Now anyone that is an intelligent mmo veteran knows better than to get hyped after all the bs we've been fed for the last decade+.
Here's my logic, it's a game. Anyone that forgets that and starts getting too emotionally attached, probably has bigger issues going on.
Despite almost 20 years of online gaming experience, I still get excited and look forward to upcoming products.
CF looks and sounds good at the point. That could change after the clock runs out, beta, release, after a month, year, whatever.
Until I see something that makes me run for the hills, I'll keep positive. Honestly doubt anyone on here needs advice from the peanut gallery about being hyped up or not. Live and learn.
I've learned that no game will ever be perfect for me or completely live up to my imaginary expectations. I'm fine with that. Doesn't mean I don't want to be surprised and have a product turn out to be enjoyable. While I take the glass half empty approach with many things in life, gaming is not one of them.
The team behind CF doesn't have a spotless record, but they do have a lot of good tries. Hopefully they can put out something that works better this time around, again, live and learn.
They don't have a lot of good tries, they have a lot of massive failures.
I'll say it again, any intelligent mmo veteran knows not to get hyped, because we've been promised everything under the sun, and mmorpg companies never deliver even half of what they promise initially.
Also to the guy that says blizzard just copied EQ and doesn't have intelligent and talented devs behind it, that's just silly. They took the good from EQ and a lot of other mmos, and added mainstream polish to it. They didn't copy EQ, EQ was much more tedious, much more grindy, and was not quest based or instanced based at all.
Trying to downplay the talent at blizzard is just plain stupid, they work on multiple IPs and have great success financially with all of them, all have great polish, all are popular.
Let's also not forget they were a top gaming studio long before WoW was ever a project for them.
No IDFC if you are hyped for it, or think I am in the minority. I am not in the minority, but the vast majority. You need to look at every other full loot game and it's popularity and success. Full loot is a concrete recipe for disaster...period.
Sure if the comparison was apples to apples.
Every full loot game that has released has had an entirely different game design. One single feature does not make the whole. EVE does just fine with loot on a massive scale ($$$$). Earlier games did okay, but online gaming was still in its infancy and there were lots of growing pains. DF/MO aren't exactly top quality titles with well thought out systems.
I'll agree that full loot can cause a lot of issues, but it is very dependent on the execution and game design. Which historically hasn't been ideal.
They haven't even released the loot rules for all the game types yet, so all those jumping to 100% full loot 100% of the time are wrong. On top of that, the game is being designed to resemble a large scale strategy simulator to some degree. Winning/Losing are part of the game. No one will be top dog on every world for every campaign. Also huge focus on team work. Seems everyone has this "oh no, I'll be all alone and someone will kill me" POV. Guess what? This isn't a solo lvl 1-50 so you can run instances type of game, learn to talk to other people online in a MMO. At the end of a campaign, slate is wiped clear relatively speaking and players get to try again. Almost like it is a game and not some super serious business where keyboards need to be thrown against the wall when things don't go as planned.
They don't need the majority. No game needs the majority. There are countless online games that seem to be doing just fine without pulling in massive numbers or the "majority" of whatever group you think you're in. Looking at upcoming games, seems the companies and devs behind them don't really care about your "majority" either.
So interesting that you and others don't care, yet need to share with those that do. If only the games you liked kept you interested enough to play them... I'm off to go say how I don't care about X game because it isn't for me...er wait, nah I'll just stick to things I actually do care about and not tell others that there preferences aren't good enough for me.
They don't have a lot of good tries, they have a lot of massive failures.
Really? UO, SWG, Wiz/Pir101, WAR, TOR wre massive failures? I'll admit that SB did relatively poorly, but still had people begging to keep it online and more then happy for anything that might resemble it coming back. As I said, they've had some nice tries, might have made a bad decision here and there with pretty severe consequences, but what they seem to be bringing to this game are what people actually liked and have been wanting for years.
I'll say it again, any intelligent mmo veteran knows not to get hyped, because we've been promised everything under the sun, and mmorpg companies never deliver even half of what they promise initially.
So? Good job, you've broke the code, you see behind the current. No fooling you. Just because you choose to live in sad land and don't get a smile on your face when a new game is announced, don't try to rain on anyone else's sunny day. Like I said, if someone is so attached to what they are seeing and are going to follow the devs off a cliff, really doesn't have anything to do with the discussions here. I don't see a bunch of mindless fanbois totally oblivious to what's going on.
Also to the guy that says blizzard just copied EQ and doesn't have intelligent and talented devs behind it, that's just silly. They took the good from EQ and a lot of other mmos, and added mainstream polish to it. They didn't copy EQ, EQ was much more tedious, much more grindy, and was not quest based or instanced based at all.
They didn't copy EQ, yet they took the good from EQ? Makes sense...
EQ basically put the mmorpg genre on the map and games that followed took some of the general guidelines. Guild leader of FOH from EQ and probably the most outspoken individual about the issues of EQ back in the day is a lead WoW dev. Simply going "We'll do the opposite of whatever people didn't like about EQ" probably helped shape WoW.
Trying to downplay the talent at blizzard is just plain stupid, they work on multiple IPs and have great success financially with all of them, all have great polish, all are popular.
Let's also not forget they were a top gaming studio long before WoW was ever a project for them.
Not sure if what they were getting at with the comment though, looked like a reference to Blizzard not having any big name devs like the ones working on CF. I know several of the CF devs by name and didn't even play their games at all or very much. Can't say the same for WoW or vast majority of mmos. Doesn't mean they are a talent less company, looking at their success would prove otherwise. Simply that they are a company. When I think of Blizzard I don't think of X or Y devs that made A or B games or even features. Unlike some of the folks on the CF team which are know for fairly specific features and which leads back to the hype.
They don't have a lot of good tries, they have a lot of massive failures.
Really? UO, SWG, Wiz/Pir101, WAR, TOR wre massive failures? I'll admit that SB did relatively poorly, but still had people begging to keep it online and more then happy for anything that might resemble it coming back. As I said, they've had some nice tries, might have made a bad decision here and there with pretty severe consequences, but what they seem to be bringing to this game are what people actually liked and have been wanting for years.
I'll say it again, any intelligent mmo veteran knows not to get hyped, because we've been promised everything under the sun, and mmorpg companies never deliver even half of what they promise initially.
So? Good job, you've broke the code, you see behind the current. No fooling you. Just because you choose to live in sad land and don't get a smile on your face when a new game is announced, don't try to rain on anyone else's sunny day. Like I said, if someone is so attached to what they are seeing and are going to follow the devs off a cliff, really doesn't have anything to do with the discussions here. I don't see a bunch of mindless fanbois totally oblivious to what's going on.
Also to the guy that says blizzard just copied EQ and doesn't have intelligent and talented devs behind it, that's just silly. They took the good from EQ and a lot of other mmos, and added mainstream polish to it. They didn't copy EQ, EQ was much more tedious, much more grindy, and was not quest based or instanced based at all.
They didn't copy EQ, yet they took the good from EQ? Makes sense...
EQ basically put the mmorpg genre on the map and games that followed took some of the general guidelines. Guild leader of FOH from EQ and probably the most outspoken individual about the issues of EQ back in the day is a lead WoW dev. Simply going "We'll do the opposite of whatever people didn't like about EQ" probably helped shape WoW.
