It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
It will be different this time.Wraithone said:Just about every one of these "sand box" games that have launched for year and years now, has claimed to have some fool proof system to limit ganking. Time after time, its turned out that the fools are the Dev's and the players who believed them.
Gankers can be more creative in finding flaws and loop holes than anyone can possibly imagine. They will spend insane amounts of time and focus to find ways to ruin others play experience. Its a hobby to them.
I wish those involved the best of luck. Past history says they will need it.
Please spare me your moral outrage and projections about "good will". It's an asset store. That is the purpose for its existence. If the artists wanted to get paid, they would charge. For whatever reasons they didn't. If they're banking on donations they should rethink their business model.YashaX said:The asset was acquired for free: that is not supporting indie artists. If they had an iota of integrity they would have contacted the artist and asked them to make some assets for their game- either paying them for it upfront or giving them a percentage of sales from the asset store.So they're reselling indie artists' assets in their game, supporting the artist, providing more options for players, and saving on labor costs so I don't see this is as a bad thing at all. Why do you people hate indie artists?
What they did (as far as I can tell from the OP) was to exploit the artist by reselling something the artist had provided for free in goodwill.
It works like this in the real world; if you can get something for free or cheap and resell it, within licenses laws and regulations, then clever you for making a buck.
One big reason artists could have for offering free assets is that having them used in production is great advertising and something to be put on your resume/cv/linkedin/business partner page. Another could be for the same reasons software companies offer free versions of their programs and services. It's advertising at the very least and an open door for sales.
The entire purpose of those assets being offered there is to use in games. How each studio or dev team chooses to sell their software is up to them within the bounds of licensing agreements.
I actually think one of the best developments compared to some other TW games is that there is a wide range of unit types. In some of the other TW games it felt like every faction was pretty similar.Adamai said:the game has potential.. for a start where is the option to attach standards to regiments??? or talismans.. also where are the regiments unique special abilities lkke form shield wall and so on??? then there is a large lack of variety in the units per faction for example the empire!! diffrenet canmkn types different infantry types repwating cannonears or pistoliers the different knightly orders and so on mercenarys
Game feels like a mod, the graphics are dumb down, the animation are poor, few factions are only playable, AI chaos has unlimited heroes, no interesting buildings in the provinces like other Total War games, the overall game is very very simplistic and shallow, felt utterly rushed.
It's a milk cow game and CA knows that Warhammer universe has millions of fans just like Battlefront It's a cashgrap nothing else.
Anthur said:If you have never played a TotalWar game before and you are a Warhammer fan I can see why someone might be enthusiastic about this game. Otherwise this game has less features (again) as previous TW games and there is no really innovation in it comparing it to older TW games. More like a mod.
Definately overpriced at 60 Euros for what it offers. Maybe next year or in a sale for half the price including some DLCs.
I am amazed at the number of people like you who make posts about games that you obviously have no clue about.That statement makes me think you've not leveled a character in a scaled world system because there is a sense of progression. In fact there is a better sense of progression than static worlds where your only indicator is bigger numbers.That's in non-scaling worlds all the time. The squirrel in the starting zone is weak. The squirrel in the current zone has 10 million hitpoints, because that makes sense and lends to immersion. Just 50 feet away, across the zone line, a squirrel can wreck you. And that adds to the feeling of immersion and a virtual world how?It seems like a polarizing feature that people either really like or dislike. I love it. For me it's core to making an MMO feel more like a virtual world. I like the oldschool design too, but in many ways it feels more constrictive and gamey to me. If only Secret World Legends would adopt scaling like ESO.Liked the game up to Tamriel One. I hate level scaling.It has an atmosphere to it that most my other games don't quite pull off to the same degree. The closest too after it are SWTOR and LotRO, but they don't have the same engaging class play and a lot of other details that ESO offers. I totally agree it's by the most rock solid MMO experience since WoW, for me at least.Can't deny that I love One TamrielIselin said:That didn't take you long. You've been playing the crap out of this haven't you?All 399 skyshards collected...
I also have the "Explorer" Title.
To me, the game is on par with GW2 for the title of best MMO released since WoW in 2004. Maybe even a bit ahead, since I like the setting more than the sometimes too "asian" one of GW2.
When the basic squirrel levels to your supposedly super power level that is not a virtual world.
Or how about how you can go through an old gray zone and the orc camp that would attack you on site just goes about milling in the same circular route like you don't even exist. That is certainly not a virtual world either.
if you are strong enough people do not mess with you. I do not like the feeling that your character is stagnate. I do not get a since of progression. The only one I have found I liked was WoW Legion where eventually you still out...well power stuff.
How is there a sense of progression when you trivialize rats in one zone but suddenly get wiped with them in the new zone because you know they suddenly got made combat skills and 10 MILLION hitpoints just for living over a zone line.
That's on top of the fact that it's the primary contributor to fragmentation and stratification of the player base. Want to play with your friends or guildies? Nope, can't do it because they only know how to fight 10 hitpoint rats, not the super ninjas with 10 million hitpoints in the next zone. How did those rats get all those combat skills and hitpoints? Talk about immersion shattering.
I can't think of one progression flaw with a scaling system where the issue isn't more glaring and worse in a non-scaled system.
I get enjoying the power a non-scaled system presents. It trivializes all previous content removing all challenge. As much as people claim they want challenge clinging to systems that gut it tells otherwise and that's the kind of game world scaled systems create.
In a scaled system there is no sense of progress. Your character is as weak today as he is tomorrow. Nothing changes. You get more flashy skills...whoopee. You still get owned by the very first creature you ever met in the game. It makes the world feel static.
I can understand the appeal of the guild based trading system; in theory it adds another layer of depth. In practice I find it inconvenient and it does add another barrier to entry.Iselin said:There are a lot of hardcore ESO fans that will defend the lack of an AH to the death as a "feature." I think it sucks too and they should have at least zone based auction houses.I agree with you about the guild vendors, that systems sucks donkey balls, and only promotes the creating of big, lifeless guilds only used for the vendors. ESO with an auction house would be better and avoid a lot of useless hassle, and also some blatant exploitation from some trading guilds.
CrazKanuk said:YashaX said:I agree. A part of the issue is that many non-gamer parents probably aren't even aware of what has been happening in the industry the last few years.Phry said:They just need to ensure that games that employ such 'dodgy' loot box game mechanics are classed as being 'adult' rated, in the same way that games that feature explicit nudity do. That more than anything will help curb the industries 'love affair' with loot boxes.
It needs to be spelled out that these games are designed to extract as much money as possible from players by incorporating potentially addictive gambling mechanics. Parents (and players) also need to be made aware that this is very different from past practices of buying dlc or expansions.
Making such games adult rated with a warning about the gambling would be a start to addressing the issue (and this is something that actually deserves an adult rating). It would also be good if schools and other educational facilities discuss the issue in classes on virtual safety/cyber bullying etc.
Again, this is the type of post that makes it seem like this is pandemic, when there is no proof this is even a problem worth solving. Please, feel free to give me the statistics that would back this up. We're talking about a GOVERNMENT actually doing something. The question is whether a GOVERNMENT has bigger problems to solve than this. My guess is that they do. Then again, it wouldn't be the first time a government attempted to solve something that wasn't a problem.