Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Panderans.

Ha, that made my day. It's about time this game kicked the bucket.

Out of intrest Mel as I've seen you note a few times you play other MMO's, what are you actual issues with it?

I'm just wondering, as I've played/tried WoW, WaR, EQ2, CoH/V, Champions Online, Guild Wars and Lineage 2.

As a MMO player I don't see a whole huge difference between any of them, (In the same way as a fps fan I don't see a whole lot of difference between Halo and other shooters when you look at the basics) subject matter maybe in the extremes of Superhero v's fantasy, as your powers feel slightly different.
However at their heart they all play in a similar fashion and WoW seems to me to play the best. This is mainly due to six years of polish, regardless of other factors, quite a few of the MMO's above I noted are fun to play, but are sluggish and not as responsive as WoW when playing.

I can get disliking WoW for story changes, its look and a various number of cosmetic reasons, but for the fundemental gameplay of it, its pretty hard to beat, and this is why I've seen many folks go off an try new MMO's and then come back to WoW at a later date.

I'm just wondering how you can say its not a good MMO with a straight face. I mean fair enough if you hate it, you don't need to ever play it, but its a pretty damn good MMO gameplay wise, and like it or loathe it I think the subscription numbers portray that.

Also as a example I can't stand Half Life, I feel the concept is a straight rip off of Doom with Aliens instead of Demons, not a fan of the look and wouldn't play it after trying a demo. However I'd never suggest its not a good shooter, it plays well, It just not a game that gels with me for some reason, so would never get it.

Manchu wrote:Panderans.

Ha, that made my day. It's about time this game kicked the bucket.

To be fair though Manchu, thats never going to happen, even if I and a load of others walk away tomorrow, the core Hardcore/Casual fans of this games means it will run for years, the subs can half and Blizz will still happily run the game, its made them shedloads of money, and even if it did ever get to critical numbers, they'd just adopt a free to play model.

I think anyone hoping for the death of the game, are waiting for the apocalypse to happen, as right now, thats more likely than Blizzard canning the game. If you listen to Metzen and others at Blizzcon just gone, they are seeing multiple expansions to come. Hell I think my assumption that the game would end when they get to lvl 100 is wrong now going on hints they are making.

Now obviously saying that this game will have to end at some point, well you'd think, however I'm starting to think that could five or six years away, if not longer, as long as Blizz keeps updating the look with each update, there isn't even a need for a WoW 2, which is what I thought would eventually happen when I first got into the game in 2006.

They noted that the Pandaran for example have a better face than any of the races with something like double or triple the equivilent bone shapes under the skin. The art department are already planning to roll it out to effect all the other races at some point, they aren't in a rush, but its on the cards. So slowly the game upgrades from underneath.

Slarg232 wrote:

Soladrin wrote:

bombboy1252 wrote:

Doctadeth wrote:Sorry blizzard, but after 5 years of these banal updates to WOW....I still don't give a rats ass. WOW was touted as the first ever good MMORPG.

Nope, thats still Richard Garret's Ultima Online, and Everquest to me.

Naaaaaaah, that goes to RuneScape.... /sarcasm

Ragnarok Online..

"run's for the hills"

You guys have TERRIBLE ways of spelling Shadowbane.....

You know, Shadowbane was good. For the first 3 months. Then the game kind of broke itself. Awful awful coding.....

I went back and checked out Cataclysm not too long ago. The new areas looked great, some of the quests were fun, but pretty much as soon as I got my level maxed I got bored and quit again. The endgame stuff is just boring as hell because raiding is stupid. The leveling up process was fun when the game was new, now it's just old and stale.

That said, I still think it's a great game. Polished and well done and it's the most popular ever for a reason. But, for me anyway, I can only play a video game for so long before I just can't anymore.

I'm sure I'll go back and see all the new panda stuff, just to check it out. But I don't expect to stick around too long.

Aye, I took four months off earlier this year, it does that to me on occasion as well. Doesn't help I'm not much of a raider either.

I do enjoy leveling alts mind, hence being desperate for Blizz to add some kind of additional Character slots system, even if it was paid for per slot by the time Mists launches.

I also find that my guild brings me back more so than the endgame, and like with my 360, I enjoy collecting achievements. My main is a pet hunter for example, she has 159 companion pets as of last count, so yeah, I suppose you get what you want out of it.

