I find it disheartening that young gamers feel the need to find a single console and lock onto it with a religious fervor. We're all gamers, we all enjoy the same hobby, but a large part of the community spends its time decrying everyone else.
The only reason I can think of that this happens, immaturity aside, is that young gamers must rely on their parents to buy consoles and their parents probably limit them to one console of choice because of price. This may give the kid a need to prove to himself and others that he got the very best console possible and made the best decision, because if he didn't make the best decision he'll never be able to buy the other console(s) and fix the problem.
Too bad they can't just relax and enjoy the different experiences offered by all the consoles.
I ask many of these relative to WoW. This should suprise nobody, as any MMO hoping to compete with WoW should liberally compare itself with - though not necessarily model itself after - WoW.
1.) PvP: - a.WAR seems to have a PvP focus. Is it possible to focus primarily on PvP and earn enough EXP from PvP so that I will not be forced to "grind up" *for* PvP like players are forced to do in WoW? - b. In WoW, there are two clear channels of play: PvP and PvE, and PvE must be done to be competative in PvP. What kind of effort will I need to put into PvE to be competative in PvP? I ask this for the players who, like myself, do not want to put anything more than minimal time into PvE because we prefer PvP. - c. Will PvP be balanced with items, levels/skills, or player skill in mind? IE: Who would win in a fight, the player with the most skill, the best gear, or the highest levels and in-game skills? Again, with WoW as an example, levels and gear are very clearly more important than actual player skill, which I find extremely damaging toward gameplay. Having to mindlessly acquire in-game stuff (I won't even say earn, because earning implies a skill investment as well as the MMO-standard time investment) to play the part of the game I actually like without constanly losing really, really sucks. - d. What will make PvP in your game different from PvP in other MMOs, again, notably WoW. Will you implement Warhammer's gameplay depth (formations, terrain, etc) to WAR? - e. How will you address the weaknesses of PvP in today's MMOs. IE: Characters bunnyhopping to avoid enemy meelee and spells, generic "press auto attack and wait" no-player-skill meelee, etc.
2.) Customization: - a. What kind of UI system are you implementing? I've been critical of WoW here, but I must say that their extremely robust UI modding system is simply excellent and one of the best features of the game. - b. To many people, part of the appeal of the Warhammer tabletop game is being able to customize your units and create "your" army. Will this , or anything similar, be implemented in WAR? Custom armor color schemes/logos, custom guild banners, etc, all spring to mind as possibilities.
3.) MMO General: - a. What, if any, MMO conventions will you be breaking? Nobody wants to see gimmicks, but there are some ideas that have struck me as being very good. IE: Allowing players to join more than one guild at a time instead of locking them into a single community of players. - b. What else do you want us to know about WAR, and why should we play it? I can visit your website for your generic PR pitch, so give us some personal opinions, strenghts and weaknesses of the game, etc, not the usual stuff.
4.) The Most Important Question to Me: - I want your game to actually feel like the cutscenes available on your website. I do not want to watch these visceral and intense CG videos only to find combat in your game is just more of the same that I've grown tired of months ago. Will combat feel like the videos, or will it be sterile MMO combat?
Don't bail on the PC as a gaming platform over this, just buy from the dependable studios/publishers who put out consistently fun, high quality, and bullshit-free software.
Though opinions vary, I personally will suggest Valve and Blizzard as two companies deserving our support. Lets show the EAs of the world that we will continue to game, but we will not tolerate this crap. If enough people send their dollars elsewhere EA will be forced to change - to that end, tell all your buddies (especially those who don't keep up on gaming news as much) to avoid EA.
This game is excellent for non-musicians. I am not a musician, but I love to play Guitar Hero. It is really all about timing, not actual guitar skill. They just put a rhythm game in a Rock 'n' Roll setting. I highly reccomend you try this game.
What pisses me off about this is not that they're investigating and scapegoating videogames, I am used to that. In addition, I think they won't find much of interest.
What pisses me off is that 90 million goddamn dollars is about to be shit away for no good reason. What a waste...
Re:will it be open to amature developers?
on
Mario All Grown Up?
·
· Score: 1
Then why is the PC not dead from lackluster user made games? The fact of the matter is that, while many amature games are crap, the crap will be avoided by most people. They will find the good stuff and stick with it. The games that crash/kill your console will not achieve many downloads.
Heck, take a look at the Xbox 1. It has a thriving homebrew scene. Xbox Media Center alone is a reason to buy and mod an Xbox. In fact, its BETTER than the crap on the 360 that is supposed to offer the same functionality. These amatures have produced better code than Microsoft.
