Howdy, Stranger!

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



Born far-Easterner by circumstance, not descent. Played Marathon for Mac, X-Wing, Escape Velocity. Went to the University of Chicago and discovered Vendetta Online. Lived in Colorado for a year, rode Crested Butte for 70 days. Worked as a Geoscientist. I have always enjoyed designing games; would love to do it for a living.


Last Active
Favorite Role
Currently Playing
Vendetta Online
  • The 10 Best MMOs of 2017 - The List - MMORPG.com

    Thane said:
    i'd say warframe has more players online than some other mmos. so it's actually quite massive, and multiplayer, and online

    uh and if they are no mmos, why is GW? what's the max per instance, 40? 100?
    sounds like a big battlefield to me, eh?

    get some fresh panties guys and chill
    sgel said:
    Could the people who say that some of the games on the list aren't mmos, defind what an mmo is?

    Just curious what each person's definition is.

    It's "massively multiplayer", not "massive + multiplayer".  Chess is played by a "massive" number of people (600 million), it is "multiplayer" (2 players), it is online.  There's all three boxes for you box-checkers.  Must be a MMORPG?  Reductio ad absurdum.

    It's hard to believe the goalposts have moved so far this must even be a discussion.

    That stated, it's not just about how many people are literally simultaneously interacting in a meaningful way; MUDs are a thing, and somewhat distinct from MMORPGs.  The term "MMORPG" also has meaningful connotation like:

    *A persistent world
    *Large numbers of people in the same digital space

    Publishing a list like this adds further confusion about what the term "MMORPG" means at a time when many people seem to be struggling with the concept.  This is mmorpg.com; you could have used this as an opportunity to showcase some MMORPGs if you needed 5 or so spots to fill, regardless of whether or not they are popular!  Perhaps in drawing your community's attention to actual MMORPGs you may even help some of them to become popular.

    From your game list:

    EVE Online
    Lord of the Rings Online
    Final Fantasy XI
    Dark Age of Camelot
    PlanetSide 2
    Dungeon & Dragons Online
    Ultima Online
    Lineage 2
    DC Universe Online
    Anarchy Online
    Dragon Nest
    World of Warcraft
    Age of Conan: Unchained
    Wurm Online
    Age of Wushu
    Vendetta Online
    Star Wars: The Old Republic
    Continent of the Ninth Seal
    Pirates of the Burning Sea
    Uncharted Waters Online
    A Tale in the Desert
    Entropia Universe
    Mortal Online

    I submit that a random selection of any five from there in place of the titles that are not MMORPGs would improve your list.
    AlomarLeFantometruewarlordthighhighsScorchienLucienReneViper482mmm_22ScotGeezerGaz82and 9 others.
  • Been 11 years since I last played an MMO for more than a few days...

    "Been 11 years since I last played an MMO for more than a few days..."

    "Nostalrius came out the other year, I played it for a few months until it got shut down with my friend and we had a blast."

    Something doesn't add up, here...
  • More Greedmonger refund drama

    The level that some people go to in order to defend these Crowdfunding people is astounding.  That ANYONE would want to defend Appleton is astounding.

    Is it defending Appleton when you deride overly eager morons for foolishly throwing money to something that sounded too good to be true?
    That’s a totally different topic.   One does not negate the other.

    I apologize in advance as I do try to not be rude if I can help it, but in this case I'm making an exception as your statement is just such absolute bullshit that I can't help myself.

    Let me explain. Person A. made a bunch of promises to create a game that People B. would like. He asked for People B. to give him money, no strings attached to make these dreams and promises come true. People B. threw thousands of dollars at him, based on nothing but some windy words. Person A. failed to deliver on said promises. Thereby making People B's donations worthless.

    Ok then, how am I supposed to demonize one participant and yet not the other? If I agree that Appleton is a Charlton that stole your money then I have to also admit you are a gullible fool for handing that money to him in the first place. Saying that Person A. is guilty of fraud but exempting People B. of gullible culpability means that there has been no actual crime committed. Unless Appleton came to all of your homes and took your money at gun point then you fools share an equal portion of the blame. Either own up to this or stop wasting our time with with your feckless whining.
    You seem to be mistaken. I never gave Appleton a cent.  

