Howdy, Stranger!

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




Last Active
Favorite Role
Currently Playing
Lord of the Rings Online
  • 2018 Overall Production Roadmap (updated 19th January)

    Regardless if take another year(s) to come out. I get this feeling this game will become standard in terms of features.
  • Are MOBAs and Other Match Based Games MMOs?

    Eldurian said:
    @Nyctelios- I made no assumptions about whether or not those games were MMOs in the original post to avoid biasing peoples answers. I didn't say they were. I didn't say they weren't. I just asked a question.

    If you read every single post I've written since then you can see my assumption is these games are NOT MMOs. Including the 2nd post directly beneath the OP.

    Stop trying to argue with me like I disagree.

    No, you are not making questions.

    You are just applying a passive aggressive way to keep pushing your stubborn assumption that things are not what they are if you take the terms and twist their meaning.

    Don't come with bullshit demagogy on me.

    This is as much a discussion as flat Earth theory is.
  • Bethesda Hiring for 'Bleeding-Edge AAA Freemium Game' - MMORPG.com News

    They discovered game as a product can be charged as a continuous service regardless the genre or if it is even single player experience if you attach its value to a brand and to it's community.

    Now they focus on making people keep paying to keep enjoying the ride - besides paying for it, of course. And you won't wish to be left out the e-sport scenes from this game we even don't know exactly the mechanics yet but we assure it will have stuff and... things... and... glamour.

    So they keep shoving this idea that a game is a style of life, an identity attached to your free time, something that will make your personal brand value more if you keep in touch with it... if you keep giving them money for the privilege of being able to play that sacred game.

    And some people will go so low to be part of a trending topic that they will toss lots of moneys for it. They'll pay to test something, they'll pay to play it 2 days before hand, they'll pay for content that is not even created yet (season passes) then they'll have to pay more because they also discovered they can make extra content outside the already existing season pass and charge for it.

    We mocked pre order and now we have "levels of pre order bonuses".

    We mocked unnecessary relaunch editions and now we have "ultimate editions" with locked content behind a pre order for a relaunch of something... So... It means you might buy an ultimate experience and that experience is not ultimate because still content locked behind situational purchase / dlc packs / cash shop. 

    May indies save our soul.
  • Open World PvP and PvE Coexistence

    Eldurian said:
    ZionBane said:
    Eldurian said:

    At minimum I believe I have provided sufficient evidence that Open World PvP being defined as "Non-instanced PvP" or "PvP which takes place in an Open World" is a commonly accepted definition by many within the gaming community.

    Given the lack of an accepted gamer dictionary the commonly accepted usage is the best standard of measure we can go by when defining terms within gaming.

    So if we were to accept the premise that "Open World PvP means the entire world is open for PvP" we would at least have to also accept that that "Non-instanced / PvP Which takes place in an Open world" is a secondary definition.

    However, unlike me, not a single one of you has provided any evidence to support your claims. During all my searching for this evidence I came across one sub comment on reddit by a user who as not very well spoken and did not seem particularly knowledgeable that seems to support your view:

    "A third of the territories (or more) are not PVP zones. And you cant flag against your own faction. So you say Archeage is open PVP? I can respond with WoW is open PVP then.

    If you are looking for true open world PVP, play Eve."

    Other than that, nadda.

    So I would say the ball is your court on providing sufficient evidence to support your claims.

    Nope. It commonly means what we have said it means.. The game world is Open PvP, your meaning is for lack of a better way say this, Bullshit, and is too broad based to be of any value as a descriptive term, That is why terms like realms vs realms and battlegrounds are used instead.
    Just because a definition is broad does not mean it doesn't have value.

    Terms like:

    Sandbox vs. Themepark
    Consensual vs. Non-consensual
    Planned vs. Impromptu 
    Instanced vs. Open World

    These are very broad words the describe a very broad range of things. Entire categories of verbs and nouns almost all fall within one of the other.

    Differentiating between the two is still a massively important distinction. You are trying to take a very broad term and make it fit your narrow definition. You're all indignant because "It's not Open world PvP its realm vs. realm or world vs. world!"

    That's like saying. "It's not a mammal, it's a dog!!!"

    And you've still provided zero evidence to back your position.

    Such terms are rarely broad.

    In fact people who have an agenda to push often claim that, because it is convenient to them if the term loses it's sense and so we can push our flag over the hill... Just like calling mobas MMO's.

    Open World is not a broad term and they pasted a good discussion about it's definition already.

    Also, they are not saying what you say they are saying - I think you fail to understand what they are trying to explain to you.
  • PC Gamer: " There's something strange about Ashes of Creation. "

    Torval said:
    Ponzini said:
    Jacobin said:
    It just shows the desperation. If the referral program has changed, conveniently right near the end of the campaign, it would be air tight fraud,
    Meanwhile in literally the same thread from a developer:

    "There has been no change in our referral system. The author of this article had an obvious agenda, and a request has been made to PCGamer for a retraction of the article. It is telling that his sources linked in the article itself were from Reddit. A shame."

    He just said it hasn't changed. So what are you arguing? Or are we just throwing facts out the window again? Unreal.
    You realize your argument is weak and holds no water. It's like someone that has been charged with a crime saying " I didn't do it. " and then you go around saying " He said he's innocent, okay? "
    If the creative director comes here and says nothing has changed and you won't believe it then nothing will satisfy your request for information. Do you plan on continuing to troll the game if you're not open to discussion or information?
    His word is his word. Nothing more and nothing less. Let's avoid this belittling towards other users. Steven's word weight as much as anyone else here.

    A simple mirror of the place with the information showing if it changed or not would satisfy, I guess.