It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
I have never played a game where basic rats wiped me in the next zone. That is a strawman generalization you are making.
No, they're not at all, actually. You're focusing on the specific example given, and ignoring the greater point. But, if the "scale" of Torval's example is hanging you up, then fine. it works just as fine if we replace the uber powerful rats in the next zone with rats that are not drastically but still notably more powerful at all, simply because you crossed an invisible line somewhere.
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.
Incorrect. You absolutely do get a sense of progress and you absolutely do not get "owned" by the very first creature (talk about strawman generalizations...).
For example, earlier this evening, I went into a Delve in ESO. There were two enemies I had to get past, attacked them and the fight took a bit of time, with me having to dodge a number of attacks, taking significant damage. I finish them off with about 1/3 life left. As I approach the next set of enemies, another player runs up behind me and we both attack them. It's over before it begins. The other player annihilates them.
In a game with level scaling.
The difference? The other player had more time on their character, and acquired better skills and better gear.
In a word: Progression.
That's so not true.Phry said:While there is a certain amount of truth in that, the reality to me seems to be that choice of weapons to use and race has more impact/meaning than the 'class' chosen as its likely that only one or two abilities will really be all that useful, so you end up choosing between swords, 1handed or 2 handed, bows, or magical staff combat, the rest is pretty much akin to traits, they allow for a certain amount of 'variation' but i wouldn't say they were all that significant compared to weapon choices which is where the real 'class' determination seems to be made.Jean-Luc_Picard said:Can't be serious. There's more character development variations possible in this game than in most if not all other class based theme parks.Golelorn said:... character customization is just so horribly bland.Viper482 said:Honestly wish I could get into this game. I love TES, love MMO's....but this game just doesn't grab me at all.
I'm neutral on SoL for now. There's a lot about it I like "on paper" - but we know how that often works out. There are also things that, "on paper" make me think "really? They think that's a good idea? Hmmm.. interesting" - those things could end up pleasantly surprising me.Wizardry said:Personally i have a few things going on my side.
Notice not much to say about Saga of Lucimia?It is not nor is it ever going to be a triple A game,it shows sings of a very small team with very little ability to make a great game.I took away only oen thing i agreed with watching a Saga video and that was when the two narrators talked about Wow being both good and bad for he industry,i said to myself ,a pretty good analogy but Saga left me with zero impressions.
lol! 10 million "Cumulative players"
I think the word cumulative sums up EXACTLY what they mean. If people are to lazy to properly read or to dumb to know the word its on them, not on SE or any other company for that matter.
But hey, its easy to hate on a company, and judging from your tone and the conclusions you draw when it comes to actual numbers I think it is safe to say you are pretty biased. Cute try though.