I think the people so hotly protesting Rockstar are missing a very important point.
Videogames are not universally meant for children.
In fact, as the people who were the first to really get into videogames grow, the maturity level of the games themselves seems to be growing, too.
These protestors seem to think that any and all videogames are intended to end up in the hands of children. I believe they would protest ANY game not suitable for a young child; GTA is just unlucky (lucky? - free press) enough to be the current scapegoat.
Why is it difficult to realize that these violent games are not intended for youth any more than rated R movies?
One thing I just don't get is this. The game features violence left and right. You can blow away cops, hookers, random pedestrians. You can DRIVE OVER people for FUN. You can engage in all the wanton destruction and mayhem you could desire and parents are fine with their kids being exposed to it all.
But the minute there might be a little sex in the game parents FLIP THE FUCK OUT. Where the fuck are the priorities of the average parent?...
Then again, upon thinking about it a little more I suppose its understandable. After all, one day their kids might be mowing down pedestrians with an assault rifle, but they'll never have sexual experiences. Nope. Never.
God damn I hate stupid people.
(And let it be noted that, despite the first paragraph, I have nothing against violent games. In fact, I'm off to play Battlefield 2 right now.)
I fail to see why the idea of gamers being addicted materializes in this situation.
Lets say some guy spends an amount of time equal to that required to obtain the "dragon saber" at a real job. He uses the money he earned to buy something he wants. For argument's sake, lets say an iPod.
His iPod is then stolen. In his rage at having both been violated in his personal effects - regardless of the specific item - and at having lost the time investment, he person goes above the law and beats the hell out of the thief.
The man in question here would never be called a "life addict", a person that takes things too sereously and needs to lighten up because "after all, it was just his time investment that was stolen." Most likely, this man would be told to seek anger counseling.
So, why then is a gamer - having lost an entirely equal time investment to a thief - being called an "addict" who needs to lighten up and realize "its just a game".
Yes, it is a game. However, the time he invests into it is real, and having it taken is infuriating.
(And for the record, I am not promoting stabbing people in anger. I am just refuting that this guy is an addict. He clearly needed to respond differently.)
Between Amazon.com and Gamemusic.com, I don't care that the CDs aren't in brick-and-mortar stores. I probably have a wider available selection online than I could ever see in a store, anyway.
I respect your logic in your statement, but you need to look back at the Cold War to see why a scenario where everyone has "the bomb" is a terrible, terrible thing.
Would you ever tell me that the Cuban Missile Crisis was a result of the reasoned thinking posession of nuclear arms brings? Dear god, no. Because two countries with nukes were at odds, we came hellishly close to obliterating eachother.
A lot of people in this topic seem to be thinking that these people are being paid to have fun in a videogame like so many Americans do on a nightly basis.
That is not true.
These people are being paid to, in videogame speek, "pharm" items and money. To "pharm" something is to mindlessly acquire the item(s) at the expense of any other activity (IE: fun). For example, in World of Warcraft to "pharm" gold (currency) at level 60 for most of these workers means staying in one zone and killing the same type of enemy ("mob") for hours upon hours. Imagine killing the exact same bird in a game for literally 8 hours.
Find bird. Kill bird. Loot bird. Repeat for six hours.
These people are not grouping, questing, raiding, interacting with other players, or doing any of the other activities that make these games fun. They are doing the digital equivalent of screwing bolt #3572 into a car chassis on an assembly line.
Also, beyond that, I have so far seen no mention of the damage these currency sellers do to in-game economies. These companies obliterate game economies with their actions.
For example, Bob wants Super-Item-of-Monster-Slaying, but Super-Item-of-Monster-Slaying costs 5000 gold, and Bob only has 10 gold. So, Bob buys 10,000 gold online. Now Bob is super-rich by in-game standards and decides that he wants Super-Item-of-Monster-Slaying *right now*. So, what does bob do? He offers 10,000 gold to the first person he sees with the item just because he can. The seller, along with every else, realizes he can start selling Super-Item-of-Monster-Slaying for twice the previous price and people will still pay for it.
This begins a downward spiral for the server's economy. People cannot pay the newly doubled price, so some of them pay real money for game money and pay even MORE. The price for goods rapidly increases, and the value of the currency plummets. In the end, players who want to buy anything in-game are forced to pay for fake cash or spend their own hours pharming the money for the horrifically overpriced goods.
