Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

I do not understand....

CoffinshockCoffinshock Member Posts: 21

Wow is all I can say after watching the gameplay video....I can not read an article about RIFT or SWTOR without reading someone talk about how the game is going to fail or how bad the animations look. Yet out of nowhere this game pops up close to GW2 on the hype list. I just do not get what the hype is for this game...Did you play Borderlands?

Each player must accept the cards life deals him or her: but once they are in hand, he or she alone must decide how to play the cards in order to win the game.

Comments

  • rojoArcueidrojoArcueid Member EpicPosts: 10,062

    Originally posted by Coffinshock

    Wow is all I can say after watching the gameplay video....I can not read an article about RIFT or SWTOR without reading someone talk about how the game is going to fail or how bad the animations look. Yet out of nowhere this game pops up close to GW2 on the hype list. I just do not get what the hype is for this game...Did you play Borderlands?

    i havent played borderlands, but ive seen a lot of gameplays, and judging by those gameplayes, firefall is gonna look way better than borderlands. i found firefall like...( a version of gears of war made with borderlands graphics in a borderland environment and some extra features) of course not gonna compare gears of wars is a beast... i just got that impression





  • zonzaizonzai Member Posts: 358

    Who cares if it looks similar to Borderlands? At least its not yet another WoW clone.  Personally, I see some significant differences between Firefall's and Borderlands' art styles.  And yes, I've played through Borderlands.

  • MumboJumboMumboJumbo Member UncommonPosts: 3,219

    There's got to be a niche here and Firefall looks like it wants to jump right in. I'm surprised not more games of this sort are on the radar already?

  • KalafaxKalafax Member UncommonPosts: 562

    Yea, I did play Boarderlands, and its pretty much the best FPS thats been made in the past few years, with that in mind, this game is being made from the Boarderlands guys, and looks to be amazing, if you cant see that your not into FPS's or your just blind.

     

    P.S. Also just to say it, Gears of War, and any game with a built in cover system is complete crap

    Mess with the best, Die like the rest

  • sunspotssunspots Member Posts: 12

    The gameplay actually looks way different from borderlands. With a dynamic, changing world where people and/or NPC's take over settlements back and forth, open world with loads of players as oppsed to 4-player co-op. Really beautiful world and graphics as opposed to borderlands, the feeling is much more epic...

    But there's no need to hype until it comes out and we see if it lives up to it's expectations.

  • pauly6478pauly6478 Member Posts: 276

    Borderlands was great. Sure it was too easy but meh. Borderlands lacked the MMO feel. I use to say man I wish a game like borderlands would come out that had more of a multiplayer feel too it. And poof here we go... 

     

    Long as this game doesnt do the over powered sniper class like in borderlands that has explosive bullets I see this being an amazing game.

  • SandaStunnaSandaStunna Member Posts: 101

    you dont understand, fps on a open world with dynamic events?

     

     just hope on pvp it plays like borderlands. or it will be know as a fake fps like fallen earth!!!!

  • ElidienElidien Member RarePosts: 1,395

    I find it funny that people ignore microtransactions in this game but its horrible in any other game.

  • EndDreamEndDream Member Posts: 1,152

    Originally posted by Dalgor

    P.S. Also just to say it, Gears of War, and any game with a built in cover system is complete crap

    Seriously? Gears of War and gears 2 are some of my favorie games ever. I Love the campaigns but not as much as the amazing multiplayer.

    Remember Old School Ultima Online

  • eveisbettereveisbetter Member Posts: 71

    Pfff!!! OP, are you serious?   

     

    1. You obviously never played borderlands

    2. If you did, and still felt Firefall was so similar, you'd be HAPPy about it.

    3. You don't seem to understand that borderlands is a singleplayer/co-op FPS, and Firefall is an MMOFPSRPG i.e. not streamlined single player mode gameplay and not linear story to go through by yourself or with a friend but a living breathing world full of people to share experiences with and to battle.

    4.  How dare you accuse a company of ripping itself off.   Especially with all the fracking ripoff developers spewing out craptastic EQ/DAOC/WOW look-alikes for the last 3 years

    5.  Perhaps you just don't like the art style of cellshading?

    6.  Be happy that 'so far' it isn't just trying to "offer what WoW offers" and hope for the subs to start rolling in.  (since apparently, we're not allowed to say "copying wow" or "wowclone" anymore without sending some tender souls into convulsions.)

