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!

So glad Camelot Unchained will be limited to PvP only

SatariousSatarious Kansas City, MOPosts: 1,075Member
As ESO and WAR before it  have shown, pleasing everybody is an impossible feat.  It's human nature.  When you have PvE and IP obsessives pulling developers in all sorts of directions, you end up with a mediocre game that pleases no one and is just adequate at everything.  I look forward to an MMO that masters NON-INSTANCED RvR at the expense of everything else.

«13

Comments

  • FearumFearum Cinnaminson, NJPosts: 1,166Member Uncommon
    Yes trying to be everything to everyone is impossible. I think ESO is pretty fun though but YMMV :P Can't wait for CU though watch the forum over there everyday and the community is pretty good so far. We will see when the new batch of backers come in though with each of their own new views of how the game should be if it stays civil for long, lol.
  • Ice-QueenIce-Queen USA, GAPosts: 2,451Member Uncommon
    Me Too!

    image

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

  • SuperNickSuperNick CambridgePosts: 460Member

    ESO has shown this before it's even released? Impressive.

    As much respect I have for Mark Jacobs and his team, I don't see this game competing.

    Honestly it looks dated, the ideas seem tired and PvP-only games are always very limited. I don't see any of that changing due to the indie nature of it.

    I know graphics aren't everything but really.. take from this what you will.

    http://images.mmorpg.com/images/galleries/full/182013/5f5b3e88-650f-471f-ac14-ecee9f18b7ef.jpg

  • SatariousSatarious Kansas City, MOPosts: 1,075Member
    Originally posted by SuperNick

     

    I know graphics aren't everything but really.. take from this what you will.

    http://images.mmorpg.com/images/galleries/full/182013/5f5b3e88-650f-471f-ac14-ecee9f18b7ef.jpg

    Lol!  I call that WAY BEFORE alpha stage.  I don't think it's even remotely fair to judge graphics at this stage.

    The crafting piece is pretty much going to replace the pve aspect of this game.  Which would be a perfect fit for an MMO since the PvEers would be useful for a change. :)  They'd be responsible for outfitting the vast majority who prefer to pvp.

  • SatariousSatarious Kansas City, MOPosts: 1,075Member

    Btw, I noticed that you pulled that graphic image from a video that Andrew used to make a point about having massive amounts of players on the screen.  This was posted literally days after they announced the game.  So it has nothing to do with what the graphics of the final game will be like.  They basically slapped together the demo using  particle effects they used from an iPad game they made (March on Oz).  Andrew even specifically emphasized that this won't be the final graphics for the game.

    I find it hilarious how haters latch on to something completely out of context to make some fake negative point about a game they decided to hate (for some stupid reason like QQing over no PvE).  I say 'hater' since any intelligent person would realize that it's WAAAAY too soon to judge on graphics.

  • AddiktedAddikted Toronto, ONPosts: 33Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Satarious

    I find it hilarious how haters latch on to something completely out of context to make some fake negative point about a game they decided to hate (for some stupid reason like QQing over no PvE).  I say 'hater' since any intelligent person would realize that it's WAAAAY too soon to judge on graphics.

    that.

  • ZinzanZinzan NorthPosts: 1,351Member
    Originally posted by Satarious
    As ESO and WAR before it  have shown, pleasing everybody is an impossible task.  It's human nature.  When you have PvE and IP obsessives pulling developers in all sorts of directions, you end up with a mediocre game that pleases no one and is just adequate at everything.  I look forward to an MMO that masters NON-INSTANCED RvR at the expense of everything else.

    It's not impossible, DAoC did it just fine...

    Expresso gave me a Hearthstone beta key.....I'm so happy :)

  • azzamasinazzamasin Butler, OHPosts: 3,066Member Uncommon
    Not having PvE goes against the very nature of an RPG though.  IMO CU becomes a 3rd person MOBA style game rather then an MMORPG.

    Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

    Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!

    Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!

    image

  • SuperNickSuperNick CambridgePosts: 460Member
    Originally posted by Satarious

    Btw, I noticed that you pulled that graphic image from a video that Andrew used to make a point about having massive amounts of players on the screen.  This was posted literally days after they announced the game.  So it has nothing to do with what the graphics of the final game will be like.  They basically slapped together the demo using  particle effects they used from an iPad game they made (March on Oz).  Andrew even specifically emphasized that this won't be the final graphics for the game.

