f13.net

f13.net General Forums => MMOG Discussion => Topic started by: Arthur_Parker on March 31, 2006, 02:59:08 PM



Title: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Arthur_Parker on March 31, 2006, 02:59:08 PM
Source (http://www.warhammeralliance.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1269)

Quote
The king of MMO PvP has its way with Warhammer Online, a world build for just that.

by Cindy Yans

The tabletop at Mythic Entertainment was nearly invisible, owing to its load of rule books, manuals, novels, game boxes, cards, miniatures, key chains, bumper stickers, paperweights, mugs, towel racks, and all manner of memorabilia related to its darling of the moment, Warhammer.

"Have you read these?" asked directer of marketing Steve Perkins, proferring a stack of all 18 Trollslayer Novels. "Uh... no." I felt guilty.

The idea of Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning has always been attractive, and when the original Climax-developed version was canceled in 2004, players were disappointed. At least they were until last year, when Mythic Entertainment announced that it had picked up the rights to the game. Mythic's Realm vs. Realm experience with Dark Age of Camelot, widely heralded as the most skillfully crafted player-versus-player MMO ever, bodes well for the game, as does the overwhelming unity of vision between Games Workshop and everybody (seemingly, literally every body) at Mythic. It was as if they speak with one voice.

When you look at the game the first thing you say to yourself is "It's a rip-off of World of Warcraft." (You did, didn't you? When you saw the screenshots? Don't lie.) So it behooves you to recall that Games Workshop had them first, those Orcs, Goblins, Elves and Dwarfs. From the original Warcraft to the present, all of that imagery is based on the original Warhammer figures. The characters are more detailed here, however; Orcs grow and expand as you level... they not only scale but gain musculature as well. One might refer to the art direction as WoW +2.

Being Green In the Warhammer universe, there are 14 known armies and lots of other races that are references, but in the initial release, we'll see only six (seven if you seperate Orcs and Goblins, which most people do not.) There are two loose aliance: Agents of Order - Empire (Humans), Dwarfs (not "Dwarves"), and High Elves - and the Agents of Destruction - Greenskins (Orcs and Goblins), Chaos (Humans), and Dark Elves. This provides for three battlefronts: Greenskins vs. Dwarfs, Chaos vs. Empire, and Dark Elves vs. High Elves.

The game will have player-versus-player combat from the get-go, but people who don't care to participate in PvP can just as well carebear their way through the game entirely. Mythic has designed the content in four "tiers" of areas, each of which will have both PvE and PvP content, except on the PvP servers, where it will be everywhere, all the time. As you approach a PvP area, a mysterious voice says, "There is no stopping in the red zone," and you become PvP flagged after five seconds. You can then choose to proceed, retreat, or say, "The white zone is for immediate loading and unloading of passengers only." Once you step back, you'll stay PvP flagged for five minutes, though. "What we don't want," says content director Destin Bales, "is for someone to go across the line, throw a fireball, then step back and go, 'Neener neener neener.'"

Faction Fiction One thing that you'll notice is that, right from the start, War is everywhere. The core of the RvR combat is based on four layers of increasing sophistication. The first type is Skirmish Combat, where two guys just cross paths, hate each other, and fight. The winner will collect various rewards in experience, coin, items - they haven't really ironed out the specifics yet.

The second type is called Battlefields: these are basically hotspots in a PvP area to which players will naturally be drawn. For example, there'll be a ruined Dwarf village that may have some resources that are valuable to both sides. "We have so many proposals along this front that it's scary," says Bales, as he pats literally mountains and mountains and mountains of printouts of gameplay content. The next level is the Scenerio, which is instanced, open RvR combat. The battles here are quick, repeatable, last about five or ten minutes, and will be objective-based, using many of the basic paradigms of CTF, Deathmatch, King of the Hill, et al.

We see instanced battlegrounds in things like World of Warcraft, but Mythic has taken a very important step toward improvement. If you've ever waited in a queue because the battleground population was unbalanced, cursing and complaining until you were either miraculously transported into the fight or died of boredom, this is for you. Warhammer's matchmaking utility not only sorts people into groups of appropriate level but, when there aren't enough players on one side or the other, it does what FPSs have been doing for a long time: fill in the spaces with bots (appropriately called Dogs of War). No waiting.

The overall victor of a Scenerio will gain control of the entire zone (Skirmishes and Battlefield victories will come into play). This affects the fourth style of combat, the Campaign, which is, at the macro level, the heart of the game. In the fourth tier of zones lies a capital city for each front, and the objective, as you may imagine, is to take over the opponent's capital and kill the leader and everyone else there (via Scenerio). Afterward the victors will retain control for some arbitrary time, say 24 hours, during which they may pillage and plunder to their hearts' content. After that period of time, the game rebalances, forces you out of the city, and resets ownership of all the different maps, and the battle begins anew.

Quest-a-licious To move away from cookiecutter mode, they've added several different quest types. First, there are public quests: when you enter an epicenter, you'll be taking and turning in quests, buying and selling, but you'll also see a public quest in which you and your entire faction can take part. For example, Orcs like to control Giants by bringing them beer; they rush out and give the Giants beer; the Giants go crazy; and the Orcs bash the heck out of them. So if you enter a Giant area, the quest might be to bring the Giant, say, 150 pints of beer. Everyone who helps gets credit for it, as does the whole realm. When these types of quests exist in a PvP area, they become competitive, with different (opposing) objectives for each side. Then there are branching quests, which let you choose how to complete them. Is your motivation cash? Experience? Then there are kill collector quests. Okay, here is one of the biggest peeves in MMO questing. You're riding a cock horse to Banbury Cross, you kill a fine lady upon a white horse, and another, and another, and another. You meet a banana mogul who says, "Hey! Those fine ladies really give me agita. I'll give you many Chiquitas for four of their noses." So you roll your eyes and go back and kill them yet again. Here, the guy would know that you had already done that and would reward you accordingly. "Hey! Bravo, you thwapped four fine ladies! Want some bananas?"

Finally there's something they call "Christmas quests." These are far off the beaten path, require little to no effort, and offer huge rewards. The goal is to get the players to branch out and explore all the areas, lest an artist whine, "But they'll never see that texture - it was MY texture." Here's an example of one: you come across a guy and his pet wolf sitting on a rock in the middle of nowhere. The guy says, "My wolf is starving. I'd give my right arm if I could get him some food." So you take him literally, whack the guy, his arm falls off, and you feed it to the wolf for a huge reward. Sick, right? But special.

C&C The basic character system that Mythic is using is not a typical "class system." They're keeping some portions of the Warhammer universe and adopting others. "The career system operates along the concept that we want you to be able to choose an interesting start to your character's progression, sort of complete the chapter of your character's life, and then choose a new chapter," says lead designer Steve Marvin. So they're using a basic progression tree where you start out as either a Fighter or Adept (read "magic user") and then, at an arbitrary stage, you may choose your next career step either in the same path as your original choice or in a direction that moves you into a different career.

In essence, a path straight through in the same discipline makes you what, in other games, is considered "pure." Or if you like a more balanced, hybrid approach, you end up being what most think of as "multi-classed." You'd think that this sort of thing would be a real challenge to balance, but Marvin isn't worried. "It would be a real nightmare if we didn't have this kind of encapsulation that gives control," he says. "Because we split the Fighter from the Adept, we're not trying to balance all the magic with all the weapon attacks... that helps us."

The combat system operates on pretty familiar principals, but they've added a twist that will bring more versatility than is offered by most other games (that don't require a "twitch"). Most systems only allow you to do one thing at a time. You have a resource (like mana or power), and you have actions that operate on a global timer, which are constrained by things like cost, casting time, recast time and so on. Multiply by two. "We added the concept of a second layer," says Marvin. "So you'll have the ability to do two things at one time." They've added a second global timer that enables you to use other abilities in the same overlapping time pool, for the potential double whammy.

Mythic President Mark Jacobs is certainly not being cavalier about his latest project. He senses the industry climate, and he's not afraid to admit that mastering the design of this burgeoning genre is a lot of learning. "We can do better," he says. "I don't mean we as just Mythic, I mean we as designers and developers of these games. We can do better... but no game is perfect. I guarantee you Warhammer will have moments of stupidity as well, but we'll just look at it and go, 'Why the heck did we do that?' because it so happens that nothing you can create is perfect. Creative things are flawed. Hopefully, here the flaws will be so few that the players won't mind."

UK PC Gamer also has a large section on Warhammer part of it below also states they are going with a career system.

Quote
Most surprising is the absence of levels, replaced by a career system similar to that of the tabletop game.  You choose a career, then select certain elements of that career which you'll attain once you have acquired enough XP.  So improvements are gradual, rather than an enormous leap with each new level, and entirely in the hands of the player.  A character learns four careers thoughtout the game, building a unique class of choosen elements.

EDIT POSSIBLY NOT SAFE FOR WORK POPUP, it's Germany so breasts are ok in any situation.  A few extra screenshots on a German site are here (http://war.onlinewelten.com/gallery.php?id=4).


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Trippy on March 31, 2006, 06:33:56 PM
Quote
We see instanced battlegrounds in things like World of Warcraft, but Mythic has taken a very important step toward improvement. If you've ever waited in a queue because the battleground population was unbalanced, cursing and complaining until you were either miraculously transported into the fight or died of boredom, this is for you. Warhammer's matchmaking utility not only sorts people into groups of appropriate level but, when there aren't enough players on one side or the other, it does what FPSs have been doing for a long time: fill in the spaces with bots (appropriately called Dogs of War). No waiting.
That's going to be quite a challenge -- good luck with that.

Quote
The overall victor of a Scenerio will gain control of the entire zone (Skirmishes and Battlefield victories will come into play). This affects the fourth style of combat, the Campaign, which is, at the macro level, the heart of the game. In the fourth tier of zones lies a capital city for each front, and the objective, as you may imagine, is to take over the opponent's capital and kill the leader and everyone else there (via Scenerio). Afterward the victors will retain control for some arbitrary time, say 24 hours, during which they may pillage and plunder to their hearts' content. After that period of time, the game rebalances, forces you out of the city, and resets ownership of all the different maps, and the battle begins anew.
I predict that certain capitals on certain servers will effectively be "perma-captured" (i.e. it'll be captured immediately after it reverts back to original ownership) unless they introduce some sort of timer during which a capital can not be captured.

Quote
Finally there's something they call "Christmas quests." These are far off the beaten path, require little to no effort, and offer huge rewards. The goal is to get the players to branch out and explore all the areas, lest an artist whine, "But they'll never see that texture - it was MY texture."
All known Christmas quests will be posted within minutes after the NDA in Beta drops.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Trippy on March 31, 2006, 06:40:56 PM
A few extra screenshots on a German site are here (http://war.onlinewelten.com/gallery.php?id=4).
That's one fricking obnoxious site. Even with two layers of popup window protection it still managed to spawn a new ad infested window.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: WindupAtheist on March 31, 2006, 11:56:54 PM
Look, more PR bullshit for an MMO that will most likely suck ass anyway.

(http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e121/GrimDysart/words.jpg)


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Telemediocrity on April 01, 2006, 12:55:32 AM
It sounds to me like a glorified version of Lineage in some ways.  And starting out you only have a choice between "fighter" and "mage"?

Doubleyew tee eff.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: eldaec on April 01, 2006, 09:14:37 AM
They have it as Empire vs Chaos + Green.

Whatever happened to Empire vs Chaos vs Green? Three is the correct number of realms for RvR.

Looking at the screenshots it looks a damn site less ugly than WoW.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: eldaec on April 01, 2006, 09:17:01 AM
Quote
All known Christmas quests will be posted within minutes after the NDA in Beta drops.

Well maybe, but the point of the quests is to replace the daoc 'camp bonus' for hunting things that haven't been killed in a while. It sounds as if there is no reason it couldn't achieve that.

And besides, nobody forces you to check spoiler sites.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Arthur_Parker on April 01, 2006, 09:21:57 AM
They have it as Empire vs Chaos + Green.

Whatever happened to Empire vs Chaos vs Green? Three is the correct number of realms for RvR.


This is the most recent quote from Mark Jacobs it, it's from the thread linked about.

Quote from: Mark Jacobs
Folks,

A few quickies:

1) Any PvP flagging we may use, keep in mind that I actually created the PvP flag concept (and called it that) almost 20 years ago in my first MUD. So, if we do use it, it isn't because we got it from WoW.  Also, keep in mind that they are lots of exploits that can be used by the player in a PvP system like that and only if we can close them will we use the system.

2) In terms of the whole 2/3 side thing. Keep in mind the following:

a) When you have a game with two sides, there will almost always be an imbalance between the two sides and when that happens, the results for either side isn't good.

b) When you have 3 sides, there is always an imbalance (even if there is not difference between the 3 sides as there is here) but if there is some good cross-flow between the sides (loose alliances), then the results are better.

c) The words loose and "early stage" should be paramount in your minds at this point.

Mark

So not sure what's happening yet as not set in stone. 

On a personal note I wish he wouldn't constantly mention how wonderful Mythic are, I just want the game not to stuck so I don't really care who invented whatever first.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: garthilk on April 01, 2006, 09:35:51 AM
What I find interesting is how orginally it was mentioned that WAR would be the conflict of 3 sides.  Now it's being touted as the Alliance of Order, vs the Alliance of Destruction.  While I understand things change in development, I wonder if we're being lined up for an expansion pack.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: schild on April 01, 2006, 09:38:06 AM
They're trying to become as MUCH LIKE WoW as possible. But no matter how much they putz around with the game design it still won't say Blizzard on the box when they ship. I mean that in the nicest way.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Arthur_Parker on April 01, 2006, 11:18:07 AM
What I find interesting is how orginally it was mentioned that WAR would be the conflict of 3 sides.  Now it's being touted as the Alliance of Order, vs the Alliance of Destruction.  While I understand things change in development, I wonder if we're being lined up for an expansion pack.

You know he's mentioned expansion packs for Skaven so extra races seems enough of a justification.   I always thought it would be easier to balance two sides over three, plus when you leveled up in DAoC at release you only saw 1/3 of the content which is a lot of wasted content. 

The only advantage I see for three sides is to keep it more like DAoC which avoids people going "lol wow2", only it's probably better marketing to have people go "lol wow2" rather than the current "lol daoc2" anyway.  They marketed DAoC at ex-EQ players so it seems logical to market WAR at ex-WoW players.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Telemediocrity on April 01, 2006, 11:33:27 AM
I dunno - I'm not seeing enough of the info that really affects how PvP plays out in practice.