    This is is why I said “One does not negate the other”. Feel free to demonize both if you want.  You can certainly make the case that people who gave thousands of dollars to this guy should have known better. That doesn’t let the originator of this effort off the hook.  
    As a matter of fact it does let this guy off the hook. I feel it shouldn't but it still does. Person A. said "Hey give me some money and I'll try to give you guys some cool stuff." People B. gave the dude some money with no other contract or guarantees. Person A. failed to deliver said cool stuff. Which means People B. have no other recourse to the law and therefore are fucked. A fool and his money are soon parted.
    No it doesn't let Appleton off the hook.  Seriously, where did that left-hand turn come from?

    'I may be a charlatan but it's your fault for believing me... therefore not guilty'... Really? In what twisted world does that make sense? 

    That's like the Arrested Development argument of "you can't arrest a husband and wife for the same crime".
    ScorchienScotSlapshot1188IselinDakeruJean-Luc_PicardjimmywolfEponyxDamorYashaXMrMelGibsonand 1 other.
  • Around the Verse - Exploring Gravlev Technology - Star Citizen Videos - MMORPG.com

    Attempt #3:
    But that's okay because I'm being offered a new mission! Fly over to a wrecked starfarer and collect "The Goods." Deliver them to such and such for who cares and get like 300 credits. I know these are MMO quests and therefor basically just ways to waste your time, but it feels like if a crate is worth recovering from a wrecked spaceship you should probably pay more than the space equivalent of bus fare to whichever mercenary picks it up for you. But what do I know. Luckily the beacon for this is like 30 km away from the asteroid with the failed protection mission, so I don't have to quantum jump anywhere. I point the nose of my ship at the beacon and settle in for another 2 minute flight.

    As I arrive, what to my wondering eyes should appear but another actual human being! Or at least, I assume it was. There's the wrecked starfarer, and there nestled up against its belly is a Cutlass that registers as friendly when I target it. Despite the ridiculous close-packed nature of the spawn, this is the first player I've encountered while just flying around in several hours of playing this stupid build. Naturally I set engines to full burn and just hammer those motherfucking triggers as the game devolves into a 1fps slideshow- I mean clearly he was after my loot, it's completely justified. I guess the pilot was actually in the cockpit because the cutlass begins trying to make evasive maneuvers, but either he flies in a straight line or he isn't pounding his controls hard enough because it is incredibly easy to track him and just lay on the fire until he explodes. That was... really odd, actually. Ships in 3.0 are normally completely unkillable due to lag and jank and weird balance issues. I played Arena Commander once (once) and none of the three guys on my team could kill even a single ship of the first wave, they just tanked everything. 

    So anyway the cutlass is dead and with one nefarious act of piracy under my belt I try to figure out how to get out of my fucking ship to get this loot. Unfortunately entering combat has A) destroyed the server, and B) destroyed my hud, including the "Push F to actually use anything in the cockpit" system that everyone is so keen on. So I'm still stuck at 1FPS and now nothing in the cockpit will respond except flight controls. Eventually I remember there's a hardcoded "Exit" key, Alt-F, and hammer that two thousand times until my guy gets up. Now all I have to do is fly into the crashed starfarer and retrieve a simple box.

    Let me digress here for a moment. Do games ever make you feel motion sick? Can you remember the last time a game was so completely disorienting that you had no idea what way was up? For me it was the Descent games back in the 90's. Something about those suckers would just fuck with my inner ear something fierce. Flight sims and VR can't hold a candle to that feeling.

    Well, Star Citizen can. See the thing is, the Starfarer is wrecked, so it has no power. That means the inside is zero-G, pitch black, and covered in floating debris. And every time you touch any piece of that debris, your spaceman starts doing sick 360 noscopes. Within seconds I'm completely disoriented, before half a minute has passed I am actually physically nauseous. The box, literally labelled "The Goods" is only 20m away but it might as well be 200. I seriously cannot make any progress towards it down a straight line fucking corridor, my spaceman janks and spins wildly every time I touch a control. But I am undeterred. I stand up and do a shot of maalox and then inch, ever so carefully, around every fucking piece of debris and down that hallway. The final door is in sight but it is covered in other boxes. I have no choice but to nipplejet straight at it and hope that I can bust through like some kind of retarded kool-aid man. Somehow, this actually works! I find myself in front of "The Goods" and somehow, manage to engage my grabby hands! This mission is so close to being over I can taste it. Now I just have to maneuver my way back out.