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:Out of intrest Mel as I've seen you note a few times you play other MMO's, what are you actual issues with it?

I think it'd save time if I said what problems I didn't have with it. Which would be a fantasy setting, mostly. If I had to list specifics, then the graphical style of the characters is horrendous, the storyline is banal, the visual design of the game world itseif is uninspired and uninteresting, and the gameplay gets a similar reaction with its grindfest style, though in that region at least it's not the worst in the MMO genre (Rising Force Online is the worst grindfest I've ever played, though that at least had more interesting visuals, which are important when your'e playing a game for hours and hours upon end).

Mel is a person of strong opinion, she either loves a game or hates it.

WoW falls into the latter with battlefield three and starcraft.

corpsesarefun wrote:Mel is a person of strong opinion, she either loves a game or hates it.

She also has a habit of looking at things as they are and taking for granted they weren't always like that. I hate the monstrosity WoW has become as much as the next guy, but WoW became the King of MMO's oh so many years ago for a reason and it wasn't because it 'wasn't good.'

LordofHats wrote:She also has a habit of looking at things as they are and taking for granted they weren't always like that. I hate the monstrosity WoW has become as much as the next guy, but WoW became the King of MMO's oh so many years ago for a reason and it wasn't because it 'wasn't good.'

... dude, I was playing MMOs before WoW was ever released. You don't know what the feth your'e talking about if you think that I didn't see WoW back when it began.

It didn't impress me back then, either.

LordofHats wrote: hate the monstrosity WoW has become as much as the next guy, but WoW became the King of MMO's oh so many years ago for a reason and it wasn't because it 'wasn't good.'

You're right.

It became the "King of MMOs" for three major reasons:
1) Accessibility. When WoW came out, its competition was games which required high end system specs. While playing EverQuest from launch to Shadows of Luclin, I had to upgrade my PC every time an expansion launched. When I played WoW from a year or so after launch until Cataclysm--I upgraded once every two expansions.
2) Ease of play. WoW was very forgiving in terms of gameplay. There were mechanics that did not completely and utterly screw you over anytime you died on a PvP server. They also were set up so that recovering from wipes during raids(and organizing said raids) was fairly easy.
3) A prior existing playerbase. If WoW had launched cold, with no Warcraft or Starcraft or Diablo I/II playerbase to build from--I can almost guarantee that we would have seen it flop. When it launched, it was a bugridden mess whose servers crashed every other two days. Now, it's far more stable but there are still the occasional hiccups.

Pretty much. Though it was hardly the first to have the first two, the third one really clinched it.

Dreadwinter wrote:

Slarg232 wrote:

Soladrin wrote:

bombboy1252 wrote:

Doctadeth wrote:Sorry blizzard, but after 5 years of these banal updates to WOW....I still don't give a rats ass. WOW was touted as the first ever good MMORPG.

Nope, thats still Richard Garret's Ultima Online, and Everquest to me.

Naaaaaaah, that goes to RuneScape.... /sarcasm

Ragnarok Online..

"run's for the hills"

You guys have TERRIBLE ways of spelling Shadowbane.....

You know, Shadowbane was good. For the first 3 months. Then the game kind of broke itself. Awful awful coding.....

Blashpemy. I just started playing when it was F2P with all the expansions, and I had an absolute blast on that game, my Mage Channeler whooped EVERYONE'S arse

Wooo Raganarok Online... my first MMORPG.

Good days, 2 vs 81 players is awesome!

LunaHound wrote:Wooo Raganarok Online... my first MMORPG.

Good days, 2 vs 81 players is awesome!

My Channeler doesn't think that sounds fair.






There's only eighty one of them....

Also don't forget, folks have short memories, every large MMO that has launched in the past three years has suffered from the exact problems WoW had at launch.

The problem is apart from the odd hiccup, WoW is now extremely stable, and folks aren't giving new MMO's a chance to settle.

No one either played, or knows how bad WoW was at launch, so they don't think its normal. A few MMO's fell straight into life support when they deserved a better crack, and player base.

I'm hoping ToR does very well myself, otherwise potential MMO's that might be awesome in the future might never even leave the ideas board.

I played WoW for 3 years. The only hiccups are the ones during expansion day server reboot.