    I find it hilarious how haters latch on to something completely out of context to make some fake negative point about a game they decided to hate (for some stupid reason like QQing over no PvE).  I say 'hater' since any intelligent person would realize that it's WAAAAY too soon to judge on graphics.

    You really expect the graphics to evolve that much beyond that? Some improved textures and better artwork but that engine is what it is: old.

    I'd venture a guess to say it's the hero engine but who knows.

    Seems more unrealistic to assume the game will evolve from that to some kinda modern day title.

    How is that taking things out of context either? I was illustrating a point the engine is gonna be dated from the get go, which is usually what you come to expect from indie developers. That's usually a lot for anything but a niché community to accept.

  • RebelScum99RebelScum99 Mesa, AZPosts: 1,090Member
    I'm also glad CU is going to be limited to PvP only.  That way I won't have to entertain any thoughts of playing it or waste any time following its progress.  
  • SatariousSatarious Kansas City, MOPosts: 1,075Member
    Originally posted by azzamasin
    Not having PvE goes against the very nature of an RPG though.  IMO CU becomes a 3rd person MOBA style game rather then an MMORPG.

    PvE in your typical MMO goes against the very nature of a true RPG.  The NPCs and MOBs in every single MMO are very static in that they walk the same path infinitely, say the same things infinitely, attack the same way infinitely, have extremely bad eyesight compared to actual players since they apparently can't see players who are more than a foot away, never age, etc.   I don't know about you, but the immersion is lost the 2nd and more times the mob/npc acts the same way or can't see me if I'm 2 feet away.  That's the problem with the current state of PvE in an MMO today, imho.  Now, the day  that they start injecting some true artificial intelligence into these NPCs and Mobs such that they are unpredictable each time you encounter them and are unscripted by a predefined program, THAT'S when I'll become interested in MMO PvE.  Until then, it's just the same old boring static nonsense that you find in every MMO.

    PvP, on the other hand, is very unpredictable and challenging by its very nature since you're constantly going up against other complicated humans.  It's dynamic and exciting indefinitely, whereas PvE becomes static and dull pretty quickly.

  • XirikXirik Yorkton, SKPosts: 1,699Member
    Originally posted by SuperNick
    Originally posted by Satarious

    Btw, I noticed that you pulled that graphic image from a video that Andrew used to make a point about having massive amounts of players on the screen.  This was posted literally days after they announced the game.  So it has nothing to do with what the graphics of the final game will be like.  They basically slapped together the demo using  particle effects they used from an iPad game they made (March on Oz).  Andrew even specifically emphasized that this won't be the final graphics for the game.

    I find it hilarious how haters latch on to something completely out of context to make some fake negative point about a game they decided to hate (for some stupid reason like QQing over no PvE).  I say 'hater' since any intelligent person would realize that it's WAAAAY too soon to judge on graphics.

    You really expect the graphics to evolve that much beyond that? Some improved textures and better artwork but that engine is what it is: old.

    I'd venture a guess to say it's the hero engine but who knows.

    Seems more unrealistic to assume the game will evolve from that to some kinda modern day title.

    How is that taking things out of context either? I was illustrating a point the engine is gonna be dated from the get go, which is usually what you come to expect from indie developers. That's usually a lot for anything but a niché community to accept.

    you must be new.

    All alpha games look like crap.  Look at the old beta footage from ESO that got leaked months ago. Compare it to what it is now.

    but since you are new you are forgiven.

    "You have some serious mental issues you may need to seek some help for. There are others who post things, but do not post them in the way you do. Out of every person who posts crazy shit in this forum, you have some of the craziest and scariest" -FarReach

  • SuperNickSuperNick CambridgePosts: 460Member
    Originally posted by Xirik
    Originally posted by SuperNick
    Originally posted by Satarious

    Btw, I noticed that you pulled that graphic image from a video that Andrew used to make a point about having massive amounts of players on the screen.  This was posted literally days after they announced the game.  So it has nothing to do with what the graphics of the final game will be like.  They basically slapped together the demo using  particle effects they used from an iPad game they made (March on Oz).  Andrew even specifically emphasized that this won't be the final graphics for the game.