Think this is too extreme and won't happen? Check out the Bazaar in Everquest 1; it already has happened.
I would love to see a Commander position implemented for the PVP Battlegrounds in WoW. I am referring to the top-down RTS style view that some other games (ie. Savage) have implemented allowing one person to coordinate the players below.
I think this would be perfect for the Battlegrounds considering how disorganized the average players are when left to their own devices. Not to mention that, being Blizzard, I am sure they could get it right without too much difficulty.
Does anyone agree that this would be incredible fun, or do you like your MMOs and RTSs separate?
As a frequent airplane traveller and lover of handheld gaming, the NDS concerns me. I know any device which emits a signal (wireless devices, cell phones espcially) are BANNED for usage on airplanes because they can interfear with the airplane's equipment.
Apparently, the issue is sereous enough that the Nokia N-Gage includes a special "airplane" mode that will not emit any such signals.
Back to the DS, using it on airplanes worries me. I do not think you can turn off the wireless, and last I checked it was constantly checking around itself for the presence of other DSs (IE: Even when single player gaming, it will occasionally send out a signal). This news that the NDS has shielding problems only worries me further - this discounting the fact that I am developing a fear of flying the more I travel. =(
I know that when I fly I can avoid using the DS if it is a problem, but could that ten year old sitting in the back row with no knowledge of these kinds of things end up interfering with the crew - or possibly crashing the plane?
I'm worried, and I hope someone more tech savvy can give me advice. Can or should I use the DS on a plane? Can I use the wireless multiplayer on a plane? Is it enough of an issue that the masses should be instructed NOT to use these on airplanes? Would the problem, if it exists, be eliminated by turning off the wireless abilities of the DS or will the shielding problems still be an issue?
Actually, this was already possible with the GameBoy Advance and GameBoy Advance SP. However, the DS has significantly more RAM to hold the games.
Also, don't forget that the cart-less play feature only works with certain games.
Stupid? Are you kidding? What you have described is absolute genious - they have managed to ride a product for six years in an industry where remaining on top for six months is quite a feat.
Their success is no accident, it is a direct result of intelligence in the company.
Slashdot Mirror
I find it disheartening that young gamers feel the need to find a single console and lock onto it with a religious fervor. We're all gamers, we all enjoy the same hobby, but a large part of the community spends its time decrying everyone else.
The only reason I can think of that this happens, immaturity aside, is that young gamers must rely on their parents to buy consoles and their parents probably limit them to one console of choice because of price. This may give the kid a need to prove to himself and others that he got the very best console possible and made the best decision, because if he didn't make the best decision he'll never be able to buy the other console(s) and fix the problem.
Too bad they can't just relax and enjoy the different experiences offered by all the consoles.
I ask many of these relative to WoW. This should suprise nobody, as any MMO hoping to compete with WoW should liberally compare itself with - though not necessarily model itself after - WoW.
1.) PvP:
- a.WAR seems to have a PvP focus. Is it possible to focus primarily on PvP and earn enough EXP from PvP so that I will not be forced to "grind up" *for* PvP like players are forced to do in WoW?
- b. In WoW, there are two clear channels of play: PvP and PvE, and PvE must be done to be competative in PvP. What kind of effort will I need to put into PvE to be competative in PvP? I ask this for the players who, like myself, do not want to put anything more than minimal time into PvE because we prefer PvP.
- c. Will PvP be balanced with items, levels/skills, or player skill in mind? IE: Who would win in a fight, the player with the most skill, the best gear, or the highest levels and in-game skills? Again, with WoW as an example, levels and gear are very clearly more important than actual player skill, which I find extremely damaging toward gameplay. Having to mindlessly acquire in-game stuff (I won't even say earn, because earning implies a skill investment as well as the MMO-standard time investment) to play the part of the game I actually like without constanly losing really, really sucks.
- d. What will make PvP in your game different from PvP in other MMOs, again, notably WoW. Will you implement Warhammer's gameplay depth (formations, terrain, etc) to WAR?
- e. How will you address the weaknesses of PvP in today's MMOs. IE: Characters bunnyhopping to avoid enemy meelee and spells, generic "press auto attack and wait" no-player-skill meelee, etc.
2.) Customization:
- a. What kind of UI system are you implementing? I've been critical of WoW here, but I must say that their extremely robust UI modding system is simply excellent and one of the best features of the game.