Is there twitch skill involved?  If so, to what extent?  Are projectiles physically dodge-able?  Is there sticky melee?  To what extent is the Z-Axis used?  What does character movement feel like, and does movement play a big role in the flow of combat?

These are the sort of things that will matter far more as to whether their game is fun to play than which classes/races/sides they have.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: eldaec on April 01, 2006, 03:14:33 PM
I can't see Mythic patching in another realm after launch.

Skaven are chaos aligned creatures, and although they are an obvious expansion race, it makes little sense to put them in their own realm.

If they were to patch in a third realm the only one I can think of that would be distinct from Empire+Dwarfs+Elves and from Chaos+Green+DarkElves iis Undead.

The more I think about the possible 2 realm world the less I like it, having things so simple and black & white seems inherently un-Warhammer to me, not to mention the fact it gives the content teams less room to really go to town creating the Orc and Chaos worlds which clearly should have a totally different outlook.

What utterly astounds me is that you can see significant numbers of people on forums elsewhere complaining about the original design because it *wasn't* a dull as ditchwater face-off between only 2 sides. Ho hum.

Quote
Is there twitch skill involved? Are projectiles physically dodge-able?

No. At least not unless you count the ability to communicate with team mates rapidly, convince large numbers of people you don't know to press buttons when you want them to, and generally herd cats in an effective manner as twitch skills (which you probably should, but that's a whole other thread).

Obviously none of the other questions you ask are something anyone can usefully talk about till beta. Which may be why a decent number of posts in this thread focus on the number-of-sides issue, which will have a significant effect on how the community builds up within the game.



Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: eldaec on April 01, 2006, 03:23:54 PM
You know he's mentioned expansion packs for Skaven so extra races seems enough of a justification.   I always thought it would be easier to balance two sides over three, plus when you leveled up in DAoC at release you only saw 1/3 of the content which is a lot of wasted content. 

The only advantage I see for three sides is to keep it more like DAoC which avoids people going "lol wow2", only it's probably better marketing to have people go "lol wow2" rather than the current "lol daoc2" anyway.  They marketed DAoC at ex-EQ players so it seems logical to market WAR at ex-WoW players.

Some advantages of 3 sides...

You have two distinct fronts to fight on, when hib is zerging in emain, you can say 'bugger this for a game of soldiers, I'm going mid'.
A kind of diplomacy/politics develops in the community where whichever realm is acting like the biggest dicks at the moment gets raided more.
It's more like the Warhammer world which has a gazillion sides.
A greater number of tactical scenarios makes it harder for one group layout to dominate against everything, people in daoc often prefered a different group setup vs different enemies.
Killing two enemy groups while they are also fighting each other is fun.
Intercepting an enemy A raid party as they escape with the phat lewt from enemy B is fricking hilarious.


The wasted content in PvE is a fair point, though I suspect with clever design and a little instancing it's surmountable.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Telemediocrity on April 01, 2006, 03:33:15 PM
What I don't understand, with the format of the game as it's set up now, is why they have to hardcode sides at all.  If the game's really fluid in terms of alliances and treachery and whatnot in the lore, simply put race/class restrictions on guilds and let people ally as they will from there, with some sort of system in place to discourage alliances from getting too large, or making sure they fracture apart once they do.

Something more akin to Mordred's system of guild ownership (not referring to the server's pvp+ flag) than the rest of the DAoC servers.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Venkman on April 01, 2006, 06:32:43 PM
Those screenshots look like the WoW engine with EQ2 styling and an ambient glow.

Otherwise, I care when it's in beta.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Trippy on April 01, 2006, 09:27:52 PM
I can't see Mythic patching in another realm after launch.

Skaven are chaos aligned creatures, and although they are an obvious expansion race, it makes little sense to put them in their own realm.

If they were to patch in a third realm the only one I can think of that would be distinct from Empire+Dwarfs+Elves and from Chaos+Green+DarkElves iis Undead.
The Lizardmen hate everybody else as do the Tomb Kings though I guess I could see the TKs allying with the Vampire Counts in the MMOG.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: eldaec on April 02, 2006, 01:34:26 AM
What I don't understand, with the format of the game as it's set up now, is why they have to hardcode sides at all.  If the game's really fluid in terms of alliances and treachery and whatnot in the lore, simply put race/class restrictions on guilds and let people ally as they will from there, with some sort of system in place to discourage alliances from getting too large, or making sure they fracture apart once they do.

Something more akin to Mordred's system of guild ownership (not referring to the server's pvp+ flag) than the rest of the DAoC servers.

If you don't totally isolate the realms in the newbie experience, no grouping, no talking, preferably no seeing. Then the community will not separate into realm based groups, and will demand any pretence of realm based amnosity be removed from the pve experience (see EQ2). You then don't have proper RvR, and you can't adequately dehumanise the other realms in order to encourage community within a realm.

And if pvp sides are guild based you degenerate the game into Guild vs Guild, which isn't nearly as interesting to the non-catass becuase you can't be on the overall winning side, ever.

Mordred sucked for many reasons, not just the all pvp all the time nature of the place.



Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Arthur_Parker on April 02, 2006, 06:08:29 AM
Yeah eldaec, maybe three sides would be better.  I'm just a bit concerned about how fast WAR is being developed, it seems real quick to be able to do three sides justice.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: eldaec on April 02, 2006, 06:58:12 AM
That is a fair point, I just assumed they would announce around 18 months worth of delays when appropriate.

Final(ish) point on the 3 sides, this would actually give me a pretty big headache if I were to play this game, I'd orefer to play Orc, because they are just way cooler than everything else. But I really don't think I could bear to be on the same side as Chaos humies and therefore with the sort of people who tend to choose to play chaos. /shudder.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Telemediocrity on April 02, 2006, 12:46:37 PM
If you don't totally isolate the realms in the newbie experience, no grouping, no talking, preferably no seeing. Then the community will not separate into realm based groups, and will demand any pretence of realm based amnosity be removed from the pve experience (see EQ2). You then don't have proper RvR, and you can't adequately dehumanise the other realms in order to encourage community within a realm.

And if pvp sides are guild based you degenerate the game into Guild vs Guild, which isn't nearly as interesting to the non-catass becuase you can't be on the overall winning side, ever.

Uh, this makes no sense.  Why would Guild vs Guild degenerate into the catasses taking over?  AC1 Darktide was guild vs guild and the catasses almost never won - large, unwieidly guilds were geographically vulnerable to tighter, more coordinated groups of friends who didn't necessarily have the same high levels.  In order to control large amounts of territory, as guild by definition must be very large - that means a lot of squawking lowbies.  The bigger an uber-guild is, the more fronts they're vulnerable on.  You hit their PvE groups or otherwise 'softer' targets, and by the time their Elite Death Squad gets called in by their squawking lowbies (who before long just sound like one big cacophany that drives the Elites nuts - another fissure point for the Big Uber-Guild) you're already recalling out with your loot.

Factors that matter:  The size of the gameworld, the influence of levels, and guild recruitment method.

For good guild-vs-guild PvP, ANY GUILD MEMBER has to be able to recruit another player into their guild, with some sort of org chart available to guild leadership so that they can see who recruited who.  PvP-oriented games should simply lift AC's patron/vassal model wholesale. (In fact, most PvE games should, too.) This is critical, because it links territorial control, size, and guild unity/disunity together.

The world size has to be big so a guild of uber-elite-catassers simply won't have the manpower to control a big portion of it, maybe more than a city or two.  Keeping travel powers relatively restricted is also important for this.

Levelling - the curve should be slow on the whole, but a guy who's halfway to the levelling cap should be able to beat a guy who's at the level cap about 1/3rd of the time.  Player skill (i.e. twitch) should be a big defining factor.

Oh, and uber-loot shouldn't be too big of a deal.  That's also important.

The server should remain relatively fluid, with maybe two or three large guilds and 10-30 smaller 'boutique' guilds, who fight one another in a sort of Rebels/Empire arrangement, which ends up being fun for both sides.

Sorry if this is a bit detailed - I'm not saying "hey your PvP game should be like AC1 Darktide", I'm just making the point that if you automatically equate 'Guild Vs Guild server' with 'Catasses win', that's just lazy thinking.  There are a whole host of possibilities out there, and you lose so much from hardcoding the game's sides - meaningful politics, intrigue, alliances/betrayals, the ability for leaders to rise organically and for generals to decide it's their turn to be king, and take some troops with them.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Azazel on April 02, 2006, 02:31:33 PM
I dunno - I'm not seeing enough of the info that really affects how PvP plays out in practice.

Is there twitch skill involved?  If so, to what extent?  Are projectiles physically dodge-able?  Is there sticky melee?  To what extent is the Z-Axis used?  What does character movement feel like, and does movement play a big role in the flow of combat?

These are the sort of things that will matter far more as to whether their game is fun to play than which classes/races/sides they have.

That shit just doesn't work if you want the game to be massive, with players from all over the world interacting with one another. You want twitch, play a FPS, or Planetside. Until the entire interwebs become latency free, twitch is a pipe dream.

And yeah, Warhammer isn't about "Alliance" vs "Horde". It's loose alliances of good and evil, sure, but everyone is happy to fight everyone else, and even their own "faction". Chaos might ally with Skaven, and Da Boyz might fight alongside them temporarily, but even the Orcs find Chaos to be "dirty" and hate them.



Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Telemediocrity on April 02, 2006, 03:10:29 PM
That shit just doesn't work if you want the game to be massive, with players from all over the world interacting with one another. You want twitch, play a FPS, or Planetside. Until the entire interwebs become latency free, twitch is a pipe dream.

Neocron and AC1 both have sufficiently twitch-based gameplay and it works just fine.  Also, why would Planetside be subject to different latency rules than everything else (Honest question, do they use different packets or something I'm not aware of)?

I would have an easier time believing twitch PvP in MMOs was a pipe dream if I hadn't been playing multiple twitch PvP MMOs for... oh, the past five years or so.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: eldaec on April 02, 2006, 03:17:17 PM
That shit just doesn't work if you want the game to be massive, with players from all over the world interacting with one another. You want twitch, play a FPS, or Planetside. Until the entire interwebs become latency free, twitch is a pipe dream.

Neocron and AC1 both have sufficiently twitch-based gameplay and it works just fine.  Also, why would Planetside be subject to different latency rules than everything else (Honest question, do they use different packets or something I'm not aware of)?

I would have an easier time believing twitch PvP in MMOs was a pipe dream if I hadn't been playing multiple twitch PvP MMOs for... oh, the past five years or so.

Twitch probably can work ok a la Planetside. It's not CS, but it is 'something based on twitch'.

But it's not relevant to this discussion because that's not the game Mythic are trying to build.

Also I'm personally dubious that twitch suits melee especially well anyway.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Telemediocrity on April 02, 2006, 03:36:56 PM
Twitch probably can work ok a la Planetside. It's not CS, but it is 'something based on twitch'.

But it's not relevant to this discussion because that's not the game Mythic are trying to build.

They're not trying to build a game that includes twitch?  Okay, that's fair enough - but in that case, how is what they're doing really distinct from EQ2, DAoC, or WoW?  How is WoW to WAR any different from EQ to WoW?  That may be enough for some people (And probably enough for Mythic's bottom line), but I have a hard time getting excited about it.

If the game's not intended for me, though, I can certainly accept that.  Just figured I'd ask.

Quote
Also I'm personally dubious that twitch suits melee especially well anyway.

I'm generally a proponent of sticky melee in these games, and then giving the melees naturally superior runspeed, with twitch coming in as they break sticky to dodge projectile attacks, switch targets, lure enemy fire as a decoy, etcetera.  I've never found the "slow but heavy hitter" model of melee combat to be conducive to good twitch PvP - rather, if melee-ers are sort of like locusts, always pecking away at you bit by bit and scrambling when you try to turn around and swat them, I think that tends to work well.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Trippy on April 02, 2006, 04:48:27 PM
That shit just doesn't work if you want the game to be massive, with players from all over the world interacting with one another. You want twitch, play a FPS, or Planetside. Until the entire interwebs become latency free, twitch is a pipe dream.
Neocron and AC1 both have sufficiently twitch-based gameplay and it works just fine.  Also, why would Planetside be subject to different latency rules than everything else (Honest question, do they use different packets or something I'm not aware of)?
PlanetSide cheats and uses client side hit detection. Also latency in online shooter games is way overblown unless you are playing games with "one shot kill weapons" like CS or, say, the railgun in Quake 3. Thousands upon thousands of people played games like QuakeWorld and Quake 2 just fine on modems against HPBs and MPBs (Medium Ping Bastards). Saying an MMO twitch game would never work because of latency is just silly, especially if you are talking about a swords and sorcery game.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Trippy on April 02, 2006, 04:52:24 PM
They're not trying to build a game that includes twitch?  Okay, that's fair enough - but in that case, how is what they're doing really distinct from EQ2, DAoC, or WoW?
From what we know so far they aren't -- hence the reason why people are calling it DAoC2.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: 5150 on April 03, 2006, 01:28:09 AM
The reason so many Fanbois are in favour of a 2 sided conmflict is because thats what happens in all the GW studio battle reports and all the games you ever play in the shops (which I havent done for ages because I find the smell of sweaty-unwashed-youngling offputting)

Every multi-faction battle I ever recall seeing in a white dwarf or being fought in a shop was 'good vs evil' regardless of how untenable that alliance was (hmm Necrons and Nids joining up with other 'evil' races......)

The only time I can recall seeing more than 2 sides in a GW game was Inquisitor where the 3rd (or subsequent) sides were played either by other players or the GM.

As an aside Neocron wasn't really twitch because (for example) as a Monk if you had the target under your reticle when you pressed fire you were guaranteed to hit regardless of what the target did before the shot landed (other than zone I guess) all cover did was make it harder for people to get the hit box under the reticle


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Azazel on April 03, 2006, 01:39:34 AM
That shit just doesn't work if you want the game to be massive, with players from all over the world interacting with one another. You want twitch, play a FPS, or Planetside. Until the entire interwebs become latency free, twitch is a pipe dream.

Neocron and AC1 both have sufficiently twitch-based gameplay and it works just fine.  Also, why would Planetside be subject to different latency rules than everything else (Honest question, do they use different packets or something I'm not aware of)?

I would have an easier time believing twitch PvP in MMOs was a pipe dream if I hadn't been playing multiple twitch PvP MMOs for... oh, the past five years or so.