Other then that, Blizzard offered excellent stable game time and unrivaled ingame support.

Hey look its the world of kun-fu video game omg! I can't believe the failure involved!

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:Also don't forget, folks have short memories, every large MMO that has launched in the past three years has suffered from the exact problems WoW had at launch.

The problem is apart from the odd hiccup, WoW is now extremely stable, and folks aren't giving new MMO's a chance to settle.

No one either played, or knows how bad WoW was at launch, so they don't think its normal. A few MMO's fell straight into life support when they deserved a better crack, and player base.

Not only that, but the behemoth also times their expansions (or expansion related content) to coincide with the launches of these 'major' MMOs.

Warhammer Online launched? The Wrath talent overhaul launched as well.
Age of Conan launched? Burning Crusade launched the Sunwell content(if I'm remembering right, I had taken a break from WoW and the drama of my guild at the time).
Now, with The Old Republic launching this year--Pandaren, Blizzard's ace in the hole are launching.

I'm hoping ToR does very well myself, otherwise potential MMO's that might be awesome in the future might never even leave the ideas board.

I'll be playing The Old Republic, no ifs ands or buts. I think EA learned from Warhammer Online's failure, and BioWare was partially involved in the game as well. It's why they're selling a much smaller run of copies than they normally would for the launch of a major game like this.

How is Bioware only partially involved in ToR?

I should have clarified better.

BioWare was involved in Warhammer Online, partially.

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:I've played/tried WoW, WaR, EQ2, CoH/V, Champions Online, Guild Wars and Lineage 2.

As a MMO player I don't see a whole huge difference between any of them, (In the same way as a fps fan I don't see a whole lot of difference between Halo and other shooters when you look at the basics) subject matter maybe in the extremes of Superhero v's fantasy, as your powers feel slightly different.
However at their heart they all play in a similar fashion and WoW seems to me to play the best. This is mainly due to six years of polish, regardless of other factors, quite a few of the MMO's above I noted are fun to play, but are sluggish and not as responsive as WoW when playing.

I can get disliking WoW for story changes, its look and a various number of cosmetic reasons, but for the fundemental gameplay of it, its pretty hard to beat, and this is why I've seen many folks go off an try new MMO's and then come back to WoW at a later date.

First of all, CoH is the only game on that list that was released pre-WoW and wasn't later changed to accomodate the casual MMO gamer surge that WoW created (even though it has always been easier and more user-friendly than WoW, with a much more singular focus on combat). Every other game you mentioned was influenced way too much by World of Warcraft and it's success (even EQ2 fell victim to this, post release), hence their similarities.

It's obvious you've never played a good sandbox MMO with open-ended character development (back before they were also disfigured by WoW), wherein you can actually affect the world and the way other players experience the game to a great degree, instead of running through set content and chasing your next level or piece of equipment. If you had, you might see why so many people call WoW a bad game. It's not because it's not responsive, or because the gameplay sucks, but because it doesn't have features that make it a world, with visible returns on your investment of time and effort and an actual sense of community. WoW is hardly a second life, it's merely a pretty grind (where you strive to achieve the same goals as everyone else) that has destroyed nearly MMO released before it (and after) with it's success. Now sandbox MMO gamers are forced to play theme park MMOs if they want to get their fix, and it's nowhere near as gratifying to upgrade your character as it is to shape the world and your place in it.

Hopefully this explains most of the WoW hate you see. People miss what the genre (mostly) used to be before WoW, as they have been left with no respite from WoW clones (aside from EVE, which is obtuse to say the least).

inb4 people crying about Pandarens that have been official lore since WC3...

oh w8, way 2 l8

/facepalm


I am somewhat tempted to play again when it comes out, but only if they fix level 60 or 70 PvP.

Chrysaor686 wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:I've played/tried WoW, WaR, EQ2, CoH/V, Champions Online, Guild Wars and Lineage 2.

As a MMO player I don't see a whole huge difference between any of them, (In the same way as a fps fan I don't see a whole lot of difference between Halo and other shooters when you look at the basics) subject matter maybe in the extremes of Superhero v's fantasy, as your powers feel slightly different.
However at their heart they all play in a similar fashion and WoW seems to me to play the best. This is mainly due to six years of polish, regardless of other factors, quite a few of the MMO's above I noted are fun to play, but are sluggish and not as responsive as WoW when playing.