Trying to downplay the talent at blizzard is just plain stupid, they work on multiple IPs and have great success financially with all of them, all have great polish, all are popular.
Let's also not forget they were a top gaming studio long before WoW was ever a project for them.
Not sure if what they were getting at with the comment though, looked like a reference to Blizzard not having any big name devs like the ones working on CF. I know several of the CF devs by name and didn't even play their games at all or very much. Can't say the same for WoW or vast majority of mmos. Doesn't mean they are a talent less company, looking at their success would prove otherwise. Simply that they are a company. When I think of Blizzard I don't think of X or Y devs that made A or B games or even features. Unlike some of the folks on the CF team which are know for fairly specific features and which leads back to the hype.
All the games listed failed at the pvp level... they are massive failures in regards to being pvp mmos.
Yea i broke the code, it's to be an intelligent consumer and not reward companies with buzz and hype for consistently underperforming. People like you on the other hand, want to throw logic to the wind and call the behavior "optimism. Good job that's typical. You don't see a bunch of mindless fanbois? I do... I did before they announced anything about the game, I do now when they've started revealing aspects of the game.
You can take the good for many games, without just plainly copying one. WoW had many mmorpgs to learn from, and yes that does make sense, but sometimes fanbois want to misconstrue what you say, does that make sense? Yea doing the opposite of what people didn't like isn't exactly "copying" something... are you starting to see the contradictions in your words? Furor also wasn't a lead dev... he started out as a regular old gm (not even senior gm) and worked his way up, but he still isn't even a "lead dev".
You literally just named a WoW dev the paragraph before, and then now you are saying you didn't recognize any names. That's called fanboi rose tinted goggles. Blizzard has been a gaming giant since long before WoW came out, their names are well known, many of which moved on and branched off and do other things, things like gw1/gw2/firefall etc etc. When you say you don't know ex blizzard devs, all that says is you don't actually know much about the industry, which is probably why you think it's good to get hyped for mmos over and over again.
Basically you're biased, the devs at CF are known for some of the most awful decisions in their respective mmos. blixtrev ruined crafting, gordon walton brought you trammel, shadowbane was one of the biggest flops in mmo history. Like honestly let's get real here.
All the games listed failed at the pvp level... they are massive failures in regards to being pvp mmos.
By who and what standard? What is a failure? What is success? These are completely subjective unless you are basing it off life of game or total pop or some other hard number. WAR for example had some mighty fun PVP, didn't recapture the DAoC experience, but wasn't a "massive failure" in my book. End game PVE and meaningful PVP is a different story. Much like Crowfall, Mark Jacobs is trying to wipe the slate clean and do it "better" with Camelot Unchained. Still a bag of promises, but I'll take promises over an empty bag with only room for my tears.
Yea i broke the code, it's to be an intelligent consumer and not reward companies with buzz and hype for consistently underperforming. People like you on the other hand, want to throw logic to the wind and call the behavior "optimism. Good job that's typical. You don't see a bunch of mindless fanbois? I do... I did before they announced anything about the game, I do now when they've started revealing aspects of the game.
And who is being harmed? You have taken yourself out of the equation, yet feel the need to still inject your view, doesn't really make sense to me. I'll admit the OP does come across as a fanboi, but eh, that's their deal. Gets conversation going, but don't get why it always has to jump off the rails into "fail fail fail." Then again, that's what I get for visiting this site, CF forum is much different crowd of course
I'm not throwing logic to the wind.
They've revealed some general and some specific details about the game.
Those look good to me.
I'm fully aware that what is delivered may not live up to my expectations or what the devs are saying.
I'm a big boy and can handle a little let down. Won't be crying myself to sleep if they go "JK this will be a themepark, get ready to grind!"
I would call this "optimism" and not blind faith or total lack of any sense of reality or past experience. Been online gaming since 95 or so, plenty of experience.
If you remove optimism, you are left with pessimism. I like games because they make me happy, not because I want to moan and complain. Whenever a game no longer meets my expectations, I'm out. I don't wallow, rage, complain, etc. Move on. Seems many prefer to start on the other end and go "this sucks, fail, no chance, I don't like this because it isn't what I like." Which is fine, but adds absolutely zero to the conversation. Guess I'll never grasp why people feel the need to hop into a forum about games they dislike and have no intention of playing and then share the view as if it was needed (not saying you, just in general).
You can take the good for many games, without just plainly copying one. WoW had many mmorpgs to learn from, and yes that does make sense, but sometimes fanbois want to misconstrue what you say, does that make sense? Yea doing the opposite of what people didn't like isn't exactly "copying" something... are you starting to see the contradictions in your words? Furor also wasn't a lead dev... he started out as a regular old gm (not even senior gm) and worked his way up, but he still isn't even a "lead dev".
I agree and why I think the whole "WoW Clone" view is usually misused. But without EQ, who know when or how WoW would of turned out. When they hire the most famous EQ player, good chance that they wanted both his experience with the most popular competition at the time and his ideas for how games could do better. As far as being a "lead," says it at this link, but honestly not really something I care too deeply about.
You literally just named a WoW dev the paragraph before, and then now you are saying you didn't recognize any names. That's called fanboi rose tinted goggles. Blizzard has been a gaming giant since long before WoW came out, their names are well known, many of which moved on and branched off and do other things, things like gw1/gw2/firefall etc etc. When you say you don't know ex blizzard devs, all that says is you don't actually know much about the industry, which is probably why you think it's good to get hyped for mmos over and over again.
To be fair, I don't remember his name, only his EQ handle and connection to FOH. Regardless, until I looked him up, didn't know what he actually did with Blizzard. Funny he started with quests considering his EQ exp. Played WoW for several years and couldn't even come close to guessing someone else's name, then again, I'm not a Blizzard fanboi either, I'm sure someone out there can rattle off a good list.
Like I said, Blizzard is a company. When someone goes "Who designed WoW" doubt many outside of big Blizz fans can name several if any (could be wrong), even more so when it comes to features.
Unlike UO, EQ, SWG, DAOC/WAR, ESO, etc which have names like Koster, Jacobs, Firor, McQuaid, etc.
Guess for me it is the leap from games that appeared to be designed and developed my individuals (as of team of course) to simply companies producing a product. Call it rose tinted or whatever, but I never see people going "Man I wish dev X from WoW that created Y feature would work on this project." Heck, don't see people praying for any features of WoW to be used in other games for that matter. Despite all the talent that went into making the biggest mmorpg in history.
Chris Roberts used his name to raise millions for a game with Roberts Space Industries slapped on it... Roberts =/= Blizzard, but that's still impressive.
Basically you're biased, the devs at CF are known for some of the most awful decisions in their respective mmos. blixtrev ruined crafting, gordon walton brought you trammel, shadowbane was one of the biggest flops in mmo history. Like honestly let's get real here.
I don't disagree. At the same time, without context you have jaded colored glasses.
Walton was asked on CF forum and said exactly why Trammel came to be, some fans might have hated it, but guess what? Many others didn't. Wouldn't say it was a terrible PVP design feature, simply a different play style. Which if you've looked into CF, you'd notice they are trying to do with the different worlds.