Planetside was pointed out since it's already there. It's also not worth playing if you live outside of the US

And as for your experiences working just fine, that's because of your geographical location, if you'd have read my point, you'd have seen that I specifically pointed out the issue being with players from all over the world. I live in NotAmerica, and I'm pretty experienced with lag effects in MMOGs by now including regular (EQ/WOW) and twitch. I briefly played PS and the game had severe, severe lag issues of the kind that I suppose you might be able to compare by playing on a CS server in Australia, or Germany or something. You know, shoot at some guy dead on, except you missed. Shame bout 'dat.  :heartbreak:


PlanetSide cheats and uses client side hit detection. Also latency in online shooter games is way overblown unless you are playing games with "one shot kill weapons" like CS or, say, the railgun in Quake 3. Thousands upon thousands of people played games like QuakeWorld and Quake 2 just fine on modems against HPBs and MPBs (Medium Ping Bastards). Saying an MMO twitch game would never work because of latency is just silly, especially if you are talking about a swords and sorcery game.

Even with clientside hit detection, you're fine except now you're actually wounded (sometimes). Think outside of your box that has Quake/2 in it playing against HPBs playing against people in the next state, and think about playing internationally. As for Swords and Sorcery specifically, unless you think you can dodge fireballs and arrows effectively, I don't really see the need.

If you're wanting to play a peristant online Soul Calibur, (which is not a bad idea) it's still quite a different proposition and would require some fucking amazing netcode beyond whatever say, XBox DOA Ultimate Online uses since you've got (way) more than 2 fighters, interactive scenery, a huge world, etc etc...



The reason so many Fanbois are in favour of a 2 sided conmflict is because thats what happens in all the GW studio battle reports and all the games you ever play in the shops (which I havent done for ages because I find the smell of sweaty-unwashed-youngling offputting)

Every multi-faction battle I ever recall seeing in a white dwarf or being fought in a shop was 'good vs evil' regardless of how untenable that alliance was (hmm Necrons and Nids joining up with other 'evil' races......)

That's because of the limitations of the Warhammer/40k "game engine". Specifically the H2H combat component. Movement and shooting work reasonably well in 3-sided games, but it gets to be a bit of a mess when you add in melee (especially 3 or 4-sides in one mass melee).

You can get by (and quite well) in a skirmish game like Necromunda, but in the bigger games it becomes a clusterfuck.



Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: eldaec on April 03, 2006, 04:02:27 AM
Quote
That's because of the limitations of the Warhammer/40k "game engine". Specifically the H2H combat component. Movement and shooting work reasonably well in 3-sided games, but it gets to be a bit of a mess when you add in melee (especially 3 or 4-sides in one mass melee).

You can get by (and quite well) in a skirmish game like Necromunda, but in the bigger games it becomes a clusterfuck.

I agree that these are good reasons while turn based tabletop games are limited to two sides, but it's worth reminding everyone that these problems vanish in a real-time MMOG.

----

On the subject of PS it plays ok in Europe (even on US servers), can't speak for anywhere else.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Numtini on April 03, 2006, 06:32:08 AM
When is this thing due out? It seems awfully early to be ramping up the publicity machine.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: eldaec on April 03, 2006, 06:38:03 AM
They claim 2007.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: HaemishM on April 03, 2006, 07:59:05 AM
They're trying to become as MUCH LIKE WoW as possible. But no matter how much they putz around with the game design it still won't say Blizzard on the box when they ship. I mean that in the nicest way.

I see that as a VERY GOOD THING (TM).


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Nebu on April 03, 2006, 09:56:08 AM
Even if the game is similar to DAoC, I'll buy it.  Other than Shadowbane (which had issues all its own), DAoC is the best implementation of a PvP MMOG to date.  It's the game I keep going back to after all other titles fail to hold my interest.

Yes, I am a DAoC fanboi.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Modern Angel on April 03, 2006, 10:45:29 AM
I am cautiously optimistic. If they can make PvE that doesn't make me want to kill myself like DAoC's did then I'm good. I liked the PvP in DAoC, warts and all. And while I've moved away from GW and their pricing schemes recently I lived their fucking games throughout my childhood; I'll be there to check it out at the least.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Telemediocrity on April 03, 2006, 10:50:24 AM
Planetside was pointed out since it's already there. It's also not worth playing if you live outside of the US

And as for your experiences working just fine, that's because of your geographical location, if you'd have read my point, you'd have seen that I specifically pointed out the issue being with players from all over the world. I live in NotAmerica, and I'm pretty experienced with lag effects in MMOGs by now including regular (EQ/WOW) and twitch. I briefly played PS and the game had severe, severe lag issues of the kind that I suppose you might be able to compare by playing on a CS server in Australia, or Germany or something. You know, shoot at some guy dead on, except you missed. Shame bout 'dat.  :heartbreak:

As someone who's going to be internetting from Japan next year, you have my sympathy. Nonetheless: A game not working well outside of America is not gamebreaking to those of us who live in America.  Sorry to say it, man, but it's the truth.  Also, ping was never a walk in the park in the MMOs here, either - in AC1, I was usually PvPing with 200ms lag or so (Though compared to what you experience abroad, that might be miniscule).  Nonetheless, we had really good guilds of Danes and Frenchmen and whatnot in AC1 DT and they weren't half bad at PvP.  So while I sympathize, I have a hard time believing it's impossible or not worth doing just because Euros may have a hard time playing on American servers.

Quote
If you're wanting to play a peristant online Soul Calibur, (which is not a bad idea) it's still quite a different proposition and would require some fucking amazing netcode beyond whatever say, XBox DOA Ultimate Online uses since you've got (way) more than 2 fighters, interactive scenery, a huge world, etc etc...

All I'm asking for is the same level of twitch seen in Neocron or AC1.

As for the "If it's DAoC2" route...  Ugh.  I spent about a year and a half on DAoC's private tester boards post release, trying in vain to point them in the direction they needed to make DAoC a decent PvP MMO.  I always found their PvP to be joyless, soulless, and unnaturally linked to the PvP grind.  The PvE was about the only thing I found less than abominable in that game.  As such, the less like DAoC it is, the more likely I am to play.

Of course, that probably means I'm not the target audience.  But if the target audience is people who enjoyed DAoC... well, I hope that doesn't mean too much cannibalization of their base.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: HaemishM on April 03, 2006, 11:20:49 AM
All I'm asking for is the same level of twitch seen in Neocron or AC1.

Sony Online Entertainment has just the game for you! You can even be a Jedi!


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Telemediocrity on April 03, 2006, 11:34:33 AM
All I'm asking for is the same level of twitch seen in Neocron or AC1.

Sony Online Entertainment has just the game for you! You can even be a Jedi!

Assuming that they add in some serious GCW features, collision detection, and keep the quests going up to 90, I actually do want to play the new SWG.  I tried the NGE demo up to level 10 and came away impressed - it's not that great yet, but it's a good start.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Johny Cee on April 03, 2006, 08:40:12 PM
As to lag.....

The problem with a RPG Fantasy MMO, I think, is that your talking about so much more detail then your typical FPS.  In DAoC,  I precache armor skins on a fairly decent comp but still stutter if I'm in a fight with albs and a zerg of mids rolls up.  You're talking about 5 or 6 different base character models (races), with some different features,  in a variety of armor skins,  a multitude of different glowy/shiny/sparky weapons,  and hundreds of different spell effects.

Character customization is the accepted standard, though,  and I'm not sure any MMO can balk that.

The whole FPS thing skill versus stats....

DAoC now has a fair amount of twitchy mechanics built in, and quite alot of skill play.  No, you can't aim.  But you still have to pick out the right target in a limited amount of time from usually at least 8.  What that means,  is on incoming,  you have to ID and select the right class to target and immobilize or interrupt.  When inc albs,  I need to pick out their sorc and drop a nearsight or mezz/stun on him.

No you can't dodge.  Good riddance,  if it would lead to the retarded monkey behavior of sprinting-super-speed-while jumping like an ass while hoping to line up the perfect headshot.  Instead you have to play with ranges and decide what measures or countermeasures to deploy,  use your abilities as the situation warrants.

For example:

A popular 8 v 8 setup now is the "caster extend group".  Drop a speed warp,  back out of DD range,  have your CCers and nearsighters go to town.  Pull the enemy group into your zone and /assist nuke them down in the face of enemy heals.  Sic pets on healers for interrupts.  Drop a Static Tempest or Thornweed Field on bunches.

If targeted, get out of range,  hope your healers can keep you up.  On the healer side,  establish Power Fonts at a safe base.  Heal, rezz and rebuff the fallen.  Battle through attrition.

There IS player skill involved,  it's just not FPS type skill.

I'm not denigrating FPSers, even if I have some distaste for the genre.  I flat out know I don't have the reflexes or the state of mind for it,  especiallly after working.  It's just a different skill set.

Just like fighting games have different skill sets,  or Magic has a completely different set.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Telemediocrity on April 03, 2006, 08:46:12 PM
As to lag.....

The problem with a RPG Fantasy MMO, I think, is that your talking about so much more detail then your typical FPS.  In DAoC,  I precache armor skins on a fairly decent comp but still stutter if I'm in a fight with albs and a zerg of mids rolls up.  You're talking about 5 or 6 different base character models (races), with some different features,  in a variety of armor skins,  a multitude of different glowy/shiny/sparky weapons,  and hundreds of different spell effects.

A game built for PvP should have PvP optimization graphics checkboxes in the main menu.

-A checkbox to view all players as the same character model, perhaps with size scaling to indicate race if it's one of those games where race is really important (I don't think race should be really important in a PvP-oriented game, but that's separate)
-A checkbox to simplify all player skins to a single, low-res one per each class.  We essentially used to do this back in AC to hit 60FPS or so even in big battles.
-A checkbox to make spell effects and sparky weapons highly simplified, with color differentiating between effects.

Quote
Character customization is the accepted standard, though,  and I'm not sure any MMO can balk that.

No reason it has to, if you can disable the customization for PvP.

Quote
DAoC now has a fair amount of twitchy mechanics built in, and quite alot of skill play.  No, you can't aim.  But you still have to pick out the right target in a limited amount of time from usually at least 8.  What that means,  is on incoming,  you have to ID and select the right class to target and immobilize or interrupt.  When inc albs,  I need to pick out their sorc and drop a nearsight or mezz/stun on him.

You just fingered the number one problem with DAoC's PvP - no good PvP game should have mez/stuns.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Johny Cee on April 03, 2006, 10:42:58 PM
You just fingered the number one problem with DAoC's PvP - no good PvP game should have mez/stuns.

In a good group set up,  mezz and stun aren't really an issue at all.  A couple weeks of solid playing nets you a decent Realm Rank,  and between that and ToA arties you have lots of protection.  They're used to give your group a few seconds breathing space to set up, or stall the opponent before a rush.

Tank groups are pretty much (casted) cc immune anyway.

Interrupts on casters,  and nearsight,  are king now.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Arthur_Parker on April 04, 2006, 05:31:18 AM
Info from Garthilk here (http://www.warhammeralliance.com/article/war-news/war-of-the-previews.html)

More info and crazy number of new screenshots.

IGN Screenshots (http://media.pc.ign.com/media/748/748723/imgs_1.html)

IGN Preview (http://pc.ign.com/articles/699/699806p1.html)

GamePro Preview (http://www.gamepro.com/computer/pc/games/previews/53097.shtml)

GamePro screenshots (http://www.gamepro.com/screen_gallery.cfm?product_id=27435&genustext=PC&family=)

Screenshots showing real improvement, couple (http://media.pc.ign.com/media/748/748723/img_3501597.html) of orcs (http://media.pc.ign.com/media/748/748723/img_3501604.html), real nice goblin (http://media.pc.ign.com/media/748/748723/img_3501585.html).


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: eldaec on April 04, 2006, 06:13:12 AM
Quote
each member of the alliances in Warhammer finds itself paired up against one enemy on the opposing side. The Dwarves fight against the Greenskins (comprised of orcs and goblins), the Elves fight against the Dark Elves, and the human Empire fights against the forces of Chaos.

I hope that is more than just flavour, and has a real home in the mechanics. It almost implies 6 realms with alliances only forming in specific pvp locations.

That way I don't have to fight alongside chaos idiots and the system sticks closer to warhammer lore.

I don't have high hopes that this will be the case however.

Quote
The third type of PVE quest, the branching quest, involves a more individual form of achievement. You'll be running errands and deliveries in these quests, but you'll have the choice of a few different outcomes that give you the choice of being rewarded either with experience or money. One quest has the player stealing battle plans for the opposing army. He can either deliver them to the general to gain XP or sell them to a rival spy for cash.

The lack of this has irritated me for a while in MMOGs. So hurrah for this.

Quote
For one thing, the PVP zones aren't separate. There are large PVP areas in every area of the world. Before you worry that you'll accidentally stumble into danger, the limits of each area are clearly marked. Sometimes a PVP zone may be located on an island accessible only by a bridge. Others times they'll simply be battlefields that are marked off by highly visible signs. The interface itself will also tell you when you're entering a PVP area.

You'll still need to be careful, however; the PVP flag for your character will persist for a short while after you leave the PVP area. This is to prevent long-range attackers from peppering enemies from the fringe and stepping back into safety whenever danger appears. [/qiuote]

Hmm, this implies that the pve areas are shared. I'm not a fan of that idea. At all.

I don't really mind pve areas being copied and pasted from the other realms, but I sure as hell don't want to start down the road that inevitably leads to a common con-competitive pve community with no interaction barriers between realms.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Arthur_Parker on April 04, 2006, 10:28:12 AM
I hope that is more than just flavour, and has a real home in the mechanics. It almost implies 6 realms with alliances only forming in specific pvp locations.

That way I don't have to fight alongside chaos idiots and the system sticks closer to warhammer lore.

I don't have high hopes that this will be the case however.

I agree it's unlikely that they would go with 6 realms, but watch me now quickly switch from wishing for 2 sides to 3 to 6  :-D

If each race has their own starter area it would give more of a unique feel and add to replay value.

If it's 3 separate battle fields with opposing races then they only need to balance a race to the opposite race.  But I really like the idea of deciding if you want to defend your own capital city or going to help an ally.  If they change the standard mmorpg guild structure to encourage pure race guilds (give exp bonus, item bonus, repair bonus or something), they could call the pure race guilds regiments, provide a standard and you have a real warhammer feel.  It even opens up the option of language skills to communicate with the other races on your own side as actually being a nice addition to fit in with the IP.

The other nice feature of 6 realms is the ability to bolt on extra races in pairs without throwing realm balance out of whack, over time I reckon they would need joint server battlegrounds unless they have a higher than usual population limit on the servers.