  • romanator0romanator0 Member Posts: 2,382

    The only reason the hype rating for the game is at the amount it is is because there has only been around 80 people who have put a hype rating. As for the game itself, it does take on a similar art style to borderlands, but that isn't a bad thing because borderlands looked great, and the gameplay itself isn't 100% FPS as people are able to switch between FPS and TPS.

    image

  • SfaliaraSfaliara Member Posts: 438

    Originally posted by romanator0

    The only reason the hype rating for the game is at the amount it is is because there has only been around 80 people who have put a hype rating. As for the game itself, it does take on a similar art style to borderlands, but that isn't a bad thing because borderlands looked great, and the gameplay itself isn't 100% FPS as people are able to switch between FPS and TPS.

    According to the recent pcgamer preview the game is also free.

  • romanator0romanator0 Member Posts: 2,382

    Originally posted by Sfaliara

    Originally posted by romanator0

    The only reason the hype rating for the game is at the amount it is is because there has only been around 80 people who have put a hype rating. As for the game itself, it does take on a similar art style to borderlands, but that isn't a bad thing because borderlands looked great, and the gameplay itself isn't 100% FPS as people are able to switch between FPS and TPS.

    According to the recent pcgamer preview the game is also free.

    I know. I've actually been following this game for a few months now and have been to the official forum.

    image

  • NcrediblebulkNcrediblebulk Member UncommonPosts: 138

    If you want to know how this game will most likely play go try Global Agenda. Everything I've seen about Firefall is that it's going to play like Global Agenda at it's basic levels but with a different art style and probably more content at launch. Global Agenda is a great game and I can see Firefall being the same. They key is how the do PvP and keep it relevant.





    The focus of PvP in Global Agenda was Alliance vs. Alliance. AvA, as it was called, in theory was great but the execution lacked longevity. After a month or two PvP boiled down to groups of 4 players just Public Queue stomping. Yes AvA is still around but it's nothing like it was when the game first launched. There was politics, trolling, griefing, and forums wars. The community reminded of the once great Daoc community. Global Agenda become much like Team Fortress two with a different camera view of your character.





    Everything I've found about Firefall has pointed to the Devs creating a ranking system for PvP but with limited numbers on each side of the battle. This leads me to believe that PvP maps or areas will be instanced like they are in Global Agenda making it nothing like Planetside was.





    As far as the hype goes Global Agenda has in my opinion become a cult classic with a cult following. Firefall's hype is mostly due to the how little is known about this game but how good the devs have made it look. It will be interesting to see how games like this turn out at launch and six months down the road after that.





    Also there's not a ton of info on it yet but Hi-Rez the developers of Global Agenda grabbed the IP for the new Tribes games. It's called Tribes Universe and is supposed to be everything that Global Agenda wasn't.



     

    "Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth."

  • EndDreamEndDream Member Posts: 1,152

    The game looks great and there is a lot of talent behind it. I'm not sure why everyone is so suprised. It might suck just like any other game might, but I dont see why I should presume it will.

    Remember Old School Ultima Online

  • eveisbettereveisbetter Member Posts: 71

    Originally posted by ajrock622

    "The focus of PvP in Global Agenda was Alliance vs. Alliance. AvA, as it was called, in theory was great but the execution lacked longevity. After a month or two PvP boiled down to groups of 4 players just Public Queue stomping. "

    "Everything I've found about Firefall has pointed to the Devs creating a ranking system for PvP but with limited numbers on each side of the battle. This leads me to believe that PvP maps or areas will be instanced like they are in Global Agenda making it nothing like Planetside was."





     

     It blows my mind that people are willing to pay anything beyond box price for games that put you in instances, arenas, battlegrounds, objective maps, etc...

    That's what single player games are for.        I HATE how this concept has snuck its way into my beloved genre.    

    Score charts and win/loss ladders and skirmish battles and "team vs team" matches don't belong in MMORPGs they simply don't.  These are FPS and sports mechanics and it's not fair to MMORPG lovers to have to put up with these archetypes being the only choices in the next gen of these games.    

    No more "go back to Azeroth" ... let's try "Go back to Madden #343094873"  or "Go back to Call of Duty"  .

    I mean really,  how come it's ok to adapt to console mechanics/standards but not ok to innovate on MMO mechanics/standards?   "Because it makes money, noob." that's your answer right?

