I'm looking for a new MMO - one that's PVP, preferably. Does anyone have any suggestions? I'm a pretty hardcore player, so something like D&D online isn't my style, and I didn't like EQ2 when I tried it. Other ideas?
It's not something people hear about.
Oh God don't let them fuck it up. SWG has left me jaded.
If you call yourself a hardcore gamer, Vanguard might be the game for you. It's made by the ex-EQ designers. Tarquinn fucked around with this message on 01-24-2006 at 07:04 AM.
quote:
Vorago said:
EVE Online struck me as a game real hardcore PvPrs could get into personally, might want to ask some of the people on here that have played it for a longer than the demo trial though, heh
It is hardcore PvP.
PvP is pretty much the end game there.
http://www.webzengames.com/Game/Huxley/ Ryuujin fucked around with this message on 01-24-2006 at 09:16 AM.
quote:
Azizza had this to say about pies:
A friend of mine is trying out the Beta of RF online. She really likes it so far but I am not sure when it will be released or anything. It is a Sci-Fi/Fantasy mix and is heavily PvP.
Think Lineage 2. It ends up your typical Asian MMO greindfest for levels, especially past level 40. Deaths also result in random XP loss, with it siding on you losing more XP the closer you are to gaining a level. At higher levels, this can set you back days of XP. You can probably find more extensive opinions around, as many NA folks were in the Korean beta for the game until they banned all NA IPs (getting to be a common occurence these days).
Try Shadowbane! Free trials are like fat chicks they are all over the place.
Horizon is a good waste of time, I mean it.
quote:
OrangeBrand had this to say about the Spice Girls:
Try Shadowbane! Free trials are like fat chicks they are all over the place.
And, like fat chicks, nobody wants to do them.
I've been playing on and off for more than a year, it's pretty spiff. I just get burnt out by playing one game too much though, which is why I'll let my subscription lapse from time to time.
quote:
Densetsu had this to say about Captain Planet:
And, like fat chicks, nobody wants to do them.
Well, if you look at all the fatty porn in the interweb, there has to be a market... [insertgreenterrifiedsmileyhere] Tarquinn fucked around with this message on 01-25-2006 at 02:21 AM.
1) Combat is twitch based, and it handles a lot more like an FPS with lots of inertia than a standard spaceship shooter.
2) There's no AFK/Macro mining here. You shoot an asteroid with a mining beam it heats up, and the hotter it is the hard it is to extract anything from it.
3) There's no "crafting" in this game. Mining and selling ore is just another way of making money (though selling ore to the same station over and over again drives down the price they'll buy it from you).
4) Too bad there's no "external" view of your ship except for when you launch. No portraits of your character either. All you do is hang out at a station between missions.
Oh, and the demo time limit is 8 HOURS! I'll have to admit that was how long it took for me to want an account, though... -_-
quote:
OrangeBrand had this to say about Punky Brewster:
The original Warhammer was going to try and make PvP perma-death.
Which would mean there'd be very little character advancement in the game.
I don't see how perma death could EVER be a good thing in an MMO.
Willias fucked around with this message on 01-25-2006 at 11:09 AM.
That being said, staying true to the thread, I'm personally looking forward to Vanguard, and I plan on checking DDO out if it doesn't bomb after release.
quote:
Willias wrote this then went back to looking for porn:
That being said, staying true to the thread, I'm personally looking forward to Vanguard, and I plan on checking DDO out if it doesn't bomb after release.
DDO and then Vanguard? You're a freaking masochist aren't you?
quote:
And I was all like 'Oh yeah?' and Talonus was all like:
DDO and then Vanguard? You're a freaking masochist aren't you?
Not really.
Lyinar Ka`Bael, Piney Fresh Druidess - Luclin
quote:
OrangeBrand had this to say about Optimus Prime:
The original Warhammer was going to try and make PvP perma-death.
Yea, thank god they took the game out of the hands of those clowns. I'm glad Mythic took the reigns.
-H
quote:
Lyinar Ka`Bael had this to say about (_|_):
Vanguard is apparently going to be the Mecca of Hardcore Gaming and Brad McQuaid the new Messiah, so if you like hardcore, that's apparently the game for you.
EQ was never particularly good when McQuaid was at the helm, either.