Edit :-
Another preview with a lot of detail (http://www.worthplaying.com/article.php?sid=33155&mode=thread&order=0) they even list a release date of Q1 2007

Quote
On the way to previewing Mythic Entertainment's upcoming title Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning, there was plenty of time to think about it. Is it just going to be an attempt at using a popular license that looks like "that WoW game" to cash in on the MMORPG market? If it isn't, then how could someone who's oblivious to the Warhammer world possibly be drawn into such a deep and well-grounded IP? With an unpredictable mix of surprise and delight, it turns out both of those thoughts are without merit. Warhammer Online is not only a title that is very much its own direction, but it also brings a few new ideas to a largely copycat genre while being accessible to someone as Warhammer-ignorant as myself who doesn't know his greenskins from his stunties.

For those who are in that category, Warhammer began life around 24 years ago as a tabletop game produced by Games Workshop. By all accounts, the game quickly gained and maintained its popularity, and over the years, the Warhammer universe has seen expansions, spin-offs, books, and games, the last of which has been probably the most varying in terms of quality and authenticity. Climax Entertainment was originally the developer behind Warhammer Online until Mythic Entertainment took over the helm, and it's pretty easy to say that the decision was a good one. Mythic has firmly based the title on the existing universe while also adding to its tapestry, and it's clear that they know what they're doing.

So, Warhammer Online. Firstly, in order to appreciate things to the fullest extent, get World of Warcraft out of your head. Rinse. The similarities between the two titles end right about the point where they both have orcs, dwarves, and elves. The Warhammer universe is gritty and violent, interspersed with bits of humor and a heaping helping of surrealism. Orcs are all green, and there's no such thing as a female orc; it's just how the Warhammer universe is. (How are orcs spawned? Something about mushrooms and outer space. See why I told you to rinse?)

Above all, the Warhammer universe used in game is not directly pulled from any one source but woven out of all of them. When elements needed to be created that had no precedent, such as the interior of Dwarven houses, Mythic created them, and Games Workshop approved them to ensure their authenticity. This leads to Warhammer Online being very faithful to the existing Warhammer universe, but it also adds authentic bits to the universe of its own creation. For instance, fans of the universe will pick up on the fact that the Morcane tower is now fully represented in-game, or how flags, while pretty and waving to the layman, use authentic icons, colors, and markers.

Initially, there will be six playable races to choose from: humans, chaos, orcs, dwarves, high elves, and dark elves. This is further split up into the pairings of human versus chaos, orcs versus dwarves, and high elves versus dark elves, with each pairing waging war in a different but connected section of the same planet. There will be 33 individual zones, with each pair waging war over their set of 11. That's not to say that the orcs can't decimate eight or nine of their zones and then hop over and help out the dark elves. It's still one big war with two sides; it's just a layered war with individual hatred between pairs of races.

Every race has between three and five career paths, and they adhere to the three rules that Mythic has for each race. For starters, every race has some sort of healer class. Additionally, every race has classes that love to hit stuff really, really hard (fighters, etc.) and classes that are more academic (mages, engineers, etc.). Each class in turn allows the player to create his own career path, such as picking up the ability to use pistols, deal more damage, be a better spellcaster, or simply blow stuff up in a more awe-inspiring fashion.

If Warhammer Online sounds like a title that contains a large amount of PvP, well, it does. In fact, the game is such that a player could foreseeably play the entire game in a PvP fashion while still gaining a respectable amount of money, items, and experience. PvP is based on the epicenter system, where players actually have to be in a specific area to engage or be engaged in PvP combat. On the other hand, to wash away those who are already thinking that PvP is limited to out-of-the-way areas, every city in the game will be mostly PvP areas.

Indeed, in the overall scheme of things, it is the goal to take over the enemy capital city, so cities are definitely not the safe zones to which MMORPG players may be accustomed. Quest givers cannot die, so the most basic operation of a city will still function for those players who are PvP-averse, but past that, expect to see a sizable war party at the city gates on occasion, in addition to your fellow players asking for your help in thwarting them.

Transport between zones hasn't been nailed down yet, and the presenter was threatened with throat-slitting motions before an exact answer could be extracted about it. While instant teleportation has been ruled out to get you from zone to zone, some sort of fast transport will undoubtedly be available. For instance, orcs might simply catapult themselves across the land, while dwarves might utilize gyrocopters.

There will be four main types of PvP combat in Warhammer Online. Incidental combat is when two or more players on opposing sides incidentally find themselves in a PvP zone and duke it out. Battlefield combat is objective-based, where each side is engaged in a big tug-of-war battle, trying to take over points on the map. Scenario-based is instanced combat between the two sides so the number of participants will remain the same and unaffected by others, and can be either point or objective based. Additionally, if one side outnumbers the other, AI combatants, known as Dogs of War, will join you to make up the difference.

It is unknown, however, if you can give any sort of rudimentary orders to these AI units, such as to defending an objective or trying to take another. Finally, the largest in scope of the PvP types is the campaign mode, which literally takes place among the entire world. The goal is to take over the enemy capital city, and to do that, you must first leapfrog from zone to zone, taking one over before moving on to the next, constantly pushing the other side back. The zones are split up so that starting players fight over just a couple of zones, as do the two higher tiers of players, while the top tier wages war across five zones.

Being an MMORPG, there are obviously still regular PvE quests that don't involve PvP combat, though the line can blur somewhat between the two, and a few new ideas have been introduced. In addition to the regular type of quest which consists of you having to meet some sort of goal, whether it be killing a monster or collecting a certain amount of items, Mythic has shaken up things a bit with a few new interesting additions to the genre. For instance, there are now public PvE quests which are automatically granted to any player who enters a specific zone, such as someone needing a few hundred of a particular item. Anyone who contributes to the goal gains experience, so instead of situations like in other MMOs where players are fighting with one another to collect six tusks or whatnot all from one area, that same group of players is now working together, knowing that it's all the same as to who turns in the tusk, since they will all get the proper experience for the quest.

There are also quests where you may indirectly compete against the other faction. In one example, imagine a large amount of dwarves lay injured and immobile on the battlefield. The dwarves will try to heal other dwarves by giving them beer, while the orcs will be trying to kill them and take their beards. "Christmas" quests are small, easy quests that yield a large amount of experience or money but are unmarked and can only be found by wandering far off the beaten path. Finally, another new quest type is the branching quests, such as if you were to get into a situation where you steal the enemy war plans. Do you give them to your general for a good amount of experience but not much money, or do you give them to the shadowy goblin who pays exceedingly well but grants you very little experience?

Meanwhile, the graphics engine (and the rest of the game, really) was totally scrapped when it changed hands to Mythic. Warhammer Online now boasts great looking fire, smoke, haze, water, grass, and shadows to show off the detailed and exaggerated personality of the Warhammer license. Thanks to the game's large draw distance, you will get into situations where you will see the silhouette of a huge tower in the distance, while in the foreground, you may see a crow pecking at the body of a dead dwarf. Look over a little to the left, you may see a goblin sawmill's blade slicing up and down, sending bits of wood everywhere, while you watch the odd goblin or two having an industrial accident. It all blends together to form an almost charming representation of the Warhammer world that you can't help but be pulled into.

One of the most notable aspects of the Warhammer tabletop game is that the players would paint and customize their miniatures, and Mythic has definitely made a note of it somewhere. Characters in the game are customizable in the expected facets, such as faces, scars, and hair, but also in more advanced areas, such as armor coloring schemes. Even past that, players can choose to tack little items onto their character that show off their might and accomplishments. For instance, orcs can impale skulls on the spikes of their armor, hang dwarven beards on their belts, and other such items. Characters will actually get larger and more muscular as they gain levels, or dwarves will get longer and more elaborate beards. It makes it easy to see who's the top dog in a churning battlefield, a point that Mythic aimed to complete.

In an unprecedented advancement for the genre, all avatars, NPCs, and monsters have full facial animation, breathing a little more life into your standard animated quest giver. Players can set their mood, so if they want to spend their in-game time smiling and happy or brooding, they have the option to do either and more. All characters in the game are well detailed, thanks to the high-resolution textures, and even without the specular lighting that is promised to be implemented in a later build, they look pretty good.

A unique feature of Warhammer Online is the morale system, which deepens combat significantly. More morale is generated if you have more players in your group or fight for longer periods of time, which in turn enables five successive levels of morale actions. The first tier might be something like a cannon going off in the distance for a dwarf and taking out a small group of the enemy, while a fifth level morale action might be something more along the lines of Armageddon. Players can gain additional morale actions for each tier as they progress down their career paths. Of course, losing a fight or taking a large amount of damage will lower morale, making it more of a coup-de-grace than something that you can use as a last-ditch effort.

Another interesting feature is the tactics bar, which a player can use to tailor his abilities to a certain extent. A player's tactic bar is composed of a set number of slots, and you can fill up this bar with tactics that may take anywhere between one and all of your slots. These tactics range from adding fire damage or frost defense, to increasing your ranged abilities or shortening your spell recovery time. This is useful in that you can strengthen yourself towards a particular enemy or just tailor your abilities to your own play style. Tactics may be shrunken down so that they take up less space on the bar, but by and large, it's a matter of fitting the right tactics for the right situation.

Finally, there are many things that were impressive over the course of the press event. Borrowing a page from another successful MMO, Warhammer Online's UI will not only be fully customizable, but to some extent, it will also be configurable from within the game, eliminating a Cosmos-style add-on for the most basic functions. The game will sport a day and night cycle, though it is unknown if there will be any sort of weather effects. Instead of a static image that represents your character, you see an animated portrait of the character's face, which reacts accordingly to in-game events. There is collision detection between members of opposing sides, making combat a little less of the, "Hey, let's jump right through the other player to get behind them, even though I'm wearing 200 pounds of armor," and more of a tactical affair. Mythic also had the foresight to eliminate the drudgery that plague a lot of MMOs; at the outset, you won't be merely fighting rats and fish. As the orcs, you can expect to be repelling a beach landing of dwarves who are coming over a nearby waterfall using barrels.

Essentially, Mythic not only managed to only make Warhammer Online faithful to the existing universe and very, very deep in relation to players who know the material, but they also made it interesting enough to welcome newbies. As if to punctuate the point, a series of slides taped to Paul Barnett's door detail quite rigidly the "anvil that all aspects of the game are broken upon." A lot of effort has been put forth to make sure that Warhammer Online isn't just another cookie-cutter MMO title, and the game is really turning out to be what you would expect from an experienced MMO developer wielding a license that has over 24 years of rich content to pull from. Suffice it to say that even as a complete newcomer to the Warhammer license and a jaded MMOer almost by profession, I found Warhammer Online to be pretty impressive, and it's easy to look forward to more information on Warhammer Online as it continues along its development cycle.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: tazelbain on April 04, 2006, 03:34:41 PM
Hmmm.  This seems more PvP geared than I expected.  I like it.  Now all they have to do is say no uber loot and I'll be sold.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Nebu on April 04, 2006, 05:07:39 PM
If the box said: DAoC without the shitty PvE, I'd buy it.  Of course, anything exceeding that will blow me away.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: HRose on April 04, 2006, 05:17:35 PM
The game will sport a day and night cycle
Ohhhhhhhhhhh!

I'm impressed.

Btw, the goblin and orc seem to use the exact same animations. It's just the same model made more fat and with a different head.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Telemediocrity on April 04, 2006, 06:26:31 PM
I want to see their policy on expansion packs / content additions - something along the lines of "We'll never add anything that makes you spend more than X hours to be PvP competitive once again."

I spent about five fucking years dreading patch days, where no content was good content because that way at least nothing would be broken or fucked up from the previous balance.  I don't want to have to do that again.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Trippy on April 04, 2006, 07:45:02 PM
Quote
Initially, there will be six playable races to choose from: humans, chaos, orcs, dwarves, high elves, and dark elves.
If you want the fanboys to take you seriously it's best to spell things correctly -- i.e. it's "dwarfs" not "dwarves" in WH.

Quote
Indeed, in the overall scheme of things, it is the goal to take over the enemy capital city, so cities are definitely not the safe zones to which MMORPG players may be accustomed. Quest givers cannot die, so the most basic operation of a city will still function for those players who are PvP-averse, but past that, expect to see a sizable war party at the city gates on occasion, in addition to your fellow players asking for your help in thwarting them.
I'm confused. If cities aren't safe why does it matter that quest givers can not die? Or are the cities safe to those that aren't flagged for RvR? What's the point of capturing cities if the city still functions?

Quote
Transport between zones hasn't been nailed down yet, and the presenter was threatened with throat-slitting motions before an exact answer could be extracted about it. While instant teleportation has been ruled out to get you from zone to zone, some sort of fast transport will undoubtedly be available. For instance, orcs might simply catapult themselves across the land, while dwarves might utilize gyrocopters.
I'd buy the game (though not necessarily subscribe) if I got to glide around as a Doom Diver for transportation.

Quote
For instance, there are now public PvE quests which are automatically granted to any player who enters a specific zone, such as someone needing a few hundred of a particular item. Anyone who contributes to the goal gains experience, so instead of situations like in other MMOs where players are fighting with one another to collect six tusks or whatnot all from one area, that same group of players is now working together, knowing that it's all the same as to who turns in the tusk, since they will all get the proper experience for the quest.
Oh yeah like this system ain't going to be ripe for abuse.

Quote
A unique feature of Warhammer Online is the morale system, which deepens combat significantly. More morale is generated if you have more players in your group or fight for longer periods of time, which in turn enables five successive levels of morale actions. The first tier might be something like a cannon going off in the distance for a dwarf and taking out a small group of the enemy, while a fifth level morale action might be something more along the lines of Armageddon. Players can gain additional morale actions for each tier as they progress down their career paths. Of course, losing a fight or taking a large amount of damage will lower morale, making it more of a coup-de-grace than something that you can use as a last-ditch effort.
Great another rich get richer game mechanic.

Quote
Mythic also had the foresight to eliminate the drudgery that plague a lot of MMOs; at the outset, you won't be merely fighting rats and fish. As the orcs, you can expect to be repelling a beach landing of dwarves who are coming over a nearby waterfall using barrels.
The drudgery isn't that you have to kill itsy-bitsy creatures at the beginning -- it's that you have to level up before you can contribute to the RvR effort. Mythic is obviously borrowing their tiered battlegrounds setup from DAoC so hopefully that won't be a problem, though with the way they are handling advancement it's possible you won't have enough skills to be useful in RvR until you've played for a bit.