SB was a relative flop, doesn't mean it didn't have any redeeming features, again, Coleman has gone into length about what went wrong. Before DAoC popped out of nowhere, I was very excited for SB. Sadly, it didn't live up to my expectations at the time. Still had a lot of potential features that any PVP focused game could utilize.
Only briefly played SWG so didn't experience what Blixtev did, but from my understanding is that he did some good, despite the crafting and even then, it wasn't a one man show making decisions. SWG suffered from some of that whole "company" design and decision making. Although he was behind EQ's POP I think, which is when I quit EQ, wouldn't exactly say he is a win for the team
Fully admit I'm biased, just like you and everyone else. Simply choose to be positive. Regardless of what mistakes these devs have made, they've had 10-15+ years to think about it. They've worked on other games, products, genres, and different industries. Going "SB sucked so CF will likely suck too." is just as accurate then saying it will be the best game ever.
This isn't Wolfpack 2.0 or UO-Trammel or SWG or .... I have no clue what will happen with Crowfall, as I said, I like what I see and until something causes me to not feel that way, I will continue to be excited. I'll take a giant leap and assume that if you take individuals from some very memorable games, behind some great features, put them in a room together and have them design something new, pretty decent chance it might actually be fun. Then again, fun might not be what some are looking for, not a lot of room for complaining when having a good time.
All the games listed failed at the pvp level... they are massive failures in regards to being pvp mmos.
By who and what standard? What is a failure? What is success? These are completely subjective unless you are basing it off life of game or total pop or some other hard number. WAR for example had some mighty fun PVP, didn't recapture the DAoC experience, but wasn't a "massive failure" in my book. End game PVE and meaningful PVP is a different story. Much like Crowfall, Mark Jacobs is trying to wipe the slate clean and do it "better" with Camelot Unchained. Still a bag of promises, but I'll take promises over an empty bag with only room for my tears.
Yea i broke the code, it's to be an intelligent consumer and not reward companies with buzz and hype for consistently underperforming. People like you on the other hand, want to throw logic to the wind and call the behavior "optimism. Good job that's typical. You don't see a bunch of mindless fanbois? I do... I did before they announced anything about the game, I do now when they've started revealing aspects of the game.
And who is being harmed? You have taken yourself out of the equation, yet feel the need to still inject your view, doesn't really make sense to me. I'll admit the OP does come across as a fanboi, but eh, that's their deal. Gets conversation going, but don't get why it always has to jump off the rails into "fail fail fail." Then again, that's what I get for visiting this site, CF forum is much different crowd of course
I'm not throwing logic to the wind.
They've revealed some general and some specific details about the game.
Those look good to me.
I'm fully aware that what is delivered may not live up to my expectations or what the devs are saying.
I'm a big boy and can handle a little let down. Won't be crying myself to sleep if they go "JK this will be a themepark, get ready to grind!"
I would call this "optimism" and not blind faith or total lack of any sense of reality or past experience. Been online gaming since 95 or so, plenty of experience.
If you remove optimism, you are left with pessimism. I like games because they make me happy, not because I want to moan and complain. Whenever a game no longer meets my expectations, I'm out. I don't wallow, rage, complain, etc. Move on. Seems many prefer to start on the other end and go "this sucks, fail, no chance, I don't like this because it isn't what I like." Which is fine, but adds absolutely zero to the conversation. Guess I'll never grasp why people feel the need to hop into a forum about games they dislike and have no intention of playing and then share the view as if it was needed (not saying you, just in general).
You can take the good for many games, without just plainly copying one. WoW had many mmorpgs to learn from, and yes that does make sense, but sometimes fanbois want to misconstrue what you say, does that make sense? Yea doing the opposite of what people didn't like isn't exactly "copying" something... are you starting to see the contradictions in your words? Furor also wasn't a lead dev... he started out as a regular old gm (not even senior gm) and worked his way up, but he still isn't even a "lead dev".
I agree and why I think the whole "WoW Clone" view is usually misused. But without EQ, who know when or how WoW would of turned out. When they hire the most famous EQ player, good chance that they wanted both his experience with the most popular competition at the time and his ideas for how games could do better. As far as being a "lead," says it at this link, but honestly not really something I care too deeply about.
You literally just named a WoW dev the paragraph before, and then now you are saying you didn't recognize any names. That's called fanboi rose tinted goggles. Blizzard has been a gaming giant since long before WoW came out, their names are well known, many of which moved on and branched off and do other things, things like gw1/gw2/firefall etc etc. When you say you don't know ex blizzard devs, all that says is you don't actually know much about the industry, which is probably why you think it's good to get hyped for mmos over and over again.
To be fair, I don't remember his name, only his EQ handle and connection to FOH. Regardless, until I looked him up, didn't know what he actually did with Blizzard. Funny he started with quests considering his EQ exp. Played WoW for several years and couldn't even come close to guessing someone else's name, then again, I'm not a Blizzard fanboi either, I'm sure someone out there can rattle off a good list.
Like I said, Blizzard is a company. When someone goes "Who designed WoW" doubt many outside of big Blizz fans can name several if any (could be wrong), even more so when it comes to features.
Unlike UO, EQ, SWG, DAOC/WAR, ESO, etc which have names like Koster, Jacobs, Firor, McQuaid, etc.
Guess for me it is the leap from games that appeared to be designed and developed my individuals (as of team of course) to simply companies producing a product. Call it rose tinted or whatever, but I never see people going "Man I wish dev X from WoW that created Y feature would work on this project." Heck, don't see people praying for any features of WoW to be used in other games for that matter. Despite all the talent that went into making the biggest mmorpg in history.
Chris Roberts used his name to raise millions for a game with Roberts Space Industries slapped on it... Roberts =/= Blizzard, but that's still impressive.
Basically you're biased, the devs at CF are known for some of the most awful decisions in their respective mmos. blixtrev ruined crafting, gordon walton brought you trammel, shadowbane was one of the biggest flops in mmo history. Like honestly let's get real here.
I don't disagree. At the same time, without context you have jaded colored glasses.
Walton was asked on CF forum and said exactly why Trammel came to be, some fans might have hated it, but guess what? Many others didn't. Wouldn't say it was a terrible PVP design feature, simply a different play style. Which if you've looked into CF, you'd notice they are trying to do with the different worlds.
SB was a relative flop, doesn't mean it didn't have any redeeming features, again, Coleman has gone into length about what went wrong. Before DAoC popped out of nowhere, I was very excited for SB. Sadly, it didn't live up to my expectations at the time. Still had a lot of potential features that any PVP focused game could utilize.
Only briefly played SWG so didn't experience what Blixtev did, but from my understanding is that he did some good, despite the crafting and even then, it wasn't a one man show making decisions. SWG suffered from some of that whole "company" design and decision making. Although he was behind EQ's POP I think, which is when I quit EQ, wouldn't exactly say he is a win for the team
Fully admit I'm biased, just like you and everyone else. Simply choose to be positive. Regardless of what mistakes these devs have made, they've had 10-15+ years to think about it. They've worked on other games, products, genres, and different industries. Going "SB sucked so CF will likely suck too." is just as accurate then saying it will be the best game ever.
