafters but none are specialized in swords, you have to ask around and find out where you can get a great one made. You find somebody who tells you there is a master swordsmith that hangs around an Inn a few towns over, so you set out to find this Inn. It might be a dangerous road to get there but hey you want a sword, along the way you run into another of your realm mates who tells you that there is a small group of enemies around but not sure where they went. You tell him your going to an Inn at said town and he agrees to run along with you because he now wants to check out this other players swords. So you both set out on your way when all of a sudden you get cc'd and 3 enemies run over a hill, you break cc and quickly take out the caster and your realm mate is getting beaten to a pulp so you rush over to aid and almost down the second guy but there is another mage on the hill that cc'd you again just long enough for them to run off. You and your mate go to chase but they are too far off and not worth the hastle since your almost to the town you decide to keep on going. You roll into the Inn and ask around for the swordsmith and the Inn keeper gives you a  beer and you tell of the enemies that you confronted right outside town. You learn the swordsmith had wife aggro and will back in a few and get a few others hanging in the inn to go out and see if you can find the enemies which got away until he gets back.

    Now that sounds to me like a better option than, go over to ah look up sword, find sword, purchase sword, open mail, equip sword.

     

     

    Dungeon finders have their place in other games that are more like lobby games, you sit there until your Q pops then you port to said instance to plow through the content to get the shiny at the end, this game will not have instances or npc drops so really no point in wasting time with a group finder. You will have to participate in raids with groups of others to accomplish feats, like raiding other realms camps or taking keeps. Not sure where a dungeon finder fits in here but I don't see a point in having one. Simply asking people you are running around with to join a group seems hard I know, but it will probably be the best way to find one if your solo and not in a guild.

    Solo story lines are fun in certain games which do them well and are designed around said story, they all run out when you get to an end though. This game will have some story and lore but not sure about a main quest line and really don't see a need to have them just to have them past a tutorial type area at the very start. Its a hard concept to understand when you're so accustomed to being led around from ! to ? So I can see where the confusion would be after being let loose on the world.

  • EasymodeXEasymodeX No, VAPosts: 149Member

    Saying you want an AH just because game X and Y have it does not fit here.

    I want an AH just because DAOC had 99% the equivalent of an AH.

    Doesn't that argument work around here?  DAOC had it so it must be good?

  • BaltoBroBaltoBro Baltimore, MDPosts: 48Member
    promises of a game that's it's not even in alpha; wait until it's released becasue chances are that some promises may be broken; I can see people getting bored fast with the RvR and then asking for PvE 6 months after release.
  • EasymodeXEasymodeX No, VAPosts: 149Member

    I definitely won't be one of those people asking for PvE.

    Ever.

    Sidenote: although a useless dragon raid once in awhile for no real purpose is kind of entertaining once in awhile.  Like ... every 6 months.

     

    [mod edit]
  • evil13evil13 Burlington, MAPosts: 359Member

    Only if rvr implementation is badly done. Besides, why ask for a pve game? there are already a dozen of them out there, if you want to pve, you can always go and play one of those.

    Plus, people who are going to play CU are really interested in pvp, not a "oh it has pvp too? well, maybe I'll give it a try when my raids' are on cool down" but those who are interested in just pvp. People like that are unlikely to get bored with a good rvr system. Heck, there are plenty of people who played daoc and barely did any pve beyond what was required (or to farm to have gold for gear they wanted)

     

    Besides, pve and pvp end games don't mix. PvE= you must have uber gear and tired progression (unless you do it the way daoc did pve, but that wouldn't be of much interest to the pve players of today) RvR= an equal level playing field gear must be easily available to anyone who wishes to partake in rvr, better gear is possible but must follow a sideway

  • EllyaEllya leylandPosts: 99Member
    Originally posted by EasymodeX

     

    Ok, I haven't seen any information on a tutorial from the devs but MJ has stated he isn't interested in casual players.

    Hopefully he's referring to the casual WoW PvE crowd, and not casual RvR/PvP players.