Edit: fixed typo


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Johny Cee on April 04, 2006, 09:34:54 PM
I have to say, as someone who still enjoys DAoC rvr....  Looks surprisingly good, at this point.  Especially with the trends Mythic has been taking with DAoC pvp (reducing the importance of CC, eliminating radar, reducing the pve grind for levels/items/abilities while boosting the amount of lower end rvr/pvp).

I'd love to start fresh playing with the few DAoC folks kicking around here (Nebu, eldaec, Hrose, et al).



Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Trippy on April 05, 2006, 03:36:13 AM
Another preview (http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/warhammeronline/news.html?sid=6147072&page=1&q=&q=) (from GameSpot). Looks like Mythic gave the same preview to a bunch of media people.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Arthur_Parker on April 05, 2006, 04:06:38 AM
Allakhazam Preview (http://www.allakhazam.com/news/sdetail7175.html?story=7175)

Quote
You can go through the entire game on only PvP, only PvE, or (as they're hoping most folks do), a mix of both. The game starts 80% PvE 20% PvP, and they're planning on having it end up with the opposite ratio. There will be PvE raids for those that get bored of RvR, but RvR is the major focus of the game. You can RvR from day 1 of playing, there's no initial time where all you do is kill bats and rats.
..........
They're planning on having NO Bind on Pickup, and only maybe having Bind on Equip. They want a robust economy, and they're considering adding some sort of item decay to balance it out.

MMORPG Preview (http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/setview/features/loadFeature/552/gameID/239)

Quote
In Warhammer’s fiction, the races are all distinct personalities. Mythic set out to ensure that their difference are reflected in the way they built missions for each group.

To illustrate, Paul Barnett made two examples. In the first, he made a simple quest where someone asks a character from each race: “Would you please get a pie for me from the old lady down the road kind sir?” In short, a FedEx quest. In every MMORPG, the player would simply get the pie. In Warhammer, they set out to make sure that each race can do it in a unique way. Here is how Paul’s chart had each race react:

Empire: Gets the pie and returns it like a good little altar boy…the pats himself on the back for a job well done.
OR
Evil Empire: Gets the pie, wraps it up in a box with skulls and pseudo-latin phrases on it, and returns it like a good little altar boy…then adjusts his eye-patch and pats himself on the back for a job well done.
Dwarf: Gets the pie and checks it for gold… finding none he sells it for some ale.
Greenskin: Defecates in the pie… then eats it… then defecates some more… then decides to kill the person who asked him to get the pie.
Chaos: Kills the old lady, violates the pie, then wears it as a hat… then the pie grows an arm.
Elf: Too good for such a lowly errand.
Dark Elf: Betrays the pie then whines that he is the rightful owner of the pan the pie was cooked in.

He continued to demonstrate the difference through a second chart. In this he took the stock phrase “hello would you like to look at my sword” and translated it how each race would say it.

Orc: Oi Git, get a load of me choppa before I guts ya!
Elf: Remember the songs this blade has song for our family.
Human: (brandishes sword) What are you looking at stranger?
Dark Elf: (stabs person) You appear to have got your blood on my blade.
Dwarf: Sword, sword. Axe’s lad, we use axes!
Chaos: Blood for the blood god. Any ones blood will do, even yours.
This does not mean you can actually defecate as an Orc – I hope – but these two templates are the actual examples provided to the quest teams as they crafted content for each race in the world.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: schild on April 05, 2006, 04:10:20 AM
Ooooh no bind on pickup. That's a secondary market euphanism for erection.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Trippy on April 05, 2006, 04:11:54 AM
They're planning on having NO Bind on Pickup, and only maybe having Bind on Equip. They want a robust economy, and they're considering adding some sort of item decay to balance it out.
If this is going to be your typical item-centric MMORPG item decay is going to cause lots of wailing and gnashing of teeth.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Arthur_Parker on April 05, 2006, 04:25:01 AM
RPG Vault Preview (http://rpgvault.ign.com/articles/699/699911p1.html)

1UP Preview (http://www.1up.com/do/previewPage?cId=3149284)

Some marketing guy at Mythic must be on something, that's an awful lot of previews in such a short space of time.


Funny stuff from the mmorpg preview above.

Quote
What is Warhammer?

“No one at Games Workshop understands Warhammer, so this is not an easy thing to do,” said Barnett as he attempted to explain to us what Warhammer is.

Paul sees Warhammer as a concept, “a cauldron of ideas”.

He then hit us with an analogy; one of his favorite things to do.

“Warhammer is Batman,” he said flatly.

Seeing confusion in the eyes of a group of American, Canadian and Japanese press, he sprung into action on his whiteboard – he insists Britain does not have technology and thus he must use a whiteboard – to drive this point home.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Azazel on April 05, 2006, 02:24:33 PM
I agree that these are good reasons while turn based tabletop games are limited to two sides, but it's worth reminding everyone that these problems vanish in a real-time MMOG.
----
On the subject of PS it plays ok in Europe (even on US servers), can't speak for anywhere else.

Sure. I was replying to 5150's post about not having seen any display games of Warhamster in GW stores that weren't 2-sided affairs. In the WFB background though, the strongest alliances between "races" would probably be Dwarfs-Empire-Kislevites. Everyone else pretty much tolerates each other at best and hates each other at worst. Or usual. Maybe Nurgle-Skaven, though I couldn't see their leaders getting along anyway.

Um, so my point was that 3 sides (at minimum) would be the best idea for the game. You can have High and/or Wood elf boobies on the good side, along with hot French chicks. The bad side gets your Dark elf bondage babes (though Warhammer DE have pale skin a la Lady Death or the chick on the Guildwars box instead of dark blue), and chaos gets viking wimmenz with tattoos (Marauders/Norscans) and Slaanesh bondage babes.

So, you know, they can still have 3 realms and boobies available to all involved...

more later. time for work.



Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: tazelbain on April 05, 2006, 02:37:18 PM
It would be pretty sweet if WAR has the same turn around time as DAoC.  I hope they do the same this time, but when the game is done hold off an extra six-monthes and polish it 'til it blinds and run super stress tests( a ton of people in a small area).


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Nebu on April 05, 2006, 02:51:50 PM
It would be pretty sweet in WAR has the same turn around time as DAoC.  I hope they do the same this time, but when the game is done hold off an extra six-monthes and polish it 'til blinds and run super stress tests( a ton of people in a small area).

This makes an excellent point that I've neglected.  One of the things that has troubled me about DAoC is not only the lag effects on PvP, but the way that players are able to use lag to their advantage (lag jumping, circle strafing, window dragging, etc.).  I'm wondering what Mythic is doing to decrease the impact that these things have on gameplay. 


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Morfiend on April 05, 2006, 02:58:32 PM
Quote
Chaos: Kills the old lady, violates the pie, then wears it as a hat… then the pie grows an arm.

I love Chaos. I cant wait to kill old ladies and fuck pies. I AM PIEFUCKER HEAR ME ROAR!


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Telemediocrity on April 05, 2006, 04:52:50 PM
Ooooh no bind on pickup. That's a secondary market euphanism for erection.

What does bind on pickup / bind on equip mean, exactly?

In AC1 we had "bonded" (cannot be dropped on death) and "attuned" (cannot be given to others while alive).  Is bind something different, or same name for different thing?


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Modern Angel on April 05, 2006, 05:54:47 PM
Can I say that the media blitz is working on me?

Please don't fuck this up. I mean, you will and I'll buy it and kvetch after I do but a boy can hope, right?


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Driakos on April 05, 2006, 06:47:07 PM
What does bind on pickup / bind on equip mean, exactly?

In AC1 we had "bonded" (cannot be dropped on death) and "attuned" (cannot be given to others while alive).  Is bind something different, or same name for different thing?

Bind on Pickup stuff, can only be NPC vendored, destroyed, or disenchanted for materials (aside from using it of course).  You cannot mule it or trade it.

Bind on Equip stuff can be traded, Auction-Housed, mailed, whatever.  Until it is equipped by someone.  Then see above.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Trippy on April 05, 2006, 07:30:55 PM
What does bind on pickup / bind on equip mean, exactly?

In AC1 we had "bonded" (cannot be dropped on death) and "attuned" (cannot be given to others while alive).  Is bind something different, or same name for different thing?
Wait a minute you've been trying to convince people that DDO is a better game than WoW and you've never even played WoW?


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Telemediocrity on April 05, 2006, 11:13:59 PM
What does bind on pickup / bind on equip mean, exactly?

In AC1 we had "bonded" (cannot be dropped on death) and "attuned" (cannot be given to others while alive).  Is bind something different, or same name for different thing?
Wait a minute you've been trying to convince people that DDO is a better game than WoW and you've never even played WoW?

I played WoW up to level 8 or so, and quit because it sucked and at that point I had invested at least 5 hours - which is far too long to play for a game that's not offering you any fun and doesn't appear to offer anything else fun in the future.  Most of WoW's featureset appears similar (i.e. Diku w/ PvP) to DAoC and AO, which I invested about 100 hours in each, 100 hours utterly wasted.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: eldaec on April 06, 2006, 01:01:59 AM
Ooooh no bind on pickup. That's a secondary market euphanism for erection.

I never understood the value of having bind on anything.

Hand-me-downs are a valid expression of community.

If a game needs bind on anything to maintain its integrity then your item design process is broken.

DAoC had items about right until they introduced ToA artifacts, which you knew were broken straight away because they had bind on activation (as well because they were, you know, batshit insane)


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Azazel on April 06, 2006, 01:05:53 AM
As someone who's going to be internetting from Japan next year, you have my sympathy. Nonetheless: A game not working well outside of America is not gamebreaking to those of us who live in America.  Sorry to say it, man, but it's the truth.  Also, ping was never a walk in the park in the MMOs here, either - in AC1, I was usually PvPing with 200ms lag or so (Though compared to what you experience abroad, that might be miniscule).  Nonetheless, we had really good guilds of Danes and Frenchmen and whatnot in AC1 DT and they weren't half bad at PvP.  So while I sympathize, I have a hard time believing it's impossible or not worth doing just because Euros may have a hard time playing on American servers.

Well seeing that WOW has raised the bar bigtime in what developers can hope for (realistic or not) it really depends on how niche they're prepared to be with their games.
As of last week, WoW is still the 3rd-best selling PC game overall in Australia more than a full 2 years aftyer release (source: http://palgn.com.au/article.php?id=4130) and so while I can't find hard numbers I think that Australian/NZ numbers alone must be higher than the 66k total we were tossing around for DDO in the other thread. Not to mention that every "Aussie" server gets clusterfucked pretty damn hard by overwhelming numbers of users. If game devs want to ignore the international market and those potential subs/numbers, then hey, their funeral.

And as an aside, I think the fact that WoW is still selling like hotcakes 2 years on pretty much puts to rest Schild's regular argument that WoW's numbers are made up of Blizzard fanbois who won't play anything else.. I'd guess most of the Blizz fanbois bought their WoW accounts a year or more ago by this pont. Regardless of anything else, it's bringing a lot of fresh players to the genre who are all potential customers for Warhammer, a decent sci-fi MMOG, or even catass-heaven Vanguard. Imagine the numbers a properly-made SWG could do!


A game built for PvP should have PvP optimization graphics checkboxes in the main menu.
-A checkbox to view all players as the same character model, perhaps with size scaling to indicate race if it's one of those games where race is really important (I don't think race should be really important in a PvP-oriented game, but that's separate)
-A checkbox to simplify all player skins to a single, low-res one per each class.  We essentially used to do this back in AC to hit 60FPS or so even in big battles.
-A checkbox to make spell effects and sparky weapons highly simplified, with color differentiating between effects.

Wow. That sounds so uninteresting I have to wonder if you're beginning to troll in this thread as well.


I played WoW up to level 8 or so, and quit because it sucked and at that point I had invested at least 5 hours - which is far too long to <blah blah blah>

*cough*

It's one thing to say you found it to be shitty. Fair enough. But it's not enough experience to talk about the game's ups and downs very much at all.

I got to level 14 in DAOC before quitting due to lack of interest. Doesn't mean I know shit about that game though.

 


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: eldaec on April 06, 2006, 01:16:31 AM
Quote
Empire: Gets the pie and returns it like a good little altar boy…the pats himself on the back for a job well done.
OR
Evil Empire: Gets the pie, wraps it up in a box with skulls and pseudo-latin phrases on it, and returns it like a good little altar boy…then adjusts his eye-patch and pats himself on the back for a job well done.
Dwarf: Gets the pie and checks it for gold… finding none he sells it for some ale.
Greenskin: Defecates in the pie… then eats it… then defecates some more… then decides to kill the person who asked him to get the pie.
Chaos: Kills the old lady, violates the pie, then wears it as a hat… then the pie grows an arm.
Elf: Too good for such a lowly errand.
Dark Elf: Betrays the pie then whines that he is the rightful owner of the pan the pie was cooked in.

This I like. Espeicially the Dark Elf entry.

Though the greenskin one should read...

Quote
Greenskin: Eats the pie. Forgets what he was doing.

Warhammer Orcs work better when they aren't actually evil, just overemotional, suffering from ADD, and possibly in possession of two Y chromosomes.

Which is another reason they shouldn't be on the same side as Chaos Humies.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Azazel on April 06, 2006, 02:15:41 AM
Warhammer Orcs work better when they aren't actually evil, just overemotional, suffering from ADD, and possibly in possession of two Y chromosomes.
Which is another reason they shouldn't be on the same side as Chaos Humies.

Well, I wouldn't even call it overemotional. They're amoral. Not WoW's "blood and honor" even, just pure, distilled Darwinism. Survival of the fittest, strongest and most brutal.

They just like to 'ave sum fun. an' fun iz 'ittin fings. Da boyz jus' want a good 'ard fight!

They're essentially violent, tribal 'ooligans. And they've got no love for Chaos at all.

In one of my Warhammer books years ago they summed up the Orc/k's philosophy of warfare. Went something like:

If we win, we win.
If we lose, we is dead, so it doesn't count.



Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: eldaec on April 06, 2006, 03:00:22 AM
^^ what he said, Azrael put it better than I did.

Crucially...

Quote
no love for Chaos at all.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Arthur_Parker on April 06, 2006, 03:14:51 AM
On greenskin's, one of the Mythic devs recently had this to say on Tattoo's and Piercing.

"Tat's are good, Warpaint is Gud, bones shoved through skin are bettah."

So I like the style so far.  Mythic have mentioned different ruleset servers but not seen any details on them yet.

Bit concerned about lag like Nebu mentioned, the justification for everyone looking the same in Lineage 2 was to cut down lag, from what I'm reading in the previews everyone in Warhammer is going to look slightly different....