This isn't Wolfpack 2.0 or UO-Trammel or SWG or .... I have no clue what will happen with Crowfall, as I said, I like what I see and until something causes me to not feel that way, I will continue to be excited. I'll take a giant leap and assume that if you take individuals from some very memorable games, behind some great features, put them in a room together and have them design something new, pretty decent chance it might actually be fun. Then again, fun might not be what some are looking for, not a lot of room for complaining when having a good time.
For me, because it is yet another MMO where they want *me* in the game instead of my character. To me, that equates to ZERO RPG.
I saw the names. I thought, "Holy cow! What an all-Star cast!" Then they make a few announcements about the gameplay and it action combat with player looting. My 2 least favorite features in one game. No thanks.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
For me, because it is yet another MMO where they want *me* in the game instead of my character. To me, that equates to ZERO RPG.
I saw the names. I thought, "Holy cow! What an all-Star cast!" Then they make a few announcements about the gameplay and it action combat with player looting. My 2 least favorite features in one game. No thanks.
How is it not rpg.
Crowfall is going to have in-depth character building from disciplines to promotional classes to runes. How is that not wanting players "in" their characters? >______________>
Hype is a net negative. People get super excited, then are let down when their expectations are not met. A relatively good game can crash and burn because people hyped it so much that when it didn't deliver on the hype, people bad mouthed into obscurity.
Better a game not be hyped and people being pleasantly surprised when it comes out and it has some positive elements.
Originally posted by AlBQuirky For me, because it is yet another MMO where they want *me* in the game instead of my character. To me, that equates to ZERO RPG.I saw the names. I thought, "Holy cow! What an all-Star cast!" Then they make a few announcements about the gameplay and it action combat with player looting. My 2 least favorite features in one game. No thanks.
How is it not rpg.Crowfall is going to have in-depth character building from disciplines to promotional classes to runes. How is that not wanting players "in" their characters? >______________>
Because no matter what my character's attack skill is, *my* mouse/keyboard skill trumps all. I want to be a character better then I am in real life, through skill development.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Originally posted by AlBQuirky For me, because it is yet another MMO where they want *me* in the game instead of my character. To me, that equates to ZERO RPG.
I saw the names. I thought, "Holy cow! What an all-Star cast!" Then they make a few announcements about the gameplay and it action combat with player looting. My 2 least favorite features in one game. No thanks.
How is it not rpg.
Crowfall is going to have in-depth character building from disciplines to promotional classes to runes. How is that not wanting players "in" their characters? >______________>
Because no matter what my character's attack skill is, *my* mouse/keyboard skill trumps all. I want to be a character better then I am in real life, through skill development.
Who said anything about it being like wow?
They already stated that the archetypes aren't going to be able to beat everyone. So there's pretty much going to be soft counters. If you can beat someone who you are a soft-counter to, then you deserve to lose that fight.
Originally posted by AlBQuirky For me, because it is yet another MMO where they want *me* in the game instead of my character. To me, that equates to ZERO RPG.I saw the names. I thought, "Holy cow! What an all-Star cast!" Then they make a few announcements about the gameplay and it action combat with player looting. My 2 least favorite features in one game. No thanks.
How is it not rpg.Crowfall is going to have in-depth character building from disciplines to promotional classes to runes. How is that not wanting players "in" their characters? >______________>
Because no matter what my character's attack skill is, *my* mouse/keyboard skill trumps all. I want to be a character better then I am in real life, through skill development.
Who said anything about it being like wow? They already stated that the archetypes aren't going to be able to beat everyone. So there's pretty much going to be soft counters. If you can beat someone who you are a soft-counter to, then you deserve to lose that fight.
I don't think I said anything about it being like WoW, though I suppose one could make that comparison. As for PvP and Archetypes, I do not care as I do not PvP. One of the 2 features that had me stop following this game's development.
My point is, when I fat finger my keys or jerk my mouse up, down, or sideways, *I* die because of *my* inadequacies, not because my character was not skilled enough. That places me and my skills (or lack thereof) smack dab into the game.
Give me tab targeting, RNG combat, and "real" character building through skills and I am able to role play. Give me action combat and I am not role playing, but rather being myself in a video game. Just my opinion. Others believe they can only role play if *they* are their character in the game.
So, not an MMO for me. You obviously like what you've read. Enjoy the MMO
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
All the games listed failed at the pvp level... they are massive failures in regards to being pvp mmos.
By who and what standard? What is a failure? What is success? These are completely subjective unless you are basing it off life of game or total pop or some other hard number. WAR for example had some mighty fun PVP, didn't recapture the DAoC experience, but wasn't a "massive failure" in my book. End game PVE and meaningful PVP is a different story. Much like Crowfall, Mark Jacobs is trying to wipe the slate clean and do it "better" with Camelot Unchained. Still a bag of promises, but I'll take promises over an empty bag with only room for my tears.
Yea i broke the code, it's to be an intelligent consumer and not reward companies with buzz and hype for consistently underperforming. People like you on the other hand, want to throw logic to the wind and call the behavior "optimism. Good job that's typical. You don't see a bunch of mindless fanbois? I do... I did before they announced anything about the game, I do now when they've started revealing aspects of the game.
And who is being harmed? You have taken yourself out of the equation, yet feel the need to still inject your view, doesn't really make sense to me. I'll admit the OP does come across as a fanboi, but eh, that's their deal. Gets conversation going, but don't get why it always has to jump off the rails into "fail fail fail." Then again, that's what I get for visiting this site, CF forum is much different crowd of course
I'm not throwing logic to the wind.
They've revealed some general and some specific details about the game.
Those look good to me.
I'm fully aware that what is delivered may not live up to my expectations or what the devs are saying.
I'm a big boy and can handle a little let down. Won't be crying myself to sleep if they go "JK this will be a themepark, get ready to grind!"
I would call this "optimism" and not blind faith or total lack of any sense of reality or past experience. Been online gaming since 95 or so, plenty of experience.
If you remove optimism, you are left with pessimism. I like games because they make me happy, not because I want to moan and complain. Whenever a game no longer meets my expectations, I'm out. I don't wallow, rage, complain, etc. Move on. Seems many prefer to start on the other end and go "this sucks, fail, no chance, I don't like this because it isn't what I like." Which is fine, but adds absolutely zero to the conversation. Guess I'll never grasp why people feel the need to hop into a forum about games they dislike and have no intention of playing and then share the view as if it was needed (not saying you, just in general).
You can take the good for many games, without just plainly copying one. WoW had many mmorpgs to learn from, and yes that does make sense, but sometimes fanbois want to misconstrue what you say, does that make sense? Yea doing the opposite of what people didn't like isn't exactly "copying" something... are you starting to see the contradictions in your words? Furor also wasn't a lead dev... he started out as a regular old gm (not even senior gm) and worked his way up, but he still isn't even a "lead dev".
I agree and why I think the whole "WoW Clone" view is usually misused. But without EQ, who know when or how WoW would of turned out. When they hire the most famous EQ player, good chance that they wanted both his experience with the most popular competition at the time and his ideas for how games could do better. As far as being a "lead," says it at this link, but honestly not really something I care too deeply about.
You literally just named a WoW dev the paragraph before, and then now you are saying you didn't recognize any names. That's called fanboi rose tinted goggles. Blizzard has been a gaming giant since long before WoW came out, their names are well known, many of which moved on and branched off and do other things, things like gw1/gw2/firefall etc etc. When you say you don't know ex blizzard devs, all that says is you don't actually know much about the industry, which is probably why you think it's good to get hyped for mmos over and over again.