WoW will be on top for a long, long time to come.
quote:
This insanity brought to you by Mr. Parcelan:
EQ was never particularly good when McQuaid was at the helm, either.
Hence my sarcasm. I see the "niche hardcore" thing lasting six months maybe and then they realize that there's no money in tedium anymore, so they're forced to either redesign some things or die a slow, faltering death.
I don't know how many times on the EQ2 boards I hear about how Vanguard is going to be soooooo much better because it had tedium. Tedium /= challenge and I wish those tards would realize this.
Lyinar Ka`Bael, Piney Fresh Druidess - Luclin
Perma death was not instant as with other PvP games. You would have like 2 knock outs or some thing like that and your character would be dead. This would make personalities a lot more important and make grieving less common.
You had to read it when they had it out. It has been so long and I do it no justice trying to remember it. I personally would love to see a Perma death game. I get tired of the all too common phrase Āmy alt is a so and soĀ or my alt Āthis and thatĀ.
I have been trying this free MMO called Runescape. It isnĀt new or anything, but it is new to me and I have some friends that play it.
Hey and donĀt bag on the fat chicks, you all know youĀve been there at one point in you life.
quote:
Everyone wondered WTF when OrangeBrand wrote:
Perma death was not instant as with other PvP games. You would have like 2 knock outs or some thing like that and your character would be dead. This would make personalities a lot more important and make grieving less common.
Bwahaha. Permanent death making griefing less common? There are people that get there rocks off by messing up other players. They don't just merely take your items like UO, they can now permantly destroy your character. That would make the game griefer central.
quote:Whoever you heard that from is most likely a gigantic biased idiot.
Lyinar Ka`Bael.
Vanguard is apparently going to be the Mecca of Hardcore Gaming and Brad McQuaid the new Messiah, so if you like hardcore, that's apparently the game for you.
McQuaid&Krew knows the money is in casual gamers - that's been obvious for quite some time now. To cater to the hardcore-only would be akin to burning large stacks of Bill Gate's money.
As far as "MECCA OF HARDCORE GAMING", the only confirmed 'hardcore' thing I've heard of is that the game will be ridiculously hard to solo in at higher levels/it will be easier to group and progress. Though I am interested to hear what the other confirmed mechanics of the game that cause you to gush such a statement are.
quote:
Blackened had this to say about Punky Brewster:
McQuaid&Krew knows the money is in casual gamers - that's been obvious for quite some time now. To cater to the hardcore-only would be akin to burning large stacks of Bill Gate's money.
Oh yeah, he really wants to target the casual gamers. He posted this a couple months back.
Too lazy to find the original post in the FOH forum, so I linked to F13 instead.
Oh, and then there's his rant against instancing. I don't see how being against instancing is a good thing for casual players.
Oh, and the crafting system is evil. You have to get gear for crafting, fight trees just to get materials, and it'll take as long to skill up in crafting as it does actual leveling.
Oh, and... I don't think I need to go on. Vanguard is for the hardcore who live to grind.
quote:
There was much rejoicing when Alaan said this:
Bwahaha. Permanent death making griefing less common? There are people that get there rocks off by messing up other players. They don't just merely take your items like UO, they can now permantly destroy your character. That would make the game griefer central.
Yeah exactly. Utopian beliefs that people will "play nice" if given the proper situation is nice, but until video game antics have real life consequences, it'll never happen.
At the core of online games is a desire to "win". "Winning" can be achieved by a variety of means. If you're going to allow player killing at all, then "winning" becomes a matter of prowess in hunting other players. Camping, stalking, whatever.
The only way around that mentality is to largely trivialize it. See, the nonpermanence of death in an online game is in there to not only retain clientele, but to make up for the fact that, despite what the game company is selling the consumer, the game isn't REALLY about them. The EQ story was, to be blunt, about NPC's (Firiona, the Wayfarers, etc) that you helped along. Most games (including everything from the Matrix to WoW) is some variant on that theme. You're either helping your faction, or you're helping a specific NPC achieve their great goal. You're never Aragorn; at best you're one of the Rohirrim. Or Generic_Elf01
So yes you can be one of the soldiers fighting in a war for artifacts (CoH/CoV, DAoC, etc), for factional control (Planetside) or something similar, and you can develop that PvP prowess, but for the losers, the defeat is never TOO bitter. You can live to fight another day when you die an ignominious death while AFK having a wee.
sigpic courtesy of This Guy, original modified by me
quote:
Talonus had this to say about Reading Rainbow:
Oh, and then there's his rant against instancing. I don't see how being against instancing is a good thing for casual players.
