An interview that sounds more like a casual conversation is personal, informative, and to the point. An interview that lets the interviewee ramble on for 4-5 paragraphs feels too artificial to me. I prefer f13's style greatly.
I'm in the same boat. Directly paying the company to get a better character than those that do not pay... pretty lame tactic to score some extra bucks. I hope the rest of the gaming industry does not take lessons from this.
[i]"Our investigations revealed the users behind these avatars to be a 54-year-old man and a 27-year-old woman. Both were immediately banned from Second Life."[/i]
Well, seeing how they just banned half the user base, 90% doesn't seem like that much more.
1 - I agree, but this is purely a case of pushing the market to its limit. If you can get away with charging for both, why not? Guild Wars has been successful by eliminating monthly fees, but has obviously given up a lot of revenue as a result. Was it the right choice?
2 - MMOs are a different type of animal than most games and you have to research and test them out in different fashions. Most MMOs have trial clients that you can download a month or two following launch. If you want to get in early, most MMOs have free beta periods that you can jump in on prior to launch. From either of those, you should be able to make your decision on an MMO with no cost to you.
3 - Except that there aren't millions of gamers waiting for Linux clients. Most people find a work around or already have a gaming PC.
4 - I don't understand this suggestion. Almost all MMOs are already PvE-oriented - it is to the point that MMOs are notorious for their epicly long PvE grind sessions.
5 - Agree, but that's where the market demand is.
6 - Talking about WoW I guess? C'mon, it wasn't that big of a deal...
Original ideas? WoW broke hardly any new ground in MMOs as far as ideas go. What WoW has going for it is talent, though. They basically took the EQ grind, polished it up, gave it a great UI, and let their hordes of existing fans at it.
If this announcement does end up being Starcraft 2 (or any other RTS for that matter), please Blizzard, rip a page out of the Supreme Commander book. Tactical zoom is a must for any RTS here on out.
After playing SupCom, every other RTS makes me cry when I try to zoom out and get the global view.
Re:To all those "old game, snooze, bah..." bashers
on
Soldat 1.4 Released
·
· Score: 1
Man, I must be a mutant or something. The Assault gameplay of the UT series is among the best gaming out there to me.
While I agree, 3 teams instead of 2 is preferred, Dark Age of Camelot was more of a PvE/PvP split game, where as WAR is being designed for PvP first and foremost. As a result, the PvP is much more integrated into normal gameplay (practically everything you do from PvP, to PvE, to even rolling an alt, generates Victory Points, which determine which side advances on a battlefront zone).
I'm happy they went ahead and delayed this so that they could layer on the extra polish. More game companies (including EA themselves) should take note.
Could turn out that way, but so far EA is letting them run the show... It could turn out to be a positive, as Mythic will be able to benefit from EA's advertising.
Games Workshop also has a very big hand in this game and has to approve of everything. If the development process is going awry, they will not hesitate to pull the plug (as past evidence has shown).
"Enemies will be visible on the field, and players will enter into battle once in contact with them. Like Dragon Quest VIII, the battle will be presented in 3D with players selecting commands for attacking enemies, casting spells and others. In the case of multiplayer, each of the players will select commands for their characters shown at the bottom part of the screen. Dragon Quest IX will also be the first time players can customize their appearance including physical features such as your height, weight, face, hair as well as your costume."
"In the grim darkness of the far future there is only war", so screw computer games anyhow.
I have to disagree with you though. The industry is pushing deeper and deeper into online play and there's no evidence that it's going to let up. Part of the problem is that the MMO genre attracts a lot of players that are playing the game for purposes other than roleplaying. There's nothing really wrong with that, but if you pick up World of Warcraft expecting to bring glory and honor to the Horde, expect to play with a lot of people that just want The Sword of 1000 Truths and couldn't give two craps about the game's lore.
I guess I don't really understand why people didn't like 3. In my opinion, it was the best of the series. Instead of hopping from mission to mission, you actually got to walk around the town and explore. You had the opportunity to go mug random strangers and break into houses all while avoiding guard patrols. The "mission structure" was still intact as well, you just had to get to the starting point instead of instantly appearing there.
Maybe it was just the Comedy Central special I saw of her, but Lisa Lampanelli was completely awful in it. Is there something else I should be watching before passing judgment?
Slashdot Mirror
Starcraft 2, eh? I pray that they include the Strategic Zoom from Supreme Commander. Playing any RTS without it feels incomplete to me now.
I wish I had mod points for you, but alas, no.
An interview that sounds more like a casual conversation is personal, informative, and to the point. An interview that lets the interviewee ramble on for 4-5 paragraphs feels too artificial to me. I prefer f13's style greatly.
I'm in the same boat. Directly paying the company to get a better character than those that do not pay... pretty lame tactic to score some extra bucks. I hope the rest of the gaming industry does not take lessons from this.