    That's lame.  And all who use the "big business" excuse are lame too.    We play games to enjoy them and have fun and emerse ourselves into a virtual world that we CAN'T have IRL, not because we want to be business-men or stock brokers for the development.   So, as consumers, we should stop shutting eachother up by saying "it's how business works" but instead DEMAND more and better and stop funding redundancy just because our friends play it too.

  • NcrediblebulkNcrediblebulk Member UncommonPosts: 138

    Originally posted by eveisbetter

    Originally posted by ajrock622

    "The focus of PvP in Global Agenda was Alliance vs. Alliance. AvA, as it was called, in theory was great but the execution lacked longevity. After a month or two PvP boiled down to groups of 4 players just Public Queue stomping. "

    "Everything I've found about Firefall has pointed to the Devs creating a ranking system for PvP but with limited numbers on each side of the battle. This leads me to believe that PvP maps or areas will be instanced like they are in Global Agenda making it nothing like Planetside was."





     

     It blows my mind that people are willing to pay anything beyond box price for games that put you in instances, arenas, battlegrounds, objective maps, etc...

    That's what single player games are for.        I HATE how this concept has snuck its way into my beloved genre.    

    Score charts and win/loss ladders and skirmish battles and "team vs team" matches don't belong in MMORPGs they simply don't.  These are FPS and sports mechanics and it's not fair to MMORPG lovers to have to put up with these archetypes being the only choices in the next gen of these games.    

    No more "go back to Azeroth" ... let's try "Go back to Madden #343094873"  or "Go back to Call of Duty"  .

    I mean really,  how come it's ok to adapt to console mechanics/standards but not ok to innovate on MMO mechanics/standards?   "Because it makes money, noob." that's your answer right?

    That's lame.  And all who use the "big business" excuse are lame too.    We play games to enjoy them and have fun and emerse ourselves into a virtual world that we CAN'T have IRL, not because we want to be business-men or stock brokers for the development.   So, as consumers, we should stop shutting eachother up by saying "it's how business works" but instead DEMAND more and better and stop funding redundancy just because our friends play it too.

    I agree with you 100% but when so many people are on the metaphorical "treadmill" it practically would take something of a Matrix equivalent to get them off.

     

    Edit: It doesn't however make Global Agenda a bad game in my opinion and if Firefall ends up being like this I don't think just this would make it a bad game other.

    "Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth."

  • eveisbettereveisbetter Member Posts: 71

    Ajrock,

    True enough.   Unfortunately, it's clearly unwise for any developer to intentionally try to rock our worlds "bigger and better than wow did".  The end result feels shallow and cold and half-assed considering their only motivation is to attract an audience addicted and dependant on a 7 year old game and hope for similar profits.   It has to happen naturally again, and all the elements have to be in order and that's going to be hard to do at this point imo 

  • NcrediblebulkNcrediblebulk Member UncommonPosts: 138

    Originally posted by eveisbetter

    Ajrock,

    True enough.   Unfortunately, it's clearly unwise for any developer to intentionally try to rock our worlds "bigger and better than wow did".  The end result feels shallow and cold and half-assed considering their only motivation is to attract an audience addicted and dependant on a 7 year old game and hope for similar profits.   It has to happen naturally again, and all the elements have to be in order and that's going to be hard to do at this point imo 

    I think eventually some new or indie company is going to come along and have an underground success. I'm sure however with this new fame they will have found they will turn into a company like EA and become a raging metaphorical bull and start the cycle over again.





    My hopes are the Hi-Rez, who developed Global Agenda, does good things with Tribes Universe. They outlined it was going to tri-faction first/third person shooter with heavy RPG elements where the main focus is territory control by faction. While fancy a third person fantasy setting with deep crafting elements, raids that take an actual epic amount of people with epic amounts and quality of loot, and at least three factions fighting for control of keeps, relics, and other objectives to better the entire realm, I certainly am looking forward to what I've seen Hi-Rez do in the past.





    AA meetings will soon be held next to WoWA meetings. I feel people who transferred to WoW from classic MMORPGs like EQ, Daoc, AC, UO, etc. are finally getting so fed up with the "same house different color" routine that Blizzard has become so good at replicating. The the WoWA meetings will only be out of lack of anything good to play.



     

    "Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth."

Sign In or Register to comment.