Yeah me either. It's worked nicely in the games I've seen it in.
sigpic courtesy of This Guy, original modified by me
Lyinar Ka`Bael, Piney Fresh Druidess - Luclin
I'm still waiting on a North American Front Mission Online release confirmation Skaw fucked around with this message on 01-28-2006 at 03:48 AM.
quote:Oh. You must be Lyinar's idiot friend. You link to three things (forum posts) and claim tht Vanguard will be, beyond doubt, the hardcore experience for people who can't think of anything else to do but grind? It's almost like you're going purposely out of way to only assume the worst you can. I know already I shouldn't even bother clarifying and expanding on my point, because you're just going to roll your eyes and continue believing that McQuaid is only capable of an evil and surefire failure. However, I figure I can give it one go and then just stop.
Talonus.
[/URL]Oh yeah, he really wants to target the casual gamers. He posted this a couple months back.Oh, and then there's his rant against instancing. I don't see how being against instancing is a good thing for casual players.
Oh, and the crafting system is evil. You have to get gear for crafting, fight trees just to get materials, and it'll take as long to skill up in crafting as it does actual leveling.
Oh, and... I don't think I need to go on. Vanguard is for the hardcore who live to grind.
First of all, I never said he was going to target casual gamers. Lyinar was right, however. Brad is hoping to appeal to a certain type of player, which he dubs the 'core' player. Of course, in your minds, that can only translate out to "hardcore players", but that's to be expected. Anyway, that in no way disproves what I originally said about Sigil knowing where the money is. In fact, McQuaid himself admitted that hardcore players were the minority in the very statement you posted.
Now, let's go back to the posts you linked to that attempted to support your point that, clearly, Vanguard will not be for the weak of mind for it is doomed to be the hardest hardcore that ever hardcored and casual players might as well just die.
Right off the bat, the first thing you link to is McQuaid discussing what he hopes his target playergroup will be. And for those here who can actually read and comprehend, you'll (again) note that Brad is clearly aiming for a specific group of players - one that might not be even what you think: "I'm not here to criticize Blizzard's plan (nor am I even privy to it), but I can say what ours is, and it's to keep the average MMOG gamer around for a long time." So remind me how 'average' clearly reads out to be 'hardcore'?
The second thing you linked to, here, however surely disproves that any casual gamer looking to enjoy a new experience might as well just light themselves on fire instead of picking up Vanguard. After all, what better way to scare away any casual player than locking the only proven way to create/balance dungeons completely out of the game? Obviously, McQuaid is a madman at the helm. "No instancing" might as well read, "We have no idea what we're doing here bllarghhhghh". I guess any core (and by core I don't mean average or niche or casual gamer I mean HARDCORE ONLY) player who still forces themselves to play this game will undoubtedly be forced to suffer through EQ1 era-type dungeons! There is no other way.
Or wait, maybe just because you and all your Vanguard-hating circlejerk buddies (I just wanted to say, 'circlejerk') can't see why instances might be a bad thing doesn't mean they don't have something else in mind? Well, actually, they do. A devolper for Vanguard has personally explained to me in the past how they plan to keep dungeon content balanced and linear and dynamic and social as well. Now, I'm honestly not sure if Brad has posted how dungeons are going to be set up - and I am 90% certain he has, but I'm not going to sludge through the FoH forums in an attempt to find it so I could link it to you ignorant masses. You'd just end up spending another ten minutes scoffing under your breath as you read it anyway, and I just don't see the need for that.
I'd also like to take a moment to point out that McQuaid's instancing theories are less on why 'instancing is evil' and more on how they effect the virtual gaming world/society and in what ways. Unless you're wearing your "I'm a jaded whoreface" t-shirt.