Oh god dammit, I messed up my post too.
[i]"Our investigations revealed the users behind these avatars to be a 54-year-old man and a 27-year-old woman. Both were immediately banned from Second Life."[/i]
Well, seeing how they just banned half the user base, 90% doesn't seem like that much more.
If you're going to make that joke, at least use "Rocket Propelled Grenade".
Agreed. They did an alright job with the few that they attempted to develop, but there are simply too many.
*Reads Title*
*Checks Date for April 1st*
*Thinks to self: "WTF?"*
Yea... except that there aren't.
QQ?
Ugh. Diablo 2 Simulator
1 - I agree, but this is purely a case of pushing the market to its limit. If you can get away with charging for both, why not? Guild Wars has been successful by eliminating monthly fees, but has obviously given up a lot of revenue as a result. Was it the right choice?
2 - MMOs are a different type of animal than most games and you have to research and test them out in different fashions. Most MMOs have trial clients that you can download a month or two following launch. If you want to get in early, most MMOs have free beta periods that you can jump in on prior to launch. From either of those, you should be able to make your decision on an MMO with no cost to you.
3 - Except that there aren't millions of gamers waiting for Linux clients. Most people find a work around or already have a gaming PC.
4 - I don't understand this suggestion. Almost all MMOs are already PvE-oriented - it is to the point that MMOs are notorious for their epicly long PvE grind sessions.
5 - Agree, but that's where the market demand is.
6 - Talking about WoW I guess? C'mon, it wasn't that big of a deal...
7 - Agreed 100%.
Original ideas? WoW broke hardly any new ground in MMOs as far as ideas go. What WoW has going for it is talent, though. They basically took the EQ grind, polished it up, gave it a great UI, and let their hordes of existing fans at it.
If this announcement does end up being Starcraft 2 (or any other RTS for that matter), please Blizzard, rip a page out of the Supreme Commander book. Tactical zoom is a must for any RTS here on out.
After playing SupCom, every other RTS makes me cry when I try to zoom out and get the global view.
Man, I must be a mutant or something. The Assault gameplay of the UT series is among the best gaming out there to me.
"Sounds to me like Mythic again has produced content which wasn't good enough to be produced by Mythic."
Which makes it sound like they are actually trying to churn out a decent title instead of cashing in quick, a la Vanguard.
While I agree, 3 teams instead of 2 is preferred, Dark Age of Camelot was more of a PvE/PvP split game, where as WAR is being designed for PvP first and foremost. As a result, the PvP is much more integrated into normal gameplay (practically everything you do from PvP, to PvE, to even rolling an alt, generates Victory Points, which determine which side advances on a battlefront zone).
I'm happy they went ahead and delayed this so that they could layer on the extra polish. More game companies (including EA themselves) should take note.
Could turn out that way, but so far EA is letting them run the show... It could turn out to be a positive, as Mythic will be able to benefit from EA's advertising.
Games Workshop also has a very big hand in this game and has to approve of everything. If the development process is going awry, they will not hesitate to pull the plug (as past evidence has shown).
"Enemies will be visible on the field, and players will enter into battle once in contact with them. Like Dragon Quest VIII, the battle will be presented in 3D with players selecting commands for attacking enemies, casting spells and others. In the case of multiplayer, each of the players will select commands for their characters shown at the bottom part of the screen. Dragon Quest IX will also be the first time players can customize their appearance including physical features such as your height, weight, face, hair as well as your costume."
So... its an MMO?
"In the grim darkness of the far future there is only war", so screw computer games anyhow.
I have to disagree with you though. The industry is pushing deeper and deeper into online play and there's no evidence that it's going to let up. Part of the problem is that the MMO genre attracts a lot of players that are playing the game for purposes other than roleplaying. There's nothing really wrong with that, but if you pick up World of Warcraft expecting to bring glory and honor to the Horde, expect to play with a lot of people that just want The Sword of 1000 Truths and couldn't give two craps about the game's lore.
Guild Wars is a decent game, but it is no more an MMORPG than Diablo 2 is.
I guess I don't really understand why people didn't like 3. In my opinion, it was the best of the series. Instead of hopping from mission to mission, you actually got to walk around the town and explore. You had the opportunity to go mug random strangers and break into houses all while avoiding guard patrols. The "mission structure" was still intact as well, you just had to get to the starting point instead of instantly appearing there.
Could that upswing also be attributed to a rise in the use of XFire though?
"How could something so successful suck?"
Welcome to your new job at EA. I think you'll fit in perfectly here.
I enjoy a good insult comic.
Maybe it was just the Comedy Central special I saw of her, but Lisa Lampanelli was completely awful in it. Is there something else I should be watching before passing judgment?