I can get disliking WoW for story changes, its look and a various number of cosmetic reasons, but for the fundemental gameplay of it, its pretty hard to beat, and this is why I've seen many folks go off an try new MMO's and then come back to WoW at a later date.

First of all, CoH is the only game on that list that was released pre-WoW and wasn't later changed to accomodate the casual MMO gamer surge that WoW created (even though it has always been easier and more user-friendly than WoW, with a much more singular focus on combat). Every other game you mentioned was influenced way too much by World of Warcraft and it's success (even EQ2 fell victim to this, post release), hence their similarities.

It's obvious you've never played a good sandbox MMO with open-ended character development (back before they were also disfigured by WoW), wherein you can actually affect the world and the way other players experience the game to a great degree, instead of running through set content and chasing your next level or piece of equipment. If you had, you might see why so many people call WoW a bad game. It's not because it's not responsive, or because the gameplay sucks, but because it doesn't have features that make it a world, with visible returns on your investment of time and effort and an actual sense of community. WoW is hardly a second life, it's merely a pretty grind (where you strive to achieve the same goals as everyone else) that has destroyed nearly MMO released before it (and after) with it's success. Now sandbox MMO gamers are forced to play theme park MMOs if they want to get their fix, and it's nowhere near as gratifying to upgrade your character as it is to shape the world and your place in it.

Hopefully this explains most of the WoW hate you see. People miss what the genre (mostly) used to be before WoW, as they have been left with no respite from WoW clones (aside from EVE, which is obtuse to say the least).

Indeed.

I hate to harken back to it, YET AGAIN, but Shadowbane was all set up on politics. Once you got off of "Noob Island", it was all one hundred percent player interaction.

I have a city, I need materials for it. You people need my land, I need your minerals. I think we can work something out. No? Ok, our nation will just start hangin out near your Mines. Oh, you don't like that, so your going to start shooting my people, "politely"? I think we have a problem....

And then come the city sieges. That's actually how I started a civil war in the game. We were promised resources for our cooperation, didn't receive them, and just quit the field of battle, allowing our "allies" to die like cattle. Caused quite a bit of ruckus, let me tell you. No one had EVER left a city siege mid battle like that.

And this isn't even including the CN, or Chinese Nation, as they called themselves. Bunch of Chinese joined the servers not long after that, told everyone "Hey, your going to play how we want you to play, or we are going to have a problem". Well.... we had a problem. That's about when we had the most fun with the game, to tell the truth. You would be in the woods, roughing up someone who stole a charge's lunch money, when a CN member came on Track, a ceasefire was called and we had an entire group of people roll out and kill them. (Luckily, my brother was never caught stealing from them before, during, and after )

So this is Theme Park versus Sand Box argument, essentially.


I remember territory battles on the PvP server in AC. Acid Walls...Acid Walls everywhere.

I might get this expansion just because I liked "Kung fu panda"

gonna name my character jack black, or JB, or Jables....or something of that nature...

bombboy1252 wrote:I might get this expansion just because I liked "Kung fu panda"

gonna name my character jack black, or JB, or Jables....or something of that nature...

Like every other panda out there?

Ahtman wrote:
I remember territory battles on the PvP server in AC. Acid Walls...Acid Walls everywhere.

I miss AC, and my original Matty robe.

Crap, now I miss Asheron's Call, too. Especially because I was like 14 or 15 when I played, and I must've had ADD cuz I had 10 characters at like level 20. Never got too far in it. It'd probably be tough to go back, at this point, the game has to be insanely top-heavy, and even more bot-infested than it was back in the day. I'm also probably looking at it with rose-colored glasses. I would definitely like a similar sandboxy game with decent PvE and PvP content... like an Asheron's Call 3, I suppose. More of a sequel to AC than AC2 was.

Mn, I've been tempted to go back in to City of Heroes myself, after Going Rogue was released.

Might just do that after the Freedom expansion that's coming out soon.

City of Heroes: Freedom has been out for a few weeks now. You have to pay to access Going Rogue, but once you buy it, you have unlimited access to the content (you are not required to subscribe, in other words).

It still holds up decently. I spent a lot of time in CoH, simply because I enjoyed creating different character concepts. It's probably the most shallow MMO on the market, but what it does, it still does exceedingly well.