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: HaemishM on April 06, 2006, 08:24:44 AM
What does bind on pickup / bind on equip mean, exactly?

In AC1 we had "bonded" (cannot be dropped on death) and "attuned" (cannot be given to others while alive).  Is bind something different, or same name for different thing?
Wait a minute you've been trying to convince people that DDO is a better game than WoW and you've never even played WoW?

I played WoW up to level 8 or so, and quit because it sucked and at that point I had invested at least 5 hours - which is far too long to play for a game that's not offering you any fun and doesn't appear to offer anything else fun in the future.  Most of WoW's featureset appears similar (i.e. Diku w/ PvP) to DAoC and AO, which I invested about 100 hours in each, 100 hours utterly wasted.

If you only played to level 8 in WoW, you really don't have any call to criticize its PVP like you have been, mainly because at level 8 you'd have NO FUCKING CLUE what it entailed.

Again, you are a tool.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Telemediocrity on April 06, 2006, 08:37:29 AM
I've watched it played out - after years and years and years of PvP, I can tell what's good PvP and what's not from watching.  Watching CS, for instance, I'd have an insane urge to jump on a PC and join in.  WoW, by contrast, looks rather shitty - and the mechanics are set up so that it's pretty much impossible for it to be good.  Projectiles you can't physically dodge?  Come on!

If WoW wasn't offering me PvP action by level 8, that's its fault for a poorly designed game.  AC1 allowed me to PvP at level 1.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Arthur_Parker on April 06, 2006, 09:05:10 AM
Does every thread have to be about you?  Wow's shit because you made level 8 and didn't get to kill anyone, DDO's future is bright even though you don't currently play it.  Please go fuck up another thread I'm trying to decide what warhammer race I want to play, your negative karma is seriously bringing me down and possibly jinxing the entire project.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: HaemishM on April 06, 2006, 09:09:14 AM
I'll repeat it just so you can be thoroughly sure where you stand.

You... are... a... tool.

Not every game is AC1. Watching WoW's PVP may be shitty, but that doesn't mean playing it will be shitty. You can say that "WoW is a shitty game because I don't get to PVP in the first five minutes of creation." And that might be valid. Stupid, but valid. You could say "It just didn't interest me" and that's valid, too. But you've made quantifible statements about how shitty and meaningless WoW's PVP is, like you've actually played it. And you haven't. At all.

As for not being able to dodge projectiles, again, not every game is AC1. While I might agree with you that I would prefer that option, it's been in just about every PVP-able MMOG out there that projectiles aren't dodge-able without some kind of skill. That doesn't mean it isn't fun. Shit, Shadowbane had great PVP, but you couldn't dodge projectiles there either. Arrows just follow you.

WoW's PVP feature set isn't for you, and that's fine. But you can't really say for sure, since you never participated in it. It's more fun that you think.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Telemediocrity on April 06, 2006, 09:54:07 AM
Not every game is AC1.

True, but most games should be more like AC1, IMHO.

Quote
Watching WoW's PVP may be shitty, but that doesn't mean playing it will be shitty. You can say that "WoW is a shitty game because I don't get to PVP in the first five minutes of creation." And that might be valid. Stupid, but valid. You could say "It just didn't interest me" and that's valid, too. But you've made quantifible statements about how shitty and meaningless WoW's PVP is, like you've actually played it. And you haven't. At all.

The problem is, it doesn't have certain features that are absolutely necessary for good PvP - for instance, fun twitch combat.

Quote
As for not being able to dodge projectiles, again, not every game is AC1.

While I might agree with you that I would prefer that option, it's been in just about every PVP-able MMOG out there that projectiles aren't dodge-able without some kind of skill.

Just about every PvP MMO out there wasn't any good, IMHO (See previous statement about the vast majority of MMOs, and MUDs by extension, and RPGs by extension, sucking in general).  It was pretty much sheer dumb luck that I happened to start out in the genre with one that was good. Had I started with a Zek on EQ and incorrectly assumed that everything else out there was similar, I probably wouldn't play MMOs to this day. (FWIW, Neocron had that, too)

Integration with your character's movement is key.  If my character's jumping, running, etcetera doesn't interact physically with the game world in a manner akin to Half Life, it feels like i'm playing a graphical layer on top of a MUD.  I mean, can you imagine playing a game of CS where the bullets just followed you, or where the jump button was 'just for show'?

When I'm saying "I don't like WoW's PvP", I'm not saying "And you shouldn't like it, either".  There's the implied "IMHO" at the end.  I get the feeling most F13'ers and myself are probably at opposite ends of the spectrum on the basics of what we enjoy; with the exception of Betrayal at Krondor and recent sand-boxy RPGs like Morrowind and Oblivion, I'm much more of an adventure/action gamer than an RPG player, and I've never found a MUD that was enjoyable.  Thus, MMOs that resemble RPGs/MUDs tend to start with two strikes against them.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: HaemishM on April 06, 2006, 10:10:12 AM
Quote
Watching WoW's PVP may be shitty, but that doesn't mean playing it will be shitty. You can say that "WoW is a shitty game because I don't get to PVP in the first five minutes of creation." And that might be valid. Stupid, but valid. You could say "It just didn't interest me" and that's valid, too. But you've made quantifible statements about how shitty and meaningless WoW's PVP is, like you've actually played it. And you haven't. At all.

The problem is, it doesn't have certain features that are absolutely necessary for good PvP - for instance, fun twitch combat.

Neither does chess, but it's got great PVP.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: 5150 on April 06, 2006, 10:35:07 AM
Isnt one thread derail into what wrong with Tele enough?

Please lets not have another - think of the children!


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Morfiend on April 06, 2006, 10:45:31 AM
Not to derail farther, but I think I just figured him out (besides being a troll).

The problem is, it doesn't have certain features that are absolutely necessary for good PvP - for instance, fun twitch combat.

You dont like MMOG PVP. Ok, now thats done, stop gaying up every thread.

Anyway, to the topic at hand. I have always LOVED the Chaos guys. I also liked Undead. I was very excited when Blizzard announced that you could be Undead. I am even more excited that I could be a Chaos Warrior in Warhammer. I will buy this game no matter what, just so I can run around as a Chaos warrior for a few days. I just hope they make the Chaos guys properly demented.

I read in a dev interview that the devs are planning on certen races being underpopulated, I believe they said they thought the less pretty races would be the under populated ones. He named Orcs and Chaos as the ones they thought would be under populated.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Telemediocrity on April 06, 2006, 11:06:32 AM
You dont like MMOG PVP. Ok, now thats done, stop gaying up every thread.

Sure I do.  Neocron, Planetside, and AC1 all offer great PvP.  There's no reason WoW should be the norm and those should be the exceptions.

Quote
Anyway, to the topic at hand. I have always LOVED the Chaos guys. I also liked Undead. I was very excited when Blizzard announced that you could be Undead. I am even more excited that I could be a Chaos Warrior in Warhammer. I will buy this game no matter what, just so I can run around as a Chaos warrior for a few days. I just hope they make the Chaos guys properly demented.

I read in a dev interview that the devs are planning on certen races being underpopulated, I believe they said they thought the less pretty races would be the under populated ones. He named Orcs and Chaos as the ones they thought would be under populated.

I have a hard time believing Chaos will be underpopulated - it's just too badass.  The reason ugly sides are underpopulated in other games is that they're ugly without ever actualy 'feeling' 'evil'.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: HaemishM on April 06, 2006, 11:09:01 AM
You dont like MMOG PVP. Ok, now thats done, stop gaying up every thread.

Sure I do.  Neocron, Planetside, and AC1 all offer great PvP.  There's no reason WoW should be the norm and those should be the exceptions.

There are 6.5 million reasons.

Stop fagging up threads. Don't you have a final to write?


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Telemediocrity on April 06, 2006, 11:17:58 AM
You dont like MMOG PVP. Ok, now thats done, stop gaying up every thread.

Sure I do.  Neocron, Planetside, and AC1 all offer great PvP.  There's no reason WoW should be the norm and those should be the exceptions.

There are 6.5 million reasons.

Stop fagging up threads. Don't you have a final to write?

Due in a month - and hey, I talked about Chaos as well in the post, whereas you didn't.  And while WoW is a big chunk of the market, that doesn't mean WoW's PvP becomes the default behavior for MMOs (To where someone who doesn't like their PvP on its principles becomes someone who 'doesn't like MMO PvP'), any moreso than the fact that WoW has raids means that someone who doesn't like WoW's raids, or raids in general, is "against MMO PvE".

Just because it's being done a lot now doesn't mean that it's inherently the MMO genre's default.

For all we know, World of Starcraft can come along with 10 million subscribers and full twitch PvP, and when you say "You know, I don't see how PvP can be fun when it's twitch", I could retort with "Okay, there's your problem, you don't like MMOG PvP".  It'd be equally silly.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: HaemishM on April 06, 2006, 11:47:46 AM
Due in a month - and hey, I talked about Chaos as well in the post, whereas you didn't.  And while WoW is a big chunk of the market, that doesn't mean WoW's PvP becomes the default behavior for MMOs (To where someone who doesn't like their PvP on its principles becomes someone who 'doesn't like MMO PvP'), any moreso than the fact that WoW has raids means that someone who doesn't like WoW's raids, or raids in general, is "against MMO PvE".

Just because it's being done a lot now doesn't mean that it's inherently the MMO genre's default.

Except that everything in MMOG's that has been PVP has been done the "WoW" way before WoW ever came out, other than UO and the ones you mentioned, were done that way. DAoC was done that way. EQ was done that way. There are more "WoW-like" MMOG's with PVP than there are "not-WoW-like."

Quote
For all we know, World of Starcraft can come along with 10 million subscribers and full twitch PvP, and when you say "You know, I don't see how PvP can be fun when it's twitch", I could retort with "Okay, there's your problem, you don't like MMOG PvP".  It'd be equally silly.

I'd love MMOG PVP with twitch. I'm actually enjoying Planetside. But the vast majority of MMOG PVP is NOT TWITCH. You listed the exceptions. WoW is more the standard than the things you listed, has had more games that are like it put out, and has more subscribers than all the others combined. It is a defacto standard until someone comes along and makes something more popular. 


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: tazelbain on April 06, 2006, 11:58:39 AM
I am sure we should add more skill to these game, but I don't think twitch is the skill (maybe as one skill of many).  I suspect the advocates of twitch consider themselves as better than average twitchers hence the advocation is self serving.   I am sure that if the skill these games rewarded was math skills, you would be whining about that the guy who can do linear algebra in his head who keeps owning your ass.  But you would have no problem if the situation was reversed. 




Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Telemediocrity on April 06, 2006, 02:38:43 PM
I suspect the advocates of twitch consider themselves as better than average twitchers hence the advocation is self serving.

Dear god, no.  I suck at CounterStrike.  But the great thing about twitch is that it's fun even when you suck, even when you haven't put any time in.  IMHO, of course.  You can hop onto a CS server, knowing little or nothing about CS, and just enjoy, even if you're getting owned.

Tying 'fun' to 'ingame success' is a big no-no for me.  A good PvP MMO should be like CS, where you're having fun regardless of whether you win or lose.  IMHO, this was one of AC1's huge strengths in PvP.  The kids I know who were dying in every battle were often the most ardently in love with the game.

If we can put linear algebra into PvP, I think that would kick ass as well.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Morfiend on April 06, 2006, 02:41:58 PM
Can we serously go back to talking about Warhammer? We understand you are having fun trolling every thread, but it really getting old.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Arthur_Parker on April 06, 2006, 02:58:37 PM
Well Elf and Dark Elf were never really options and Empire is out as it may be fairly boring. 

So I'm torn between Goblin, Chaos and Dwarf.  Currently leaning towards Dwarf and travelling asap to Elven lands.  There I can roleplay being incredibly rude to the stuck up bastards, when that wears thin I get to kill Dark Elves and watch Dark Elves kill normal Elves.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: HaemishM on April 06, 2006, 02:59:52 PM
I imagine I'll end up either Empire or Dwarf, if you can be a Dwarven Slayer type. I've never liked the "evil" races in Warhammer, though if hard-pressed, I'd have to choose Chaos Warriors over any of the others. Especially Orcs.

But then playing a Bitch Elf could be interesting.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Telemediocrity on April 06, 2006, 03:01:26 PM
I'll either go Chaos, Dark Elves, or Dwarves.  My top priorities are stealth and runspeed, in that order.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: HaemishM on April 06, 2006, 03:10:18 PM
I'm pretty sure the Dwarves will have neither. Chaos Warriors might have stealth, but runspeed? Only with a horse.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Morfiend on April 06, 2006, 03:19:18 PM
Any one know what the "Evil Human" they are talking about is? I thought that was Chaos, but then he mentioned Chaos later. In the article I read, it said every side had an antithesis.

Human - Chaos
Elves - Dark Elves
Dwarves - Greenskins

Would evil human just fall under human?

I doubt Chaos Warriors will have stealth. Seems there is going to be 4 classes per race, 2 Casters and 2 melee for most. I think he said Greenskins only had one caster, so maybe they have a thief class. I wouldnt be supprised to see a stealth caster class for Chaos, but thats just a guess.

I myself will forsure play Chaos. I will probably have a greenskin alt so I can eat poop. Also, maybe a evil human, depenind on how they do them. But Chaos, defenetly.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Arthur_Parker on April 06, 2006, 03:29:28 PM
Pretty sure Evil Human is Chaos, maybe a very recently corrupted part of the Human Empire.  It's probably only going to be Khorne Chaos at release.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Morfiend on April 06, 2006, 03:30:39 PM
Pretty sure Evil Human is Chaos, maybe a very recently corrupted part of the Human Empire.  It's probably only going to be Khorne Chaos at release.

If you go and look at the fedex quest explination, it has one for Evil Human and one for Chaos.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Arthur_Parker on April 06, 2006, 03:39:44 PM
Oh yeah, strange I read that a few times and missed it each time.  Maybe you can start as Empire and end up Chaos by taking the Evil quest options?  If they feared Human's being the largest side population wise it might make sense to promote the dark side and it fits the IP.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Hoax on April 06, 2006, 04:22:58 PM
Human - Too bad it is Empire not Britonian, if I can use those gattling guns or pistol/sword I'm there though
High Elf - Phantom Warrior
Dwarf - Slayer
Orc/Goblin - The one race I would play a caster for, if they do it right the magic should be awesome
Dark Elf - Witch-bitch (nekkid chick that dual wields swords)
Chaos - No interest I have a strong hatred for all things Chaos.