    I find it hilarious how haters latch on to something completely out of context to make some fake negative point about a game they decided to hate (for some stupid reason like QQing over no PvE).  I say 'hater' since any intelligent person would realize that it's WAAAAY too soon to judge on graphics.

    You really expect the graphics to evolve that much beyond that? Some improved textures and better artwork but that engine is what it is: old.

    I'd venture a guess to say it's the hero engine but who knows.

    Seems more unrealistic to assume the game will evolve from that to some kinda modern day title.

    How is that taking things out of context either? I was illustrating a point the engine is gonna be dated from the get go, which is usually what you come to expect from indie developers. That's usually a lot for anything but a niché community to accept.

    you must be new.

    All alpha games look like crap.  Look at the old beta footage from ESO that got leaked months ago. Compare it to what it is now.

    but since you are new you are forgiven.

    Do they? ESO looked great in early alpha, as did Star Citizen. Have those games improved? Sure, but to the lengths people seem to be expressing here? No chance.

    You crack on though son, keep defending where those millions went to with this game.

    /thread for me

  • TorvalTorval Oregon CountryPosts: 7,209Member Uncommon

    I think Mark Jacobs knows his target demographic and is focused on delivering a very targeted experience. From my perspective that is smart. This is the game I think hardcore rvr freaks will flock to. From all accounts it intends on delivering exactly what they're asking for it, how they're asking for it.

    They could screw it up and I could be wrong, but of all the indie mmos, and especially KS projects, this is the one I expect to be most successful.

  • g0m0rrahg0m0rrah indianapolis, INPosts: 269Member

     

     I would like to see pvp blended seamlessly with pve.  For some odd reason everyone believes that the concepts of pvp and pve are polar opposites.  I want to see roaming gangs of npcs, pcs, and mixed.  I want to see caravans guarded by pcs and npcs being ambushed by both.  What we need is counter play where Quests are simply a tool used to point players in the direction of conflict whether is be pve, pvp, or both.

      I want to see villages under siege guarded by townsfolk(pc and npc).  The razing of a village should be felt and have consequences.  The problem with mmorpg's is the separation of the conflict and the fact that there is never consequences to any action.  You kill an npc, it doesnt affect you besides maybe some sort of reputation bar which may allow you to purchase items, oh noes.

      I do not see Camelot Unchained breaking from the mold.  I see a more mmorpg version of planetside and that is not what I want.  I want a living breathing world and not a game of trade the fortress...

  • syriinxsyriinx New York, NYPosts: 1,063Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Torvaldr

    I think Mark Jacobs knows his target demographic and is focused on delivering a very targeted experience. From my perspective that is smart. This is the game I think hardcore rvr freaks will flock to. From all accounts it intends on delivering exactly what they're asking for it, how they're asking for it.

    They could screw it up and I could be wrong, but of all the indie mmos, and especially KS projects, this is the one I expect to be most successful.

    This and Pantheon.  Focus on your niche.  I have zero desire to ever play a PvP only game, but there is certainly demand for this product and I think this will deliver.

  • cheeseheadscheeseheads beloit, WIPosts: 56Member Uncommon
    im glad also.  maybe then the pvpers will leave the pve games alone and we can stop getting nerfs cause of them.  just saying
  • XiaokiXiaoki White Pigeon, MIPosts: 2,603Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by Satarious
    Originally posted by azzamasin Not having PvE goes against the very nature of an RPG though.  IMO CU becomes a 3rd person MOBA style game rather then an MMORPG.
    PvE in your typical MMO goes against the very nature of a true RPG.  The NPCs and MOBs in every single MMO are very static in that they walk the same path infinitely, say the same things infinitely, attack the same way infinitely, have extremely bad eyesight compared to actual players since they apparently can't see players who are more than a foot away, never age, etc.   I don't know about you, but the immersion is lost the 2nd and more times the mob/npc acts the same way or can't see me if I'm 2 feet away.  That's the problem with the current state of PvE in an MMO today, imho.  Now, the day  that they start injecting some true artificial intelligence into these NPCs and Mobs such that they are unpredictable each time you encounter them and are unscripted by a predefined program, THAT'S when I'll become interested in MMO PvE.  Until then, it's just the same old boring static nonsense that you find in every MMO.