This part would be where I discuss how ugly you are for stating your third link (here) as another testiment to the unholy hardcore shrine that is Vanguard... However, not only do you sound like a whiny bitch while stating (again) your personal opinion (that clearly equals fact [look more sarcasm!]) on the dastardly mechanics of crafting that lead me to think you're a gigantic wuss regardless of anything you say and you're hardly enough of a player to "suffer" through a game like WoW, but there's also the fact that the ideas discussed in that thread are nearly half a year old. That is, half a year old in a game that is still in development. So, all I can give you on that unshaking foundation of truth is a 'way to go' in a very mocking tone because, ultimately, you're ugly.
And now I tire of pointing out flaws that should have been obvious to even you (but yet quickly accepted by Lyinar as undeniable facts), so I'll just stop and let you say whatever dumb things you wish to say so I can quickly reply with the fact that you're stupid.
quote:
Skaw stopped staring at Deedlit long enough to write:
Dunno if it'll get a North American release, but Fantasy Earth looks pretty good. It's kind of like DAoC meets RTS. Different Kingdoms with RvR-style PvP, with constructable bases/towns/castle fortresses.I'm still waiting on a North American Front Mission Online release confirmation
I'm not sure I like the idea of an MMORTS in that vein. I don't think there's a clean way to implement persistant bases and land control without requiring the user to constantly log in to baby sit things.
Personally, I think a large scale metagame works much better. Anyone who's tried Boneyards or Phoenix Worx for Total Annihilation knows what I'm talking about.
-H Hellbender fucked around with this message on 01-28-2006 at 05:51 AM.
quote:
Blackened had this to say about Optimus Prime:
Oh. You must be Lyinar's idiot friend. You link to three things (forum posts) and claim tht Vanguard will be, beyond doubt, the hardcore experience for people who can't think of anything else to do but grind?
Two of the three contain actual dev posts and one is a link to a quote to a link of a dev post. I don't claim that's all I can find either. That's all I cared to find offhand.
quote:
It's almost like you're going purposely out of way to only assume the worst you can. I know already I shouldn't even bother clarifying and expanding on my point, because you're just going to roll your eyes and continue believing that McQuaid is only capable of an evil and surefire failure. However, I figure I can give it one go and then just stop.
I'm go out of my way to assume the worst about a MMO these days. Vanguard doesn't get that honor. As far as McQuaid goes, he has a hit game once. Of course, I'd still question if most of the success wasn't based on timing, rather than design (blah blah insert dikimud comments here).
quote:
First of all, I never said he was going to target casual gamers. Lyinar was right, however. Brad is hoping to appeal to a certain type of player, which he dubs the 'core' player. Of course, in your minds, that can only translate out to "hardcore players", but that's to be expected. Anyway, that in no way disproves what I originally said about Sigil knowing where the money is. In fact, McQuaid himself admitted that hardcore players were the minority in the very statement you posted.
"McQuaid&Krew knows the money is in casual gamers". Sounds like you said one of their target crowds will be casual gamers. And I don't know how you can infer that the "core" players aren't hardcore. Maybe you missed the part where he thinks players want more of an old school grind? Since when do casual players want the grind?
quote:
Now, let's go back to the posts you linked to that attempted to support your point that, clearly, Vanguard will not be for the weak of mind for it is doomed to be the hardest hardcore that ever hardcored and casual players might as well just die.
Bah, putting words in my mouth. Casual gamers might as well be masochists who want to frustrate themselves.
[qupte]Right off the bat, the first thing you link to is McQuaid discussing what he hopes his target playergroup will be. And for those here who can actually read and comprehend, you'll (again) note that Brad is clearly aiming for a specific group of players - one that might not be even what you think: "I'm not here to criticize Blizzard's plan (nor am I even privy to it), but I can say what ours is, and it's to keep the average MMOG gamer around for a long time." So remind me how 'average' clearly reads out to be 'hardcore'?[/quote]
In other words, put players on a damn grindy treadmill. Who doesn't link treadmills afterall?
quote:
The second thing you linked to, here, however surely disproves that any casual gamer looking to enjoy a new experience might as well just light themselves on fire instead of picking up Vanguard. After all, what better way to scare away any casual player than locking the only proven way to create/balance dungeons completely out of the game? Obviously, McQuaid is a madman at the helm. "No instancing" might as well read, "We have no idea what we're doing here bllarghhhghh". I guess any core (and by core I don't mean average or niche or casual gamer I mean HARDCORE ONLY) player who still forces themselves to play this game will undoubtedly be forced to suffer through EQ1 era-type dungeons! There is no other way.