To be fair, I don't remember his name, only his EQ handle and connection to FOH. Regardless, until I looked him up, didn't know what he actually did with Blizzard. Funny he started with quests considering his EQ exp. Played WoW for several years and couldn't even come close to guessing someone else's name, then again, I'm not a Blizzard fanboi either, I'm sure someone out there can rattle off a good list.
Like I said, Blizzard is a company. When someone goes "Who designed WoW" doubt many outside of big Blizz fans can name several if any (could be wrong), even more so when it comes to features.
Unlike UO, EQ, SWG, DAOC/WAR, ESO, etc which have names like Koster, Jacobs, Firor, McQuaid, etc.
Guess for me it is the leap from games that appeared to be designed and developed my individuals (as of team of course) to simply companies producing a product. Call it rose tinted or whatever, but I never see people going "Man I wish dev X from WoW that created Y feature would work on this project." Heck, don't see people praying for any features of WoW to be used in other games for that matter. Despite all the talent that went into making the biggest mmorpg in history.
Chris Roberts used his name to raise millions for a game with Roberts Space Industries slapped on it... Roberts =/= Blizzard, but that's still impressive.
Basically you're biased, the devs at CF are known for some of the most awful decisions in their respective mmos. blixtrev ruined crafting, gordon walton brought you trammel, shadowbane was one of the biggest flops in mmo history. Like honestly let's get real here.
I don't disagree. At the same time, without context you have jaded colored glasses.
Walton was asked on CF forum and said exactly why Trammel came to be, some fans might have hated it, but guess what? Many others didn't. Wouldn't say it was a terrible PVP design feature, simply a different play style. Which if you've looked into CF, you'd notice they are trying to do with the different worlds.
SB was a relative flop, doesn't mean it didn't have any redeeming features, again, Coleman has gone into length about what went wrong. Before DAoC popped out of nowhere, I was very excited for SB. Sadly, it didn't live up to my expectations at the time. Still had a lot of potential features that any PVP focused game could utilize.
Only briefly played SWG so didn't experience what Blixtev did, but from my understanding is that he did some good, despite the crafting and even then, it wasn't a one man show making decisions. SWG suffered from some of that whole "company" design and decision making. Although he was behind EQ's POP I think, which is when I quit EQ, wouldn't exactly say he is a win for the team
Fully admit I'm biased, just like you and everyone else. Simply choose to be positive. Regardless of what mistakes these devs have made, they've had 10-15+ years to think about it. They've worked on other games, products, genres, and different industries. Going "SB sucked so CF will likely suck too." is just as accurate then saying it will be the best game ever.
This isn't Wolfpack 2.0 or UO-Trammel or SWG or .... I have no clue what will happen with Crowfall, as I said, I like what I see and until something causes me to not feel that way, I will continue to be excited. I'll take a giant leap and assume that if you take individuals from some very memorable games, behind some great features, put them in a room together and have them design something new, pretty decent chance it might actually be fun. Then again, fun might not be what some are looking for, not a lot of room for complaining when having a good time.
Edit: Sorry for wall of text
You can argue anything in the world to be subjective, context is what matters. As PvP mmos, they all failed, either short-lived, extremely low pop to the point they couldn't keep running, or they drove the pvpers away with pve changes.
Wrong, if you remove optimism you are left with realism and pessimism in the spectrum. This seems to be something you've never considered.
Now you're just arguing a hypothetical, someone says WoW is an EQ clone, I mention that it didn't just copy EQ and actually has a lot of differences, you argue that it did, then I argue that it didn't, now you are saying "well who knows how it would be without EQ", well we know how it is with EQ, and it's still very different from EQ. It learned from it, it did not copy it.
Blizzard names are more recognizable in the industry than any other names except maybe garriott... you just happen to be detached from the blizzard universe. Remember WoW is the game that all other games listen to, they may not copy, but they are always definitely interested in what blizzard is up to. To think people don't recognize names of some of their big devs is just plain silly.
Any dedicated pvper in UO did not like trammel.
Basically your logic seems to be, "this might not be like their other mistakes, it could be good if they really learned from it"... sorry that's not enough of a foundation to get hyped about... unless you are a fanboi.
Originally posted by AlBQuirky For me, because it is yet another MMO where they want *me* in the game instead of my character. To me, that equates to ZERO RPG.
I saw the names. I thought, "Holy cow! What an all-Star cast!" Then they make a few announcements about the gameplay and it action combat with player looting. My 2 least favorite features in one game. No thanks.
How is it not rpg.
Crowfall is going to have in-depth character building from disciplines to promotional classes to runes. How is that not wanting players "in" their characters? >______________>
Because no matter what my character's attack skill is, *my* mouse/keyboard skill trumps all. I want to be a character better then I am in real life, through skill development.
Who said anything about it being like wow?
They already stated that the archetypes aren't going to be able to beat everyone. So there's pretty much going to be soft counters. If you can beat someone who you are a soft-counter to, then you deserve to lose that fight.
I don't think I said anything about it being like WoW, though I suppose one could make that comparison. As for PvP and Archetypes, I do not care as I do not PvP. One of the 2 features that had me stop following this game's development.
My point is, when I fat finger my keys or jerk my mouse up, down, or sideways, *I* die because of *my* inadequacies, not because my character was not skilled enough. That places me and my skills (or lack thereof) smack dab into the game.
Give me tab targeting, RNG combat, and "real" character building through skills and I am able to role play. Give me action combat and I am not role playing, but rather being myself in a video game. Just my opinion. Others believe they can only role play if *they* are their character in the game.
So, not an MMO for me. You obviously like what you've read. Enjoy the MMO
What you stated before had to do with every class beating everyone aka like WOW.
How is having several ways to develop your character not "real" character building? On top of what we already know,how do you somehow already know we aren't going to get even more options?
The fact that Crowfall isn't for you is perfectly fine. However I'm going to speak up if someone is stating incorrect information. ;]
Hype is a net negative. People get super excited, then are let down when their expectations are not met. A relatively good game can crash and burn because people hyped it so much that when it didn't deliver on the hype, people bad mouthed into obscurity.
Better a game not be hyped and people being pleasantly surprised when it comes out and it has some positive elements.
How is this possible?
Only way I see this happening is releasing a game with zero marketing/PR beforehand. Simply saying "We are making a game" will cause the hype train to start rolling (did in this case for example).
I get if personally, people choose to not turn into crazed fanbois, but there is no harm is looking forward to, getting excited for, or hoping a product will turn out a certain way.
Beyond those without common sense, getting caught up in the hype shouldn't be an issue.
I don't know of one game that I didn't enjoy because it didn't live up to what I was expecting. Almost always it is due to flat poor execution and problems with the game design. If someone is off in crazy town and thinks a game is going to magically change their life, that has nothing to do with an average individual being excited.
Maybe it's just my way of looking at it, but if there was no "hype" sites like this wouldn't exist. Decent chunk of the conversations are on "what if". Other part is vet gamers complaining that devs don't make games designed specifically for them and therefore all games suck.
