Last Active
  • A few questions to decide if I give TESO another try

    Horusra said:

    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.

  • So I was playing ESO - captured this screenshot.

    Phry said:
    Golelorn said:
    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.
    ... character customization is just so horribly bland.
    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.
    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. :/
    That's so not true.

    Your character build depends on so many factors - weapons used, stat point distribution, skills used, mundus stone chosen, which gear combination(s) used (mixing light/med/heavy, set-bonuses), what traits applied... and so on.

    There are so many ways you can play any given Class, it's overwhelming. Take Sorcerer.. You can play a Stamina-based Sorc or a Magic-based sorc. Within either of those two approaches, there are numerous builds to try, based on different applications of the above-mentioned options available. It's not a case where, like in many (most?) other MMOs, options are pointless 'cause there's only one or two "viable builds". A number of builds can be viable in ESO.

    For example, here's just two examples of how you could build a Stamina-based Sorcerer... from the same person.

    That's just two options out of many for one approach (stamina) to one class. There's plenty more options out there as well.

    In ESO, your class choice is where your character's options *begin*... unlike other titles where it's the end-definition of what it will become.

    There's simply no way a person can say with a straight-face that character build/customization is "bland", unless they're either really good at dead-pan humor, or they have no idea how ESO actually is and are talking out their rears. Though, I'm finding a lot of the criticism leveled at ESO is either people being blatantly dishonest, clinging to "how the game was at launch" as though it's still the same now, or just going on what they've heard others say.

  • Saga of Lucimia has little competition

    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.

    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.

    Here's something to bear in mind, and it's something I keep in mind...

    The MMOs that so many of us "old farts" refer back to when talking about how much better the genre used to be, *were developed by people who had never developed a MMORPG either*. They had no idea what did or didn't work. They also didn't have the plethora of tools and middleware and resources and experience represented in documentation, tutorials, etc. as we have now. That gives them an advantage not many others have.

    Yet, those old-school devs went on to create experiences that many still remember fondly, and still play in many cases, despite all the newer and supposedly "better" options on the market now.

    One thing that SoL is doing that I admire and appreciate is that they're trying something different. They're not following what's popular, or what the "bandwagon jumpers" expect (though I've seen many others trying to get them to hop on those bandwagons, in their forums, etc). They're creating what they feel is the best MMORPG for their game, their world and their desired experience. This is more in line with how SE approached FFXI's design, rather than the other way around, which they did with FFXIV (shoe-horning FF fan service into a standard themepark template).

    I believe, and Renfail can correct me if I'm wrong, but the world of SoL is based on their own, long-running tabletop RPG games of the past. So, if I'm correct in that, they already have a large, fleshed out, and detailed world to work with. The world design part is already done, and they know the world intimately. That must also be a huge help when creating something like this from scratch.

    But, I do remain neutral on it. It might be great to me, it might be not so great to me. I'll know when I get to play and experience it for myself. I don't need a MMO to be popular to enjoy it; many of the games I get into, folks haven't even heard of lol.

    So, we'll see.
  • Latest Patch Notes, PAX West Plans & 10M Players - Final Fantasy XIV - MMORPG.com

    lahnmir said:

    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.


    My "tone" is the same toward any company I see pull that kinda crap. I specifically stated it's lame when *any* company does it.

    People being lazy and not properly reading, or being too dumb to know the word *is* on them. You're absolutely right. But that isn't the point.

    The point is, SE (and other companies who do this crap) are *counting* on people to be that lazy and dumb, so that they'll see the number "10 million" and "players" in the same statement, conclude that means "omg FFXIV has 10 million active players!" and take to the forums spreading it as gospel.

    Players have already done exactly that based on previous such announcements from SE. I've seen people talking about FFXIV having "millions of active players" plenty of times, based on previous such announcements.

    Here's another way to put it...
    Back in FFXI's heyday, they would openly and proudly announce their *active* player numbers, when they were up around 500k consistently (which was very impressive for a MMORPG at that time). When the number started dropping to less impressive figures, suddenly, they started citing "character numbers", because it was a higher and, hence, more impressive number.

    So, your spin notwithstanding, my point stands.

    "Cute try though".
  • Latest Patch Notes, PAX West Plans & 10M Players - Final Fantasy XIV - MMORPG.com

    lol! 10 million "Cumulative players"

    Oh... SE... You make me laugh.

    "We have to get the number 10 million out there! I know that's not the active player base, but most people won't make that distinction and will start telling everyone it is! As long as it's not us saying it, we can't get in trouble! Just throw a weasel word in there... like "cumulative", it's technically true, even if it's still misleading!"

    When a developer talks about "cumulative" numbers, or "registered" numbers... it means their actual *active* player numbers aren't very impressive. I love how they put an asterisk after the statement, indicating a clarification will be provided later, but never actually provide one. Very thorough.

    Such dishonest BS. How many people have "cumulatively" played FFXIV since its release means absolutely nothing to the people playing it *right now*.

    And yes, to those who would inevitably say it, I know "other devs do it, too". It's lame and weaselly when they do it. It's lame when SE does it.