So basically to translate to diku-terms:

Human IF:  I get a ranged attack that has me using a gun.

High Elf IF:  They have a well designed skirmish/melee/range hybrid possibly with limited stealth or at least anti stealth abilities.

Orc/Goblin IF:  The magic at all matches the IP

Dark Elf IF:  They get nothing but bondage elf titties right.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Azazel on April 06, 2006, 05:27:29 PM
Going from my knowledge of the TTG:

Evil human could be lower-level-chaos, if they make you work your way from Chaos Cultist to Marauder to Warrior. It depends how they do it since chaos is such an all-pervasive thing in Warhammer. Are they going Khornate, or undivided.

Greenskins in Warhammer only have Shamans really - it's one school of magic, though there's a big difference between an Orc Shaman and a Night Gioblin shaman coked up on magic mushrooms!

Can't see chaos with stealth really. Only if they had a spy class, which is much more a Chaos cultist thing, specifically Tzeentch or Slaanesh (or undivided). Doesn't fit in with Khorne or Nurgle.

Dwarf Slayers are such a strong part of the IP, so I can't see them being left out, if only to differentiate the game and race from things like WoW. However, slayer is really only appropriate for the last stages of any career path ingame, as the idea is that to become a slayer, you've committed some great dishonour and you now seek solace in a heroic death. They then go Troll Slayer/Giant Slayer/Dragon Slayer as they increasingly go after bigger targets as they continue to kill stuff, (constantly failing in their quest for that honourable death). That's fine. But it doesn't really lend itself to becoming a Dwarven engineer after you've been a slayer for awhile (yes I know about the Scottish airship guy in the books, but he was the excption. if they let people change profession after becoming a slayer, it'd be like.. it'd be like letting everyone become Jedi in an OT Star Wars game or something.  :-P


Oh, Telemoron: On dodging projectiles in MMOGs:

Have you ever tried to dodge arrows in real life? It's not all that different to dodging bullets. The onus is really on the one firing the weapon to hit, as they have to lead the target properly, be aware of wind, etc. Just like with a gun. Try it sometime. Just because they let you do it in some MMOGs doesn't mean it's realistic. It's not space invaders.

Dodging magic projectiles. - it depends how you "view" things like Fireballs and so on. You might look at fireballs as big, slow, flying things that go in a single direction (see Diablo). Others might see them as smart missiles. It depends whether the game mechanics/designers/etc decide that you cast a fireball towards the mobs, or if you cast a fireball at a mob. Because, you know, it's fucking magic.

Here's an idea for you, by the way. Go play AC1 again, and stop being a troll/little bitch combo. Go talk to the Peace Corps about your enlistment so you can get sent somewhere that doesn't have internet access... :roll:



Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Trippy on April 06, 2006, 09:38:11 PM
I've never played the PnP RP game or looked through the rulebook so I'm going by what I know about the miniatures game. I'm assuming things like mounted units, vehicles (chariots), and war machines will not be playable so that leaves just the foot troops. I don't like playing straight up fighter classes so that will cut down on the possible choices for me.

On the "good" side I've never liked the Empire and the High Elves are pretty bland as well so that leaves the Dwarfs which fortunately do have a lot of interesting foot troops (in fact they might have too many) in large part because they don't have any non-foot units except for the Gyrocopter. Unfortunately that also means putting up with all the RPers with their fake Scottish accents.

So for Dwarfs my picks would be:

  • Doomseeker -- Dual axe chain wielding psychos that make Troll Slayers look like pansies. No chance they will made player playable since they are basically super-powerful "suicide" units but it would've fun if they were.

  • Engineer -- I like playing support classes.

  • Thunderers -- What's not to like about shooting guns?

  • Runesmith/Runepriest -- Dwarf equivalent of a spell caster.

  • Ironbreaker -- Walking miniature tanks. One of the few pure fighter types I could see myself playing.

  • Miners -- Miners can dig tunnels and pop up behind enemy lines in scenarios that allow such things. While actually digging tunnels in an MMORPG is way too much work to put in it'd be cool if they had "prebuilt" tunnels on certain maps with entrances/exits and passages you could open and close with miners a la The Rock in Team Fortress. You would need an equivalent class/skill tree on the Greenskin side since the Skaven aren't in the game so they would need to invent something like Goblin demolition teams a la WarCraft.

Like I said above Empire's pretty bland but if I had to I guess I could play an Engineer (more guns), Warrior Priest or Wizard in a pinch. With High Elves I could do Shadow Warrior (archer/ranger), Archer, or Mage again in a pinch.

I don't like playing evil races but I don't consider the Greenskins evil (they would be Chaotic Neutral in D&D) -- they simply exist to fight including each other if there are no other convenient targets around -- so I could see myself playing them especially if they do the goblins right.

So for the Greenskins my picks would be:

  • Night Goblin Fanatic -- Also not going to happen (see Doomseeker above).

  • Night Goblin Shaman -- What's not to like about a 'shroom eating pointy-hat robe wearing spell-casting goblin? Well except for the maybe the exploding head part but hey magic is a dangerous thing in WH.

  • Night Goblin Squig Herder -- Squig Hoppers probably aren't going to make it into the game (mounted troops) so a cymbal smashing or squigpipe playing Squig Herder is the next best thing.

  • Night Goblin Netter -- Root for teh win!


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: 5150 on April 07, 2006, 04:01:22 AM
'Evil human' might be Norse (stepping stone to Chaos Warrior) they worship chaos but are otherwise just humans with a penchant for fluffy clothing, axes, beer and mayham (so pretty much as close as humans get to being Ork)

Alternatively it could just be 'evil human'. i.e. they live in humanity but work for their own ends from within (Neocromancer for example)

Personally I was planning on being a Necromancer in the original WHO - it looks like I'm just going to have to pick chaos on WAR :-(


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Fargull on April 07, 2006, 07:18:47 AM
Chaos does not equal evil.

For the most part they go hand in hand, but they do not equate to the same thing in Warhammer.  The evil human was just a disposition, not a mutation by the chaos gods.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: dakitten on April 10, 2006, 01:35:41 PM
I'm really worried about 'Scenarios', and I hope they don't clone WoW's battlegrounds too much there.  While there are some really good things about them (team balance, fairly even objectives), there are some really negative things as well (clearing out the outside world pvp, artificialness, repetitiveness).  And adding bots to control queue time?  Damn - I signed up for some PvP, and instead I get a 5-10 minute match against bots?  Tying the "fourth style of combat - the Campaign" to this seems rather silly as well.  It just feels wrong to have the fate of the zone tied to 5 minute "king of the hill" matches - it doesn't feel epic, or serious enough.

"Doze stunties have bin up on dat hill all day chief - shud we'z get da boyz and go home now?"

The Campaign system does sound good (what little we know about it right now), but I worry about it progressing too fast, and losing some of it's significance.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Arthur_Parker on April 10, 2006, 02:36:35 PM
Penny Arcade (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/)


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Wolf on April 11, 2006, 02:26:53 AM
Penny Arcade (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/)

Mhm. I just came here to post that.  :cry:


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: eldaec on April 11, 2006, 06:51:17 AM
I do love that comic, and sense I may have to link to it almost as often as the money hat comic over the coming year or so.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Azazel on April 12, 2006, 02:23:04 AM
And adding bots to control queue time?  Damn - I signed up for some PvP, and instead I get a 5-10 minute match against bots? 

The fact is that it also has to play like a game, and if adding in bots allows PVP to be a bit more like jumping into an existing round of BF2/CS/etc instead of joining a queue, sitting on your hands for 25 minutes, then seeing you missed your chance to go into the BG because you dared to take a piss while in the queue than I can only see it as a good thing..



Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: eldaec on April 12, 2006, 03:10:44 AM
I worry much more about the size of the server population needed to support all these different types of pvp than a I do about bots.

You have 4 different fronts (stunties vs green, human vs chaos, elf vs bondage elf, plus empire & friends vs bizarre nonsensical alliance of chaos and green) plus several different types of pvp within each front, (though the 'types' basically seem to boil down to just daoc style frontier and GW style instances).

Now if they are planning for 20k peak populations per server, then fair enough, but operating on a more normal 3-5k, I don't see this variety being used.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: eldaec on April 12, 2006, 03:21:39 AM
And the other thing I worry about is this...

Quote
In essence, a path straight through in the same discipline makes you what, in other games, is considered "pure." Or if you like a more balanced, hybrid approach, you end up being what most think of as "multi-classed." You'd think that this sort of thing would be a real challenge to balance, but Marvin isn't worried. "It would be a real nightmare if we didn't have this kind of encapsulation that gives control," he says. "Because we split the Fighter from the Adept, we're not trying to balance all the magic with all the weapon attacks... that helps us."

Smite.
Cleric.

The diku world has traditionally felt the need to maintain a chinese wall between support magic and offensive magic. I can see horrible half baked kludges to fix all sorts of percieved imbalance a few months in.

(Obviously actual good games like CoH just flat out ignore this restriction and the sky doesn't fall around them, but mythic have never been very good at correcting balance in a subtle or imaginative manner ;) To be fair this is in part because the pvp focus in daoc makes balance issues more immeadiate and critical than in something like coh, but war will also have that pvp focus ofc...)


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Arthur_Parker on April 12, 2006, 05:58:14 AM
I really don't think character balance is incredibly important, especially in a pvp game, the opposing pvp races should be balanced but that's about it.  I seem to remember AC2 was the most balanced game out there.

A couple of jokes below stolen from RhyssaFireheart @Grimwell that I think illustrate the point.

Q: How many rogues does it take to kill a paladin?
A: Two. One engaging the fight and the other one waiting in the inn of ironforge.


--------
An Alliance army is marching across the Barrens to raid Orgrimmar when a shaman comes running up and makes a rude gesture at the general. The general points to 2 of his soldiers and orders them to kill the shaman. The shaman runs away round a mountain and the soldiers follow.

After a few minutes the shaman comes back with no sign of the Alliance soldiers. He insults the general who promptly sends 10 officers to kill the shaman. The shaman runs round the mountain and returns again.

The general getting very annoyed orders 40 men to kill the shaman. They all chase him round the mountain and for 10 minites nothing happens. Then one badly wounded soldier comes back limping and says "Sir, it was a trap! There's two of them!"



Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Arthur_Parker on April 21, 2006, 02:29:40 PM
April Newsletter (http://www.warhammeronline.com/english/newsletterCentral/archives/April2006.html)

More videos and info on giants, some info on e3 which I'm hoping someone interested in WAR is going to.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Johny Cee on April 21, 2006, 05:04:34 PM
Quote
In case you missed it, we recently hosted an event for members of the online press here at Mythic. We had a great time with the different reporters, but we had an even better time reading your reactions online afterwards. Keep visiting the forums and letting us know what you think! If you've got a fansite or a forum, won't you email me and let me know? It's Sanya AT mythicentertainment dot com - be sure to put WARHAMMER FANSITE in your subject line. If you've got any other sort of question or feedback, please be sure to use the forms we've set up.

Oooooo.....

Dear Uncle Schild,

Please make Mediocre your official F13 rep to Mythic for the purpose of real-life trolling at one of these.  And make him record and type transcripts.  Pretty please?

Sincerely,

J.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Trippy on April 21, 2006, 05:07:33 PM
April Newsletter (http://www.warhammeronline.com/english/newsletterCentral/archives/April2006.html)
Whoa, a Doom Diver (http://www.warhammeronline.com/english/media/conceptArt/full/gob_cc_01.jpg). I may actually have to play this game.

Edit: hmm...actually that's more like a kite (there are lines leading down the ground, presumably). Maybe it's some sort of spotter unit.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: eldaec on April 21, 2006, 05:26:30 PM
Tweety has started doing a monthly grab bag thing for WAR on the sites linked above...

http://www.warhammeronline.com/english/community/grabBag/grabBag_april.php

Quote
Q: How many realms will there be in WAR?

A: Short answer: we are launching with two realms, six armies, and three battlefronts. Each realm is comprised of a loose alliance of armies that have formed out of circumstance (see the game’s backstory for more details) – the Alliance of Order (Dwarfs, High Elves, and the Empire) and the Armies of Destruction (Greenskins, Dark Elves, and Chaos). Everything you do in WAR furthers the cause of your army and thus your realm.

Realm vs. Realm™ combat in WAR centers around the above armies and takes place on one of three fronts where ancient foes battle one another – Dwarfs vs. Greenskins, High Elf vs. Dark Elf, and Empire vs. Chaos humans. Players begin the game fighting their racial enemy, but are later free to journey to other battlefronts to help their allies in the larger struggle.

A particular dark elf, for example, can work with allies to invade the capital cities of the Empire, high elves, or the dwarfs. That same dark elf can choose instead to defend his own lands or those belonging to his Greenskin or Chaos "allies." Assuming his own interests don't incline him towards betrayal, of course.

Bah. This is still all wrong.

The line about betrayal suggests people might be able to change sides. I'm not entirely sure that's a good idea either in terms of matching the IP or in terms of making the game design work. Hmmm.

Also, 2 realms is the wrong number of realms etc etc Orcs shouldn't be on the same side as Chaos Humans blah blah....


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: gimpyone on April 21, 2006, 05:43:05 PM
I like the TM after RVR.  I never played Warhammer except for Dawn of War but neednless to say, the thought of another Mythic game featuring this does make me think of my days in DAOC before the players ruined it with buffbots and radar.  Then ToA came a long and touched my no no spot.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Modern Angel on April 22, 2006, 07:29:57 AM
Mythic, I swear if you wine and dine me then break my heart...

I'm cautiously optimistic about this game with less caution and more optimism as time goes on.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Johny Cee on April 22, 2006, 10:04:55 AM
The line about betrayal suggests people might be able to change sides. I'm not entirely sure that's a good idea either in terms of matching the IP or in terms of making the game design work. Hmmm.

Also, 2 realms is the wrong number of realms etc etc Orcs shouldn't be on the same side as Chaos Humans blah blah....

Well.....

If they go with some kind of dynamic system of alliance....  it could be a major step up from DAoC's populaion issues.  For instance,  Alliance of Destruction outnumbers Order badly, and is kicking the shit out of them.  The devs switch the greenskins so they are either neutral (can attack both sides) or temporarily allied with the alliance of order. 

It would be relatively true to the IP,  and seem to be a better option than bot players.