Give me tab targeting, RNG combat, and "real" character building through skills and I am able to role play. Give me action combat and I am not role playing, but rather being myself in a video game. Just my opinion. Others believe they can only role play if *they* are their character in the game.
So, not an MMO for me. You obviously like what you've read. Enjoy the MMO
Believe this is another case of a undefined word being used in multiple different ways.
As you said, some folks like to play themselves through a character taking as much control as possible, while others enjoy taking on the role of a character and putting their fate in the hands of the game more. Two sides of the RPG coin I guess. Both allow for immersion and enjoyment.
Either way, hopefully we all get what we are looking for.
You can argue anything in the world to be subjective, context is what matters. As PvP mmos, they all failed, either short-lived, extremely low pop to the point they couldn't keep running, or they drove the pvpers away with pve changes.
Which is fine, but again, is your view and dependent on the parameters you set. Unless you have universal definition of what makes a game a success or failure. FURY was a fun PVP game that lived a very short time. Might have had a poor game model, marketing, depth, whatever, but was fun for what it was. WoW has lost millions upon millions of customers/fans over the years, yet it is still doing well enough. It is all relative. You or a select group not liking something doesn't make it a failure. Games can fail players depending on their expectations.
Wrong, if you remove optimism you are left with realism and pessimism in the spectrum. This seems to be something you've never considered.
Realism is dependent on the individual. What outlook might not be real to you, doesn't make it any less "real" to me. Your "realism" seems very close to pessimism, which to me would be a sign that you've been burned before, maybe even got a little too hyped yourself, and now hold a grudge against the gaming industry or along those lines. Looking at your GW2 posts, doubt I'm too far off. If you choose to not be optimistic, so be it, won't stop me from being so myself. Wonder who is going to have a more enjoyable time? Unless complaining and pointing out every flaw really pumps you up...
Now you're just arguing a hypothetical, someone says WoW is an EQ clone, I mention that it didn't just copy EQ and actually has a lot of differences, you argue that it did, then I argue that it didn't, now you are saying "well who knows how it would be without EQ", well we know how it is with EQ, and it's still very different from EQ. It learned from it, it did not copy it.
It is what it is. Based on my experiences with both games and other games of the time that could have potentially influenced Blizzard, I'll go with they gently borrowed from EQ, just as every game since WoW is instantly a WoW Clone if it has a sword or a race with pointy ears.
Blizzard names are more recognizable in the industry than any other names except maybe garriott... you just happen to be detached from the blizzard universe. Remember WoW is the game that all other games listen to, they may not copy, but they are always definitely interested in what blizzard is up to. To think people don't recognize names of some of their big devs is just plain silly.
Can you point out a couple WoW devs and what they did specifically for the game that are held up, be it earned or not? Could you also point out gamers beyond Blizzard loyalists mentioning them as individuals they'd like to see work on other projects? Beyond the "Polish" that people reference to being what Blizzard got right with WoW, little to no features from release to know would I want in another game. Probably why so many similar games don't do that well in comparison, despite offering quite a lot of the same. Not sure who gets "Polish"credit.
Any dedicated pvper in UO did not like trammel.
No disagreement. Why would a PVPer like a PVE alternative, doesn't make sense. Still doesn't make UO PVP a failure. What Trammel did was shine a light on the fact that many people that enjoyed UO up till that point, were willing to deal with PKing, but didn't exactly prefer it. UO wasn't a failure as a PVP game, was fun, but as an early design, was a good example that without purpose and depth, PVP can't sustain itself on killing alone, especially when you remove the sheep from the equation.
Basically your logic seems to be, "this might not be like their other mistakes, it could be good if they really learned from it"... sorry that's not enough of a foundation to get hyped about... unless you are a fanboi.
Which is fine for you. I disagree. Then again, I have no clue what you even think "hype" is. All praise the vagueness of the internet and everyone's opinion being the right one.
With your logic though, why bother discussing/following any product before it has launched and you've fully tested every inch of it as an objective outsider?
When a game is announced, we as players have option A: Be as critical as possible because those other games.... or B: Stay silent? Man, I'm hyped about my options!
Seriously, you are obviously holding onto some past gaming trauma, it isn't that serious. I don't expect anyone to give up their first born for an upcoming game, but really no need to pop others balloons either. All's good though, I'll enjoy the wait for the timer to tick down and beyond, you enjoy.... not sure what you are here for I guess.
No IDFC if you are hyped for it, or think I am in the minority. I am not in the minority, but the vast majority. You need to look at every other full loot game and it's popularity and success. Full loot is a concrete recipe for disaster...period.
Sighs, some people just love drawing so many conclusions due to being afraid of something. What we have confirmed is inventory loot, and inventory loot + chance to drop gear. Neither of which is the most "harsh" or "easiest" ruleset for a campaign. Now we don't know if the harshest campaign will even include full loot, and will the easiest campaign even have full inventory loot. And you're branding it a recipe for disaster because of your assumptions. Afraid of losing pixels much?
There is too little known about the actual game, and personally, I'm tired of riding hype trains that lead down a cliff. Recently, all ESO, ArcheAge and Wildstar have highly disappointed me, and when it happens over and over you learn to take a step back and wait for actual results.
Besides, full loot won't be a popular feature, even if a lot of people like to boast here about how much they love it, and like telling people who don't like it how spineless they are. I foresee full loot servers being the most empty ones.
My opinion is my own. I respect all other opinions and views equally, but keep in mind that my opinion will always be the best for me. That's why it's my opinion.
Originally posted by AlBQuirky For me, because it is yet another MMO where they want *me* in the game instead of my character. To me, that equates to ZERO RPG.I saw the names. I thought, "Holy cow! What an all-Star cast!" Then they make a few announcements about the gameplay and it action combat with player looting. My 2 least favorite features in one game. No thanks.
How is it not rpg.Crowfall is going to have in-depth character building from disciplines to promotional classes to runes. How is that not wanting players "in" their characters? >______________>
Because no matter what my character's attack skill is, *my* mouse/keyboard skill trumps all. I want to be a character better then I am in real life, through skill development.
Who said anything about it being like wow?They already stated that the archetypes aren't going to be able to beat everyone. So there's pretty much going to be soft counters. If you can beat someone who you are a soft-counter to, then you deserve to lose that fight.
I don't think I said anything about it being like WoW, though I suppose one could make that comparison. As for PvP and Archetypes, I do not care as I do not PvP. One of the 2 features that had me stop following this game's development.My point is, when I fat finger my keys or jerk my mouse up, down, or sideways, *I* die because of *my* inadequacies, not because my character was not skilled enough. That places me and my skills (or lack thereof) smack dab into the game.Give me tab targeting, RNG combat, and "real" character building through skills and I am able to role play. Give me action combat and I am not role playing, but rather being myself in a video game. Just my opinion. Others believe they can only role play if *they* are their character in the game.So, not an MMO for me. You obviously like what you've read. Enjoy the MMO
What you stated before had to do with every class beating everyone aka like WOW.How is having several ways to develop your character not "real" character building? On top of what we already know,how do you somehow already know we aren't going to get even more options?The fact that Crowfall isn't for you is perfectly fine. However I'm going to speak up if someone is stating incorrect information. ;]
I highly doubt I said anything about classes beating each other, for I do not care. But I have been mistaken before.