    Because if casual RvR players leave CU, it will die.

     

    Actually, he is interested in casual players. In fact, he's so interested that he is considering different subs for people with less play time, such as the "Weekend Warrior" idea. 

    I'm sure every type of player will be warmly welcomed into the game, but many will find that, with no pve, rvr/pvp only, no mounts, little fast travel and no auction house, they won't like it.

    Of course, he'd like it to appeal to many, but it just won't, and he won't change the game to make it so.

  • Niix_OzekNiix_Ozek Calgary, ABPosts: 397Member

    [mod edit]

    DAOC's community interaction was by far at its best before housing / the CM ... so no that doesn't really apply to the community this game is supposedly aiming for.

    Ozek - DAOC
    Niix - Other games that sucked

  • EasymodeXEasymodeX No, VAPosts: 149Member

    Ironically, the CM is nearly identical to an AH, except you have extra running around.

    Whee.

  • LokbergLokberg OlsoPosts: 315Member
    There is a easy way to deal with mr X it is alittle button called block, i do want the entertainment at work so i wont block thou ^_^
  • SovrathSovrath Boston Area, MAPosts: 18,452Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by GreenHell

    I have to agree with EasymodeX. His points are well made. It's a sad reflection on the CU community when the responses he gets are "this game isn't for you."

     

    But why?

    If I like a game but see there are game play elements that are not to my taste then "the game isn't for me".

    I tend not to stay with sci-fi games or post apocalyptic anything so "those games are not for me".

     

    I don't really get into the idea of perma-death so you don't see me going to the salem forums and posting how it's going to crash and burn. why? Because I recognize that there are people who like certain types of games and if the game can support itself with their custom then this is a good thing. But "Salem is not for me".

    Dark Fall onlne has some compelling game play but I feel like I'd have to spend much more time than I am willing to spend at this moment in my life so "the game is not for me".

    It's ok to recognize that not every game is for every individual. What's more, the creator of CU has said "these are the things I want in the game, this is the type of game I want to make".

    And because of this anyone might recognize that he means what he says and what he has said has excited a segment of the gaming population.

    I agree that the OP has a right to his opinion but I don't agree with his opinion. I would go as far as to say that all the things he is touting as a "must" are things I don't particularly want or care for or "must have". Therefore, on the surface, CU would be more "for me". And less for him as I see these things as "pros" and not "cons".

    No one is teliing anyone to "F' Off". There is a difference between tellnig someone to "hit the road and dont' let the door hit you..."  and saying "hey, given what your preferences are and given the direction that the developers are insisting the game take, I don't think this game is going to be of interest to you provided it's successful" and they stick to their vision."

     

  • EasymodeXEasymodeX No, VAPosts: 149Member
    Originally posted by Sovrath

    But why?

    If I like a game but see there are game play elements that are not to my taste then "the game isn't for me".

    I tend not to stay with sci-fi games or post apocalyptic anything so "those games are not for me".

    Luckily, CU is an RvR game focused on RvR.

    Therefore it's a game for me.

     

    Even if no-AH sounds like a pretty lame / illogical idea.

    Your flippant "the game isn't for you" is simply your expression for "I have no idea how to argue something, and he said something that isn't 100% CU fanboy support, so I'll just tell him to F off in as many words".

  • waynejr2waynejr2 West Toluca Lake, CAPosts: 4,470Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by EasymodeX
    Originally posted by Sovrath

    But why?

    If I like a game but see there are game play elements that are not to my taste then "the game isn't for me".

    I tend not to stay with sci-fi games or post apocalyptic anything so "those games are not for me".

    Luckily, CU is an RvR game focused on RvR.

    Therefore it's a game for me.

     

    Even if no-AH sounds like a pretty lame / illogical idea.

    Your flippant "the game isn't for you" is simply your expression for "I have no idea how to argue something, and he said something that isn't 100% CU fanboy support, so I'll just tell him to F off in as many words".

     So if you are going to purchase the game, then they have  your money and therefore don't need to add an AH.

Sign In or Register to comment.