Instancing is the friend of the casual player. I really shouldn't have to explain why. Instancing makes life easier on players, because they don't have to compete with others. Do you remember camping a mob? Do you remember having to compete with a bigger guild for any mob? That shit wasn't fun, especially if you had a limited time frame to do so (read: casual gamer). And, please, explain to me how you can have a dungeon that isn't in the style of EQ1 without any instancing?
quote:
Or wait, maybe just because you and all your Vanguard-hating circlejerk buddies (I just wanted to say, 'circlejerk') can't see why instances might be a bad thing doesn't mean they don't have something else in mind?
I don't hate Vanguard. It will serve the purpose of creating a game for the hardcore crowd. Quite frankly, that's a good thing. The more hardcore there are playing that game, the less of them there are to bitch about other games. If Sigil can do a good job with that, good for them I say.
quote:
Well, actually, they do. A devolper for Vanguard has personally explained to me in the past how they plan to keep dungeon content balanced and linear and dynamic and social as well. Now, I'm honestly not sure if Brad has posted how dungeons are going to be set up - and I am 90% certain he has, but I'm not going to sludge through the FoH forums in an attempt to find it so I could link it to you ignorant masses. You'd just end up spending another ten minutes scoffing under your breath as you read it anyway, and I just don't see the need for that.
Again, I don't see how you can do a dungeon that isn't going to encourage whack-a-mole syndrome or camping without having any instancing, as no developer has done so before. Are they planning to not have big boss type monsters, making it pointless to camp for rare loot or something? That's about the only explanation I can think of.
quote:
I'd also like to take a moment to point out that McQuaid's instancing theories are less on why 'instancing is evil' and more on how they effect the virtual gaming world/society and in what ways. Unless you're wearing your "I'm a jaded whoreface" t-shirt.
Saying "instancing is evil" is easier. I'm just lazy. Still, he does not believe in using instancing because it makes the game diverge from being a persistent world.
quote:
This part would be where I discuss how ugly you are for stating your third link (here) as another testiment to the unholy hardcore shrine that is Vanguard... However, not only do you sound like a whiny bitch while stating (again) your personal opinion (that clearly equals fact [look more sarcasm!]) on the dastardly mechanics of crafting that lead me to think you're a gigantic wuss regardless of anything you say and you're hardly enough of a player to "suffer" through a game like WoW, but there's also the fact that the ideas discussed in that thread are nearly half a year old. That is, half a year old in a game that is still in development. So, all I can give you on that unshaking foundation of truth is a 'way to go' in a very mocking tone because, ultimately, you're ugly.
Ok, I mocked it. You do have to get gear specifically for crafting, which is stated in the thread. You will have to fight trees to get materials, which has been stated by beta players. You will have to spend a long time to level up crafting, which is stated in the thread. And please, don't tell me that because the thread is old the design has entirely changed. The design in the thread are consistent with the game in general, and if the crafting design has changed that greatly it says something entirely else about the game.
quote:
And now I tire of pointing out flaws that should have been obvious to even you (but yet quickly accepted by Lyinar as undeniable facts), so I'll just stop and let you say whatever dumb things you wish to say so I can quickly reply with the fact that you're stupid.
I'll save you the trouble. I'm stupid. You're stupid too if you think Vanguard isn't targetting the hardcore crowd though. Talonus fucked around with this message on 01-28-2006 at 09:00 AM.
I dislike the way instances seem to split the world up. It's part of the reason Guild Wars bugged me so much, and a large part of the reason why I will not be trying DDO.
quote:
Zaeron probably says this to all the girls:
I loved non-instanced content. I thought it improved the game immensely, and one of the things I really, really hate about WoW is the complete and utter lack of respect for things like camps.
Wow, this is the complete and total opposite of how I feel Vorago fucked around with this message on 01-28-2006 at 10:40 AM.
quote:
There was much rejoicing when Vorago said this:
Wow, this is the complete and total opposite of how I feel
Really? I always found camps one of the more interesting things about EQ, at least in retrospect. I often feel that I am not involved in the community at all with WoW, whereas with EQ, camps and the mechanics that spawned them almost forced interaction with the community, which I kind of like.
However, it is very nice for avoiding spawn competitions and trains.