    I hear laser fire from outside. Well, I assume it's laser fire. I hear noises, space noises, chopped up into incomprehensibility by the 1-2 fps that I'm getting. Did Cutlass man come back? Did the game spawn pirates on me when I got the box? I can't lose now! Slowly, caaarefully I - fuck, touched some debris, time for the zero-g tilt-a-whirl from hell again. I get back out the door and to the ship- I'm guessing it is NPC pirates shooting at it, but I really can't tell. Either way they appear to be doing zero damage to my entirely stationary, powered-off ship. Sure, okay.

    I jet to the ship, pilfered goods in hand, and at last the moment is upon us. "Enter pilot seat" I tell my character, and he does just that- immediately chucking the box into the void of fucking space as he enters his pre-canned animation god DAMN IT. So apparently if you have single seat fighters, you should basically not do any mission that involves moving any kind of good because you literally have to physically stuff that shit in your ship, I guess? CIG I feel that you perhaps did not think any of this through very well. 

    In order to complete the mission I'd have to fight off the two basically invincible npc's, fly back to jankbase prime, spawn a ship with a cargo area, come back and redo the starfarer carnival ride bullshit a second time. I want to emphasize, this is a starter mission, paying 300 credits, and to complete it you're going to need 1+ hour and a ship that costs more than 100 bucks- one that can fight and carry cargo.  

    Mission abandoned.
    There is a fair bit of roadwork ahead.  Don't fall into the trap of 'maybe it's going to have feature X, and it will be like Y, or Z!'  Star Citizen leverages this aspect of the human psyche suscepto munere.

    I wish them well, but this project needs to be approached soberly and with a healthy dose of skepticism.  There is a lot of propaganda surrounding this, here and elsewhere.  No, there are not "two sides".  Look at what they have today; I mean really look.  Consider how much has been given to them, how much time has elapsed, and what is still being promised.
  • Frontier Announces End of Mac Support - Elite: Dangerous - MMORPG.com

    who uses mac for gaming anyways lol
    I do.  It's my main rig.  My Toshiba laptop is secondary.
  • Why I quit Albion and why you should too!

    fanglo said:
    So you offer no examples and expect us to believe you?

    But yes, support will always back up other employees.

    Random Person: I love having sex with women
    Random Person: I'm a lesbian
    Me: I'm sorry
    Me: I hope they find a cure for that soon

    Mod: Homophobic comments are not allowed
    Me: Some rant about censorship of speech
    You got what you deserved, loser.
  • Seven hundred and twenty bucks for the A2? Go **** yourself, Chris.

    Babuinix said:
    Just look around in the gaming scene and find a game with just half the scope and features of Star Citizen.

    If it was easy it would have been done by now. ;)
    I don't know... space blasters in a Newtonian environment as a MMORPG has been a thing for me since 2003, and that seems to be more than half Star Citizen's core scope.  SC even appears to be struggling with the MMORPG aspect.

    It looks gorgeous, though.
  • Seven hundred and twenty bucks for the A2? Go **** yourself, Chris.

    Orinori said:
    I got to go do more worthwhile things but I will leave the short version of this instead.

    Free market capitalism
    Supply and demand

    You are welcome. 
    This is incredibly facile. This same mentality resulted in Enron and innumerable other scandals since the advent of mercantilism.

    Welcome to the 21st century. 
  • I Think I Made a Mistake 2 of 2

    Kyleran said:
    NorseGod said:
    Check out 1 of 2, where I discuss gimmicks and what lead me here.

    So, I'm just hanging out reading up on stuff. Waiting on the Mercury Q&A. It's a dud. It's slow, sold as fast smuggling ship. Data limitations, but more computers than any other sub-capital ship.

    Then, I noticed in the last 2 days, threads about private servers and getting rid of PVP from the game popping up.

    I'm sitting there reading all this about PVP needs to go, it's not fair, I just want to play with my friends, etc etc. Like, great, here we go with casual carebears ruining another MMORPG.

    So casual carebears, whom will leave the game after their first 30 days, are asking for a PVP/PVE toggle, PVE servers, and outright getting rid of PVP.

    THEN, I found a thread about private servers. And from the thread discussions, there will be:

    Private servers
    Public servers
    Official Public servers
    PvE servers
    PvP servers
    Capital Ships Only servers
    Sub-Capital Ships Only servers
    [Insert another way to split up the playerbase] server

    I asked for citations. Yep, it's true. Everybody is going to be spread out across a million different private servers. The casuals support this so they don't have to play with others or PVP, etc.

    So, if you think server pop in an MMORPG is important. There ya go.

    Those citations were from 2013, but no updates. They are hard to find, as with any important information with this game.