These "several ways" to develop a character... Develop them in what ways? In an action combat PvP game, the usual route is many "combative" ways to develop a character. That is not "real" character development, that is "killer building." Most MMOs are 85% or more about combat, so having many combat skills for developing a character makes sense. The games I enjoy are about more then just fighting.
How can you know what I say is "incorrect?" Is PvP in the game? Will players be able to loot other players? I believe those have been stated by the developers. The rest is my opinion and preferences. You may disagree with these, but they are far from "incorrect."
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Originally posted by AlBQuirky For me, because it is yet another MMO where they want *me* in the game instead of my character. To me, that equates to ZERO RPG.
I saw the names. I thought, "Holy cow! What an all-Star cast!" Then they make a few announcements about the gameplay and it action combat with player looting. My 2 least favorite features in one game. No thanks.
How is it not rpg.
Crowfall is going to have in-depth character building from disciplines to promotional classes to runes. How is that not wanting players "in" their characters? >______________>
Because no matter what my character's attack skill is, *my* mouse/keyboard skill trumps all. I want to be a character better then I am in real life, through skill development.
Who said anything about it being like wow?
They already stated that the archetypes aren't going to be able to beat everyone. So there's pretty much going to be soft counters. If you can beat someone who you are a soft-counter to, then you deserve to lose that fight.
I don't think I said anything about it being like WoW, though I suppose one could make that comparison. As for PvP and Archetypes, I do not care as I do not PvP. One of the 2 features that had me stop following this game's development.
My point is, when I fat finger my keys or jerk my mouse up, down, or sideways, *I* die because of *my* inadequacies, not because my character was not skilled enough. That places me and my skills (or lack thereof) smack dab into the game.
Give me tab targeting, RNG combat, and "real" character building through skills and I am able to role play. Give me action combat and I am not role playing, but rather being myself in a video game. Just my opinion. Others believe they can only role play if *they* are their character in the game.
So, not an MMO for me. You obviously like what you've read. Enjoy the MMO
What you stated before had to do with every class beating everyone aka like WOW.
How is having several ways to develop your character not "real" character building? On top of what we already know,how do you somehow already know we aren't going to get even more options?
The fact that Crowfall isn't for you is perfectly fine. However I'm going to speak up if someone is stating incorrect information. ;]
I highly doubt I said anything about classes beating each other, for I do not care. But I have been mistaken before.
These "several ways" to develop a character... Develop them in what ways? In an action combat PvP game, the usual route is many "combative" ways to develop a character. That is not "real" character development, that is "killer building." Most MMOs are 85% or more about combat, so having many combat skills for developing a character makes sense. The games I enjoy are about more then just fighting.
How can you know what I say is "incorrect?" Is PvP in the game? Will players be able to loot other players? I believe those have been stated by the developers. The rest is my opinion and preferences. You may disagree with these, but they are far from "incorrect."
I didn't say you specifically said.
And it seems you have absolutely no knowledge on the game. It is listed that there will be Active and Passive skill training.
If you would have bothered to thoroughly look through the product, you are (semi-)negatively talking about, I am sure you would have seen that.
When it comes to facts, yes, you are incorrect. You stated several times that Crowfall doesn't have "real" character building. Even though you just got specific about what "real" character building is to you, I just proved that Crowfall is not all about "killer building" as you put it.
Comments
They don't have a lot of good tries, they have a lot of massive failures.
I'll say it again, any intelligent mmo veteran knows not to get hyped, because we've been promised everything under the sun, and mmorpg companies never deliver even half of what they promise initially.
Also to the guy that says blizzard just copied EQ and doesn't have intelligent and talented devs behind it, that's just silly. They took the good from EQ and a lot of other mmos, and added mainstream polish to it. They didn't copy EQ, EQ was much more tedious, much more grindy, and was not quest based or instanced based at all.
Trying to downplay the talent at blizzard is just plain stupid, they work on multiple IPs and have great success financially with all of them, all have great polish, all are popular.
Let's also not forget they were a top gaming studio long before WoW was ever a project for them.
Sure if the comparison was apples to apples.
Every full loot game that has released has had an entirely different game design. One single feature does not make the whole. EVE does just fine with loot on a massive scale ($$$$). Earlier games did okay, but online gaming was still in its infancy and there were lots of growing pains. DF/MO aren't exactly top quality titles with well thought out systems.
I'll agree that full loot can cause a lot of issues, but it is very dependent on the execution and game design. Which historically hasn't been ideal.
They haven't even released the loot rules for all the game types yet, so all those jumping to 100% full loot 100% of the time are wrong. On top of that, the game is being designed to resemble a large scale strategy simulator to some degree. Winning/Losing are part of the game. No one will be top dog on every world for every campaign. Also huge focus on team work. Seems everyone has this "oh no, I'll be all alone and someone will kill me" POV. Guess what? This isn't a solo lvl 1-50 so you can run instances type of game, learn to talk to other people online in a MMO. At the end of a campaign, slate is wiped clear relatively speaking and players get to try again. Almost like it is a game and not some super serious business where keyboards need to be thrown against the wall when things don't go as planned.
They don't need the majority. No game needs the majority. There are countless online games that seem to be doing just fine without pulling in massive numbers or the "majority" of whatever group you think you're in. Looking at upcoming games, seems the companies and devs behind them don't really care about your "majority" either.
So interesting that you and others don't care, yet need to share with those that do. If only the games you liked kept you interested enough to play them... I'm off to go say how I don't care about X game because it isn't for me...er wait, nah I'll just stick to things I actually do care about and not tell others that there preferences aren't good enough for me.
All the games listed failed at the pvp level... they are massive failures in regards to being pvp mmos.
Yea i broke the code, it's to be an intelligent consumer and not reward companies with buzz and hype for consistently underperforming. People like you on the other hand, want to throw logic to the wind and call the behavior "optimism. Good job that's typical. You don't see a bunch of mindless fanbois? I do... I did before they announced anything about the game, I do now when they've started revealing aspects of the game.
You can take the good for many games, without just plainly copying one. WoW had many mmorpgs to learn from, and yes that does make sense, but sometimes fanbois want to misconstrue what you say, does that make sense? Yea doing the opposite of what people didn't like isn't exactly "copying" something... are you starting to see the contradictions in your words? Furor also wasn't a lead dev... he started out as a regular old gm (not even senior gm) and worked his way up, but he still isn't even a "lead dev".
You literally just named a WoW dev the paragraph before, and then now you are saying you didn't recognize any names. That's called fanboi rose tinted goggles. Blizzard has been a gaming giant since long before WoW came out, their names are well known, many of which moved on and branched off and do other things, things like gw1/gw2/firefall etc etc. When you say you don't know ex blizzard devs, all that says is you don't actually know much about the industry, which is probably why you think it's good to get hyped for mmos over and over again.
Basically you're biased, the devs at CF are known for some of the most awful decisions in their respective mmos. blixtrev ruined crafting, gordon walton brought you trammel, shadowbane was one of the biggest flops in mmo history. Like honestly let's get real here.
It will fail for so many reasons but biggest are one founders already said he want cashshop CHECK
tHE GRAPHICS look like WoW CHECK
For me a reason not to play.
Plus because a UO developer is on team don't say nothing to me UO sucks in many ways.