    PvP, on the other hand, is very unpredictable and challenging by its very nature since you're constantly going up against other complicated humans.  It's dynamic and exciting indefinitely, whereas PvE becomes static and dull pretty quickly.



    The NPCs and mobs may be static but they provide a necessary element to the greater background of the game's world.


    Having an MMO without NPCs and mobs would be a very dull and lifeless world and ruin immersion even more than having NPCs standing in one place indefinitely.

  • TorvalTorval Oregon CountryPosts: 7,209Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by g0m0rrah

     I would like to see pvp blended seamlessly with pve.  For some odd reason everyone believes that the concepts of pvp and pve are polar opposites.  I want to see roaming gangs of npcs, pcs, and mixed.  I want to see caravans guarded by pcs and npcs being ambushed by both.  What we need is counter play where Quests are simply a tool used to point players in the direction of conflict whether is be pve, pvp, or both.

      I want to see villages under siege guarded by townsfolk(pc and npc).  The razing of a village should be felt and have consequences.  The problem with mmorpg's is the separation of the conflict and the fact that there is never consequences to any action.  You kill an npc, it doesnt affect you besides maybe some sort of reputation bar which may allow you to purchase items, oh noes.

      I do not see Camelot Unchained breaking from the mold.  I see a more mmorpg version of planetside and that is not what I want.  I want a living breathing world and not a game of trade the fortress...

    Lineage. It does this as good as a game can in my opinion. Factions are based on players, allegiance, guilds, and alliances. They form, grow, evolve, crumble, reform, and it doesn't end. PvE is very important and where gear and advanced spell come from. PvP controls resources and the ability to obtain PvE. It's fully open pvp, but not full corpse looting. Corpse looting is conditional based on player behavior. If you're a PK then you'll drop items. If not it is very unlikely. You can solo, group, or any combination. Unfortunately is was not very popular here in NA and the EU. 15 years later it is still one of the top money makers world wide.

    Originally posted by syriinx

    Originally posted by Torvaldr

    I think Mark Jacobs knows his target demographic and is focused on delivering a very targeted experience. From my perspective that is smart. This is the game I think hardcore rvr freaks will flock to. From all accounts it intends on delivering exactly what they're asking for it, how they're asking for it.

    They could screw it up and I could be wrong, but of all the indie mmos, and especially KS projects, this is the one I expect to be most successful.

    This and Pantheon.  Focus on your niche.  I have zero desire to ever play a PvP only game, but there is certainly demand for this product and I think this will deliver.

    I'm not interested in a pvp game anymore either. I just think that this dev company is doing it right. I  hope they succeed.

  • XirikXirik Yorkton, SKPosts: 1,699Member
    Originally posted by SuperNick
    Originally posted by Xirik
    Originally posted by SuperNick
    Originally posted by Satarious

    Btw, I noticed that you pulled that graphic image from a video that Andrew used to make a point about having massive amounts of players on the screen.  This was posted literally days after they announced the game.  So it has nothing to do with what the graphics of the final game will be like.  They basically slapped together the demo using  particle effects they used from an iPad game they made (March on Oz).  Andrew even specifically emphasized that this won't be the final graphics for the game.

    I find it hilarious how haters latch on to something completely out of context to make some fake negative point about a game they decided to hate (for some stupid reason like QQing over no PvE).  I say 'hater' since any intelligent person would realize that it's WAAAAY too soon to judge on graphics.

    You really expect the graphics to evolve that much beyond that? Some improved textures and better artwork but that engine is what it is: old.

    I'd venture a guess to say it's the hero engine but who knows.

    Seems more unrealistic to assume the game will evolve from that to some kinda modern day title.

     

    How is that taking things out of context either? I was illustrating a point the engine is gonna be dated from the get go, which is usually what you come to expect from indie developers. That's usually a lot for anything but a niché community to accept.

    you must be new.

    All alpha games look like crap.  Look at the old beta footage from ESO that got leaked months ago. Compare it to what it is now.

    but since you are new you are forgiven.

    Do they? ESO looked great in early alpha, as did Star Citizen. Have those games improved? Sure, but to the lengths people seem to be expressing here? No chance.