    Kinda mad about it.

    It's not because of the $200 I threw at them. Not because of the new SSD I bought this past Saturday, solely for the game. Not the hours of reading and watching videos.

    No, I'm mad because I have been waiting over a decade to have a large, OWPVP, sandbox MMORPG that I could get lost in again. Now it's a co-op or single-player game or, MMORPG if you're willing to pay to play on an empty Official server (why would you if there are 100K free ones to play on?)

    So, another game I have to move on from. I'm so damn sick of casuals ruining games. I hope you people that care about PVP and challenging MMORPGs start speaking up loudly. I don't know what casuals do or say to devs, but, it's not a joke or something that should be ignored. If you get in an alpha or beta and see some casual thread, stomp it into the mud and make it clear to the devs that little Billy who only plays 2 hours on Saturdays isn't worth more than you.
    The game you want already exists, its called EVE but I assume you aren't playing for "reasons."

    There are others as well. 

    Those deeply inculcated by SC culture tend to have a pair of blinders on; they have been told SC is the only worthwhile space sim on the market or even that SC will 'save PC gaming'.

    There are others.
  • You're a scientist and discovered real life was a MMORPG...

    As our technology progresses forward, we'll be able to build computers capable of running a virtual universe. Then again in that virtual universe lifeforms and computers will evolve to host their own virtual universe and so on.

    So there is 1 real universe, and an endless number of virtual universe.

    Therefore statistically speaking we are in an MMORPG right now. 
    ...this is true only if you reject (or assign almost nil value) to the first two postulates in Nick Bostrom's argument, each of which are worth considering on their own.

    1) Great Filter

    Maybe there is some filter which prevents us from ever reaching a stage where technology capable of simulating consciousness is possible; nuclear war, economic or environmental collapse, or maybe Moore's law tapers off in conjunction with other factors: just as the space race in the mid 20th century didn't lead to a new era of space exploration as expected, maybe the leaps and bounds we are seeing in computation will fizzle at some level before the necessary technology is feasible.

    Perhaps consciousness is impossible to simulate because it's not materialistic.  Consider a computer that looks like a human, responds intelligently and tells you it's conscious.  Would you believe it?  The human mind is very different from a computer; neurons are far more complex than binary transistors, and the speed at which a signal propagates through a neural network is order of magnitudes slower.  It's also not clear whether neuronal activity results from, or is caused by consciousness; consciousness may not be simply a result of mathematical emergence, but rather something non-material.

    2) "Amistics"

    Perhaps the second postulate is true that future civilizations will choose not to simulate consciousness due to ethical concerns even though the technology exists, at least not frequently enough to tip the scale in favor of the simulation hypothesis.  This may seem improbable at first glance, but consider that we haven't blown ourselves back to the stone age with nukes (yet) even though the technology exists.

    The simulation hypothesis only holds water if you reject these first two possibilities.  Interesting to note (as in the video I posted up thread) if we ever do unequivocally simulate consciousness on a large enough scale, this would imply by Bostrom's argument that the 'creator level' of human experience would itself almost certainly be simulated, although there would have to be one level of "base reality" as Mr. Musk puts it.  Of course, what's to say that this so-called 'ground level' is anything at all like what's in the realm of human experience?

    Finally, it's worth noting that "reality isn't real" is not at all a new concept; this is more or less a technocentric take on an ancient, religious idea (see especially Samsara, Maya, the Tao Te Ching, or the Tibetan Book of the Dead).

    There have been some interesting advances in scientific theory which tend to mirror the simulation hypothesis.  One is the holographic principle which states that all information within a three dimensional volume may be encoded on a two-dimensional surface.  This has important ramifications for black holes:

    If you know much cosmology it also implies some unsettling things about our universe (is the observable universe inside a black hole, or to wit: is this evidence of reality being simulated?  I.e. if all information about our universe is encoded on the cosmic horizon, when we look at the cosmic horizon are we looking at the machinery generating our reality?)

    The theoretical physicist Dr. James Gates Jr. claims to have discovered a code within the equations of string theory; not just any code but one invented in the 1940's (watch the first four minutes):

    This is also on-the-nose when it comes to the simulation hypothesis, as if reality ever were to be simulated by a computer at some point the code on which the simulation ran would have to be invented.  What if that point has already occurred?

    I strongly recommend taking this with a grain of salt, as none of this is 'scientific proof'; not in the way that we know Einstein was right about General Relativity.  It's still interesting to consider.