- b. To many people, part of the appeal of the Warhammer tabletop game is being able to customize your units and create "your" army. Will this , or anything similar, be implemented in WAR? Custom armor color schemes/logos, custom guild banners, etc, all spring to mind as possibilities.
3.) MMO General:
- a. What, if any, MMO conventions will you be breaking? Nobody wants to see gimmicks, but there are some ideas that have struck me as being very good. IE: Allowing players to join more than one guild at a time instead of locking them into a single community of players.
- b. What else do you want us to know about WAR, and why should we play it? I can visit your website for your generic PR pitch, so give us some personal opinions, strenghts and weaknesses of the game, etc, not the usual stuff.
4.) The Most Important Question to Me:
- I want your game to actually feel like the cutscenes available on your website. I do not want to watch these visceral and intense CG videos only to find combat in your game is just more of the same that I've grown tired of months ago. Will combat feel like the videos, or will it be sterile MMO combat?
Don't bail on the PC as a gaming platform over this, just buy from the dependable studios/publishers who put out consistently fun, high quality, and bullshit-free software.
Though opinions vary, I personally will suggest Valve and Blizzard as two companies deserving our support. Lets show the EAs of the world that we will continue to game, but we will not tolerate this crap. If enough people send their dollars elsewhere EA will be forced to change - to that end, tell all your buddies (especially those who don't keep up on gaming news as much) to avoid EA.
This game is excellent for non-musicians. I am not a musician, but I love to play Guitar Hero. It is really all about timing, not actual guitar skill. They just put a rhythm game in a Rock 'n' Roll setting. I highly reccomend you try this game.
What pisses me off about this is not that they're investigating and scapegoating videogames, I am used to that. In addition, I think they won't find much of interest.
What pisses me off is that 90 million goddamn dollars is about to be shit away for no good reason. What a waste...
Then why is the PC not dead from lackluster user made games? The fact of the matter is that, while many amature games are crap, the crap will be avoided by most people. They will find the good stuff and stick with it. The games that crash/kill your console will not achieve many downloads.
Heck, take a look at the Xbox 1. It has a thriving homebrew scene. Xbox Media Center alone is a reason to buy and mod an Xbox. In fact, its BETTER than the crap on the 360 that is supposed to offer the same functionality. These amatures have produced better code than Microsoft.
I say fling the console doors wide open.
I think the people so hotly protesting Rockstar are missing a very important point.
Videogames are not universally meant for children.
In fact, as the people who were the first to really get into videogames grow, the maturity level of the games themselves seems to be growing, too.
These protestors seem to think that any and all videogames are intended to end up in the hands of children. I believe they would protest ANY game not suitable for a young child; GTA is just unlucky (lucky? - free press) enough to be the current scapegoat.
Why is it difficult to realize that these violent games are not intended for youth any more than rated R movies?
Sorry about the formatting, I always forget to change it from HTML to "Plain Old Text".
One thing I just don't get is this. The game features violence left and right. You can blow away cops, hookers, random pedestrians. You can DRIVE OVER people for FUN. You can engage in all the wanton destruction and mayhem you could desire and parents are fine with their kids being exposed to it all. But the minute there might be a little sex in the game parents FLIP THE FUCK OUT. Where the fuck are the priorities of the average parent? ...
Then again, upon thinking about it a little more I suppose its understandable. After all, one day their kids might be mowing down pedestrians with an assault rifle, but they'll never have sexual experiences. Nope. Never.
God damn I hate stupid people.
(And let it be noted that, despite the first paragraph, I have nothing against violent games. In fact, I'm off to play Battlefield 2 right now.)
I fail to see why the idea of gamers being addicted materializes in this situation.
Lets say some guy spends an amount of time equal to that required to obtain the "dragon saber" at a real job. He uses the money he earned to buy something he wants. For argument's sake, lets say an iPod.
His iPod is then stolen. In his rage at having both been violated in his personal effects - regardless of the specific item - and at having lost the time investment, he person goes above the law and beats the hell out of the thief.
The man in question here would never be called a "life addict", a person that takes things too sereously and needs to lighten up because "after all, it was just his time investment that was stolen." Most likely, this man would be told to seek anger counseling.
So, why then is a gamer - having lost an entirely equal time investment to a thief - being called an "addict" who needs to lighten up and realize "its just a game".
Yes, it is a game. However, the time he invests into it is real, and having it taken is infuriating.
(And for the record, I am not promoting stabbing people in anger. I am just refuting that this guy is an addict. He clearly needed to respond differently.)