    You crack on though son, keep defending where those millions went to with this game.

    /thread for me

    gotten love people who can't defend there position and ditch.

    http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/threads/61613-What-i-hope-for-ARR-graphics

    Jacobs must have ruined this kids childhood or touched him..image

    "You have some serious mental issues you may need to seek some help for. There are others who post things, but do not post them in the way you do. Out of every person who posts crazy shit in this forum, you have some of the craziest and scariest" -FarReach

  • SatariousSatarious Kansas City, MOPosts: 1,075Member
    Originally posted by Torvaldr

    I think Mark Jacobs knows his target demographic and is focused on delivering a very targeted experience. From my perspective that is smart. This is the game I think hardcore rvr freaks will flock to. From all accounts it intends on delivering exactly what they're asking for it, how they're asking for it.

    They could screw it up and I could be wrong, but of all the indie mmos, and especially KS projects, this is the one I expect to be most successful.

    Completely agree.  There's a huge pent-up demand for an MMO with RvR done RIGHT free from the chains of PvE and instanced combat freaks.  That doesn't exist in the marketplace, currently.  There's a few differences between the ideal of this game and Planetside.  It's not going to be a twitchy shooter game for one thing.  For another, it's going to have an elaborate crafting system that should be the perfect respite from non-stop PvP when you need to take a break from time to time.

  • InporylemQQInporylemQQ asdasadsPosts: 165Member

    Pretty curious to see what kind of route they will take on their PvP development. Will it be the typical no risk zergfest that we have seen 20 million copies since wow. Or something that would have somekind of meaning like item drops etc.

    I don't even count the respoint and safe zone zerging as a PvP anymore I can't stand a single game anymore which revolves around dying and instantly running back to the action from the closest respoint.

    ArcheAge, Black Desert and Bless videos InporylemQQ Youtube

  • SatariousSatarious Kansas City, MOPosts: 1,075Member
    Originally posted by InporylemQQ

    Pretty curious to see what kind of route they will take on their PvP development. Will it be the typical no risk zergfest that we have seen 20 million copies since wow. Or something that would have somekind of meaning like item drops etc.

    I don't even count the respoint and safe zone zerging as a PvP anymore I can't stand a single game anymore which revolves around dying and instantly running back to the action from the closest respoint.

    How about the idea of organized zergs going up against other organized zergs?  I'm not sure if this game will deliver that, but that's the holy grail of MMO pvp, as far as I'm concerned.  If I were making this game, I would focus on the mechanics to make organizing zergs easy TOP priority.  Think ranks and drawing on maps that your troops can see.

  • ElandrialElandrial atlanta, GAPosts: 162Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Satarious
    As ESO and WAR before it  have shown, pleasing everybody is an impossible task.  It's human nature.  When you have PvE and IP obsessives pulling developers in all sorts of directions, you end up with a mediocre game that pleases no one and is just adequate at everything.  I look forward to an MMO that masters NON-INSTANCED RvR at the expense of everything else.

    ie if it does NOT fit your goal than it did not work?so i guess your the new mmorpg god who decided what everyone else likes

    i was really confuse about what i liked,i am glad you decided for me.that really was a load off me. funny how the pvp games never really catch on.if you want pvp ,try fps.why not just have a big arena and everyone pile in and go at it.if that is all your interested in,why do you even need anything else?.oh that right you want to pvp others ,lower than you,who are playing a game.silly me.

  • ElandrialElandrial atlanta, GAPosts: 162Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Satarious
    Originally posted by InporylemQQ

    Pretty curious to see what kind of route they will take on their PvP development. Will it be the typical no risk zergfest that we have seen 20 million copies since wow. Or something that would have somekind of meaning like item drops etc.

    I don't even count the respoint and safe zone zerging as a PvP anymore I can't stand a single game anymore which revolves around dying and instantly running back to the action from the closest respoint.

    How about the idea of organized zergs going up against other organized zergs?  I'm not sure if this game will deliver that, but that's the holy grail of MMO pvp, as far as I'm concerned.  If I were making this game, I would focus on the mechanics to make organizing zergs easy TOP priority.  Think ranks and drawing on maps that your troops can see.

    i assume you know what zerg is.by your response i sort of doubt it.

«13
Sign In or Register to comment.