I have more respect for shadowbane founder.
Wish it was Darkfall 1 instead that came back that this pile of...
Hope to build full AMD system RYZEN/VEGA/AM4!!!
MB:Asus V De Luxe z77
CPU:Intell Icore7 3770k
GPU: AMD Fury X(waiting for BIG VEGA 10 or 11 HBM2?(bit unclear now))
MEMORY:Corsair PLAT.DDR3 1866MHZ 16GB
PSU:Corsair AX1200i
OS:Windows 10 64bit
Edit: Sorry for wall of text
#Preach
Witty & Wicked
For me, because it is yet another MMO where they want *me* in the game instead of my character. To me, that equates to ZERO RPG.
I saw the names. I thought, "Holy cow! What an all-Star cast!" Then they make a few announcements about the gameplay and it action combat with player looting. My 2 least favorite features in one game. No thanks.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
How is it not rpg.
Crowfall is going to have in-depth character building from disciplines to promotional classes to runes. How is that not wanting players "in" their characters? >______________>
Witty & Wicked
Hype is a net negative. People get super excited, then are let down when their expectations are not met. A relatively good game can crash and burn because people hyped it so much that when it didn't deliver on the hype, people bad mouthed into obscurity.
Better a game not be hyped and people being pleasantly surprised when it comes out and it has some positive elements.
I self identify as a monkey.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Who said anything about it being like wow?
They already stated that the archetypes aren't going to be able to beat everyone. So there's pretty much going to be soft counters. If you can beat someone who you are a soft-counter to, then you deserve to lose that fight.
Witty & Wicked
Why should i hype a paper project?
Show me the game "working" and maybe they get my hype, im not talking about graphics, im talking about implemented features working well all together.
Untill there zero hype form me, this game or any other one.
My point is, when I fat finger my keys or jerk my mouse up, down, or sideways, *I* die because of *my* inadequacies, not because my character was not skilled enough. That places me and my skills (or lack thereof) smack dab into the game.
Give me tab targeting, RNG combat, and "real" character building through skills and I am able to role play. Give me action combat and I am not role playing, but rather being myself in a video game. Just my opinion. Others believe they can only role play if *they* are their character in the game.
So, not an MMO for me. You obviously like what you've read. Enjoy the MMO
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
You can argue anything in the world to be subjective, context is what matters. As PvP mmos, they all failed, either short-lived, extremely low pop to the point they couldn't keep running, or they drove the pvpers away with pve changes.
Wrong, if you remove optimism you are left with realism and pessimism in the spectrum. This seems to be something you've never considered.
Now you're just arguing a hypothetical, someone says WoW is an EQ clone, I mention that it didn't just copy EQ and actually has a lot of differences, you argue that it did, then I argue that it didn't, now you are saying "well who knows how it would be without EQ", well we know how it is with EQ, and it's still very different from EQ. It learned from it, it did not copy it.
Blizzard names are more recognizable in the industry than any other names except maybe garriott... you just happen to be detached from the blizzard universe. Remember WoW is the game that all other games listen to, they may not copy, but they are always definitely interested in what blizzard is up to. To think people don't recognize names of some of their big devs is just plain silly.
Any dedicated pvper in UO did not like trammel.
Basically your logic seems to be, "this might not be like their other mistakes, it could be good if they really learned from it"... sorry that's not enough of a foundation to get hyped about... unless you are a fanboi.
What you stated before had to do with every class beating everyone aka like WOW.
How is having several ways to develop your character not "real" character building? On top of what we already know,how do you somehow already know we aren't going to get even more options?
The fact that Crowfall isn't for you is perfectly fine. However I'm going to speak up if someone is stating incorrect information. ;]
Witty & Wicked
How is this possible?
Only way I see this happening is releasing a game with zero marketing/PR beforehand. Simply saying "We are making a game" will cause the hype train to start rolling (did in this case for example).
I get if personally, people choose to not turn into crazed fanbois, but there is no harm is looking forward to, getting excited for, or hoping a product will turn out a certain way.
Beyond those without common sense, getting caught up in the hype shouldn't be an issue.
I don't know of one game that I didn't enjoy because it didn't live up to what I was expecting. Almost always it is due to flat poor execution and problems with the game design. If someone is off in crazy town and thinks a game is going to magically change their life, that has nothing to do with an average individual being excited.
Maybe it's just my way of looking at it, but if there was no "hype" sites like this wouldn't exist. Decent chunk of the conversations are on "what if". Other part is vet gamers complaining that devs don't make games designed specifically for them and therefore all games suck.
Believe this is another case of a undefined word being used in multiple different ways.
As you said, some folks like to play themselves through a character taking as much control as possible, while others enjoy taking on the role of a character and putting their fate in the hands of the game more. Two sides of the RPG coin I guess. Both allow for immersion and enjoyment.
Either way, hopefully we all get what we are looking for.
Sighs, some people just love drawing so many conclusions due to being afraid of something. What we have confirmed is inventory loot, and inventory loot + chance to drop gear. Neither of which is the most "harsh" or "easiest" ruleset for a campaign. Now we don't know if the harshest campaign will even include full loot, and will the easiest campaign even have full inventory loot. And you're branding it a recipe for disaster because of your assumptions. Afraid of losing pixels much?
There is too little known about the actual game, and personally, I'm tired of riding hype trains that lead down a cliff. Recently, all ESO, ArcheAge and Wildstar have highly disappointed me, and when it happens over and over you learn to take a step back and wait for actual results.
Besides, full loot won't be a popular feature, even if a lot of people like to boast here about how much they love it, and like telling people who don't like it how spineless they are. I foresee full loot servers being the most empty ones.
My opinion is my own. I respect all other opinions and views equally, but keep in mind that my opinion will always be the best for me. That's why it's my opinion.
These "several ways" to develop a character... Develop them in what ways? In an action combat PvP game, the usual route is many "combative" ways to develop a character. That is not "real" character development, that is "killer building." Most MMOs are 85% or more about combat, so having many combat skills for developing a character makes sense. The games I enjoy are about more then just fighting.
How can you know what I say is "incorrect?" Is PvP in the game? Will players be able to loot other players? I believe those have been stated by the developers. The rest is my opinion and preferences. You may disagree with these, but they are far from "incorrect."
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
I love how many people here (I will not point anyone out) try to force their opinion onto others as fact about an unreleased game.
So will all due respect to everyone:
"Those with the most Opinions tend to have the fewest Facts"
Have a nice day.
"My Fantasy is having two men at once...
One Cooking and One Cleaning!"
---------------------------
"A good man can make you feel sexy,
strong and able to take on the whole world...
oh sorry...that's wine...wine does that..."
I didn't say you specifically said.
And it seems you have absolutely no knowledge on the game. It is listed that there will be Active and Passive skill training.
http://crowfall.com/#/faq/54c967bb5592cb654ca24f0e
If you would have bothered to thoroughly look through the product, you are (semi-)negatively talking about, I am sure you would have seen that.
When it comes to facts, yes, you are incorrect. You stated several times that Crowfall doesn't have "real" character building. Even though you just got specific about what "real" character building is to you, I just proved that Crowfall is not all about "killer building" as you put it.
Ignorance isn't a excuse.
Witty & Wicked