Between Amazon.com and Gamemusic.com, I don't care that the CDs aren't in brick-and-mortar stores. I probably have a wider available selection online than I could ever see in a store, anyway.
I respect your logic in your statement, but you need to look back at the Cold War to see why a scenario where everyone has "the bomb" is a terrible, terrible thing.
Would you ever tell me that the Cuban Missile Crisis was a result of the reasoned thinking posession of nuclear arms brings? Dear god, no. Because two countries with nukes were at odds, we came hellishly close to obliterating eachother.
I want to leave off with this thought:
M.A.D. - Mutually Assured Destruction
A lot of people in this topic seem to be thinking that these people are being paid to have fun in a videogame like so many Americans do on a nightly basis.
That is not true.
These people are being paid to, in videogame speek, "pharm" items and money. To "pharm" something is to mindlessly acquire the item(s) at the expense of any other activity (IE: fun). For example, in World of Warcraft to "pharm" gold (currency) at level 60 for most of these workers means staying in one zone and killing the same type of enemy ("mob") for hours upon hours. Imagine killing the exact same bird in a game for literally 8 hours.
Find bird.
Kill bird.
Loot bird.
Repeat for six hours.
These people are not grouping, questing, raiding, interacting with other players, or doing any of the other activities that make these games fun. They are doing the digital equivalent of screwing bolt #3572 into a car chassis on an assembly line.
Also, beyond that, I have so far seen no mention of the damage these currency sellers do to in-game economies. These companies obliterate game economies with their actions.
For example, Bob wants Super-Item-of-Monster-Slaying, but Super-Item-of-Monster-Slaying costs 5000 gold, and Bob only has 10 gold. So, Bob buys 10,000 gold online. Now Bob is super-rich by in-game standards and decides that he wants Super-Item-of-Monster-Slaying *right now*. So, what does bob do? He offers 10,000 gold to the first person he sees with the item just because he can. The seller, along with every else, realizes he can start selling Super-Item-of-Monster-Slaying for twice the previous price and people will still pay for it.
This begins a downward spiral for the server's economy. People cannot pay the newly doubled price, so some of them pay real money for game money and pay even MORE. The price for goods rapidly increases, and the value of the currency plummets. In the end, players who want to buy anything in-game are forced to pay for fake cash or spend their own hours pharming the money for the horrifically overpriced goods.
Think this is too extreme and won't happen? Check out the Bazaar in Everquest 1; it already has happened.
I would love to see a Commander position implemented for the PVP Battlegrounds in WoW. I am referring to the top-down RTS style view that some other games (ie. Savage) have implemented allowing one person to coordinate the players below. I think this would be perfect for the Battlegrounds considering how disorganized the average players are when left to their own devices. Not to mention that, being Blizzard, I am sure they could get it right without too much difficulty. Does anyone agree that this would be incredible fun, or do you like your MMOs and RTSs separate?
As a frequent airplane traveller and lover of handheld gaming, the NDS concerns me. I know any device which emits a signal (wireless devices, cell phones espcially) are BANNED for usage on airplanes because they can interfear with the airplane's equipment.
Apparently, the issue is sereous enough that the Nokia N-Gage includes a special "airplane" mode that will not emit any such signals.
Back to the DS, using it on airplanes worries me. I do not think you can turn off the wireless, and last I checked it was constantly checking around itself for the presence of other DSs (IE: Even when single player gaming, it will occasionally send out a signal). This news that the NDS has shielding problems only worries me further - this discounting the fact that I am developing a fear of flying the more I travel. =(
I know that when I fly I can avoid using the DS if it is a problem, but could that ten year old sitting in the back row with no knowledge of these kinds of things end up interfering with the crew - or possibly crashing the plane?
I'm worried, and I hope someone more tech savvy can give me advice. Can or should I use the DS on a plane? Can I use the wireless multiplayer on a plane? Is it enough of an issue that the masses should be instructed NOT to use these on airplanes? Would the problem, if it exists, be eliminated by turning off the wireless abilities of the DS or will the shielding problems still be an issue?
Thank you for your responses.
Actually, this was already possible with the GameBoy Advance and GameBoy Advance SP. However, the DS has significantly more RAM to hold the games. Also, don't forget that the cart-less play feature only works with certain games.
Are there any new Mutators or other things that are in the retail ECE and not in the download?
Stupid? Are you kidding? What you have described is absolute genious - they have managed to ride a product for six years in an industry where remaining on top for six months is quite a feat. Their success is no accident, it is a direct result of intelligence in the company.