Mythic has been doing these things with DAoC.  They regularly shift around population bonuses (major bonuses to leveling and xp,  can cut leveling time in half) on DAoC servers now to even things out.  Though the population bonuses don't seem to work too well.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Xanthippe on April 22, 2006, 11:02:39 AM
I have always liked the idea of players being able to switch sides.  Having things like espionage, diplomacy, politics (beyond what already happens in guilds) would be awesome.

But I'm with Modern Angel here on Mythic.

I want to believe Mythic has changed, really, I do.  I want to believe Mythic learned its lesson about ToA, and won't be making that mistake again.  No more nerfing of classes to the point of making them no fun (sniff, and I loved my cave shaman so much).  No more taking months to acknowledge a mistake and more months to attempt a solution.

Eh, who am I kidding?  I'll jump at the chance to be in the beta.  I'll likely preorder the collector's edition (if they have one).  I'll play for at least 3 months, not wanting to believe the bad things I hear, and will have faith they will fix them, despite my past experiences.  I really liked DAOC the first year.

Some people just ask for their hearts to be broken.



Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: eldaec on April 23, 2006, 03:42:49 PM
If they go with some kind of dynamic system of alliance....  it could be a major step up from DAoC's populaion issues.  For instance,  Alliance of Destruction outnumbers Order badly, and is kicking the shit out of them.  The devs switch the greenskins so they are either neutral (can attack both sides) or temporarily allied with the alliance of order.

That will never never never happen. This is why...

1) The game launches with green and chaos on the same side. (God only knows who thought this was an acceptable idea btw)
2) Egro green and chaos will be able to talk and group with each other.
3) Therefore as night follows day, if they cannot guild together the whining will rapidly reach such intensity so as to ensure it gets patched in early (ref: every MMOG ever that didn't allow ARAC guilds within realms)
4) Once realm based ARAC guilds exist, no developer is going to have the balls to sunder them in half by doing something as crazy as reorganising the sides so that they resemble Warhammer.

If they include betrayal it can only concievably mean an Orc joining the Dwarfs. Which will probably exacerbate population issues as everyone flocks to the winning side.   :-(


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Azazel on April 23, 2006, 08:23:55 PM
The only "betrayal" that really fits the IP to me would be:

* Humans selling out Empire to the Skaven for money. Who, um, aren't in the game yet.
* Humans becoming corrupted to the undeads. The Sylvanian counts, anyways, now that Undead are "wet" and "dry".
* Humans/Elves turning to Chaos. Orcs don't really do this. Nor do Dwarfs.
* Chaos guys betraying other chaos guys. Because it's chaos, brah. Tzeentch and all that. The great plan.
* I suppose you could have the "good vampire" thing, or the "chaos warrior tries for redemption" thng. Was that in the Konrad books? I forget.
* Orcs dont much like anyone. They respect strength, but thats about it.
*Dark Elves seem to have the silly "we're all oh so evil" thing happening in their culture. So backstabbing and all that is rife. But this isn't Drizzt, the High elves will gladly KOS them. Maybe they could hide in with the humans, but it's more like internecene warfare. Like the orcs. Or chaos. Or the Empire. Or..


So really, betrayal is rife in Warhammer. Most of it's not faction-changing "betrayal" though.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: pants on April 23, 2006, 08:48:13 PM
* Humans/Elves turning to Chaos. Orcs don't really do this. Nor do Dwarfs.

No Chaos Dwarfs?  I'm sure I remember Chaos Dwarfs, or is my Warhammer IP horribly out of date these days?


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Azazel on April 23, 2006, 08:53:21 PM
CDs were written out about 2 editions ago, then brought back in a semi-official way with a Ravening Hordes type list, then were re-introduced as crew for some chaos siege machine which is part of the standard chaos army, though the model designs had reverted back to their original look (think WFB3 chaos warriors and chaos dwarfs) rather then the Byzantine beards and silly giant hats of 4th Ed.

But anyway, they're a society of corrupted dwarfs, like dark elves, rather than good dwarfs gone wild bad.

Also, they're not in the MMO game. (and they're still on the fringes of WFB).



Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: 5150 on April 24, 2006, 01:51:03 AM
* Humans/Elves turning to Chaos. Orcs don't really do this. Nor do Dwarfs.

No Chaos Dwarfs?  I'm sure I remember Chaos Dwarfs, or is my Warhammer IP horribly out of date these days?

No longer are there stunties in big silly hats I'm afraid...

http://groups.msn.com/WarhammerMiniatureGalleries/chaosdwarfs.msnw?action-ShowPhoto&PhotoID=76


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: eldaec on April 24, 2006, 03:22:34 AM
So really, betrayal is rife in Warhammer. Most of it's not faction-changing "betrayal" though.

And ofc, I shudder to think just how godawful the game might become if non-realm changing types of betrayal are allowed. Imagine an Orc being allowed to let the stunties in the back door of the keep and get rewarded for it, great for RP, crap for community building.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Azazel on April 24, 2006, 07:31:28 AM
Yeah, that's much the same as I was thinking. It's one thing for a corrupt Empire nobleman to turn to Slaanesh, but letting them (or anyone) run espionage against their own race.. well it could be really interesting, or very bad.

OTOH, that might be what that example of taking the plans to the General are about.. the ones that suggest doing the quest "properly might gain you a bunch of exp but no cash, vs selling the plans to the shifty looking goblin for lotsa cash but little xp.



Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: tazelbain on April 24, 2006, 07:58:22 AM
Why are you guys still dweebing about the IP, Mythic already said they are only going to follow the IP when it suits them.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Morfiend on April 24, 2006, 10:20:23 AM
* Humans/Elves turning to Chaos. Orcs don't really do this. Nor do Dwarfs.

No Chaos Dwarfs?  I'm sure I remember Chaos Dwarfs, or is my Warhammer IP horribly out of date these days?

No longer are there stunties in big silly hats I'm afraid...

http://groups.msn.com/WarhammerMiniatureGalleries/chaosdwarfs.msnw?action-ShowPhoto&PhotoID=76

This guy rocks.

(http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0fQDvAvYm3YOkONqJFLTGslFYHxtX75SX8xSJ42L9iHoex3Kco6zwaSwYJrfdKiiFoPIfnaoyQ28FMkGfPPtCq3CHU4dIiZaLKlEv*4gtiWJEOyujZK3oT84OD0BaCWvy8vuHLYD!OHt1*OmCiNIjM7l26w9!G2VNsHYUN00KhTNcAf5DtBBjWA/Chaos%20Dwarf%20Hero%20-%20%20by%20FatherNurgle.JPG?dc=4675357840758718440)


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Arthur_Parker on May 03, 2006, 01:59:06 AM
W.A.R. E3 Video.

High Res version (http://www.only-war.com/warhammeronline_wmvhighwide.wmv)

High Res Mirror (http://www.warhammeronlineforum.com/war_e3_trailer_big.zip)

Low res + mirrors

http://media.pc.ign.com/media/748/748723/vids_1.html

http://www.warhammeronlineforum.com/war_e3_trailer.zip

http://www.warhammeralliance.com/movies/war_e3_trailer.zip

http://www.thewarband.com/videos/trailer/E3/war_e3_trailer.zip

Well worth a watch.

Edit - before anyone complains this is CGI  :-D


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: schild on May 03, 2006, 02:06:16 AM
It was fucking CGI!

CGI trailers are wasted effort as far as I'm concerned and I'm fairly sure I'm not just speaking for myself.

Edit: Ok, fine, I thought the orc and dwarf fight was awesome. STILL, CGI. Heh.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: HRose on May 03, 2006, 04:32:53 AM
It's not even "effort" since Mythic is outsourcing all that.

Just a spot.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: angry.bob on May 03, 2006, 07:03:27 AM
Dark Elf sorceress FTW. Sure it's CG, but everything about it was great.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Murgos on May 03, 2006, 11:23:17 AM
Dark Elf sorceress FTW. Sure it's CG, but everything about it was great.

Which part was better?  The bikini top?  Or the bikini bottom?


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: angry.bob on May 03, 2006, 11:37:50 AM
Dark Elf sorceress FTW. Sure it's CG, but everything about it was great.

Which part was better?  The bikini top?  Or the bikini bottom?
Doh, i meant everything about the trailer was great. The Orcapult was the best part and made me miss the old days of having Orcy Event cards. The slayer/boss fight was good. The Witch Elf was good, but the Orc stuff was better. Though it would be cool if they carry the ass-floss loincloth and pasties sling into the game. The internet is old enough that porn featuring real humanoids no longer does it for me.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Simond on May 04, 2006, 05:38:58 AM
I love the sly dig at the very start of the vid. :D


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Pococurante on May 04, 2006, 08:17:05 PM
Though it would be cool if they carry the ass-floss loincloth and pasties sling into the game.

L.A.F.F.!!! (http://www.camille-west.com/camille_west_lyrics-ladies_against_fanny_floss.htm)

Ah I do adore the bitchin' babes.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Azazel on May 05, 2006, 12:07:05 AM
It was fucking CGI!

CGI trailers are wasted effort as far as I'm concerned and I'm fairly sure I'm not just speaking for myself.

Edit: Ok, fine, I thought the orc and dwarf fight was awesome. STILL, CGI. Heh.

Well, yeah, but it's supposed to get you hyped, in the same way that the nice video for WoW did, or the intro vid to Dawn of War. It was disappointing to not see an equally-inspiring FMV intro for the DoW expansion..


I love the sly dig at the very start of the vid. :D

I must have missed it? Unless you mean the "25 years of Warhammer" bit which I read as "fuck you if you think we're ripping off WoW". ;)



Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: JoeTF on May 05, 2006, 12:42:06 AM
Chaos does not equal evil.


Yup. After two years of playing on WH based mud I can tell you one thing - chaos equals G A N K I N G. On a scale unseen before.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Simond on May 05, 2006, 05:47:14 AM
I must have missed it? Unless you mean the "25 years of Warhammer" bit which I read as "fuck you if you think we're ripping off WoW". ;)
Pretty much, yeah - especially as the WoW intro starts with 'Ten Years of Warcraft' ;)


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Azazel on May 05, 2006, 06:11:21 AM
Ah makes sense then. I haven't watched the WoW one for awhile.

I still kind of wonder why there's still no movement on a 40k CRPG or MMORPG. The 40k universe is a lot more popular than the WFB world, and much more unique (and even more derivitive, edmittedly). Maybe it's because the Warhammer name isn't as strong in Computer-land as others, so the fantasy arm is better suited to get recognition to people that already understand orcs vs elves...

A good persistant Necromunda game would be great, actually.



Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Arthur_Parker on May 05, 2006, 06:28:47 AM
I'm stealing again from Garthilk's website.

He just posted an Interview with Erik Mogensen of Games Workshop (http://www.warhammeralliance.com/article/alliance-exclusives/interview-with-erik-mogensen-of-games-workshop.html) small part quoted below.

Quote
When the initial idea comes to create a new product what are the main considerations for Games Workshop when creating a new license based on the Warhammer game?

We have to feel like it's a type of product that suits the Warhammer IP. For example, it's pretty easy to see that an MMO set in the Warhammer World could work, and could rock. Black Orc pillow cases on the other hand... A bit more of a stretch and not something we're likely to be interested in. Another factor is money, of course. Any prospective licensee needs to provide us with a comprehensive business plan and needs to convince us they can deliver a certain amount of financial success. By far the most important factor however, is that we need to 'click' with the licensee. That might sound weird, but we really only want to work with people that share our love of our worlds and we see working with them as more than just a commercial exercise. Sometimes when I'm with the guys from Mythic it feels like we actually work for the same company - now that's a perfect licensing partner.

With so many fans of both Warhammer and Warhammer 40k would you someday like to see a 40k MMO?

Of course we'd like to consider it. Who doesn't want to play a Space Marine?! However, we've got quite a lot on our plates at the moment so let's not get ahead of ourselves.

After the success of Dawn of War and the upcoming Mark of Chaos, along with WAR, is it safe to say that Games Workshop is embracing computer gaming more ever before? What do you believe has encouraged this growth?

We've always embraced computer gaming... Perhaps the world is just embracing computer games set in our worlds more than before? The thing is, for a company like GW with great IP but no expertise in making computer games, the key to success in this market is finding strong partners. Given what I already said about what we look for in a partner that can be extremely hard to do. We've been very picky, and as a result have ended up with 3 very strong like-minded interactive partners. The quality of all the games you mentioned is testament to that.

I'm betting that if WAR is a success then 40k will get the green light fairly quickly.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Azazel on May 05, 2006, 06:50:16 AM
Depends on what though, Having a 40k and WFB MMOg out at the same time would split a lot of their userbase when they'd be better off just trying to see how well they go against, say, Vanguard or the SOE stable. Why cripple your own game like EQ2 did if it's a success?

40k should possibly go the action route. Something like a BF2 with persistant stats would be perfect, but even a well-done SP-FPS on the Doom3/HL2 engine would be a good entry. Be a Space Marine, hell they could revive the Space Hulk FPS assuming EA doesn't have any longterm hooks into it, and a lot of people seem to look back on SH fondly.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Typhon on May 05, 2006, 10:17:20 AM
...

That will never never never happen. This is why...

1) The game launches with green and chaos on the same side. (God only knows who thought this was an acceptable idea btw)
2) Egro green and chaos will be able to talk and group with each other.
3) Therefore as night follows day, if they cannot guild together the whining will rapidly reach such intensity so as to ensure it gets patched in early (ref: every MMOG ever that didn't allow ARAC guilds within realms)
4) Once realm based ARAC guilds exist, no developer is going to have the balls to sunder them in half by doing something as crazy as reorganising the sides so that they resemble Warhammer.

If they include betrayal it can only concievably mean an Orc joining the Dwarfs. Which will probably exacerbate population issues as everyone flocks to the winning side.   :-(


Unless the developer is willing to include server transfers into their roadmap up front and make it a part of the server/game fiction.  i.e. Server A has a population imbalance (or just simple overcrowding).  Server "Race War" is brought online and the sides are defined as o-human + c-human, l-elf + d-elf, greenskin + dorf.  Folks choose to migrate ("betray" based upon the knowledge of what you're getting into).

AND/OR, the developer creates "cutthroat" severs and states up front - "on cutthroat servers alliances are temporary.  chat/guilds will be enabled for the duration of the alliance, but at some point all alliances will fail".  Players can only bitch about dynamics servers for so long before they put up (and play along), or shut up (and stop bitching about servers not having dynamic/changing stories).

course, this is all just my bullshit opinion.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Nija on May 05, 2006, 10:48:58 AM
The more time goes by the more I'm actually KINDA looking forward to this game. I just don't think Mythic can pull off anything worthwhile, so I'm not getting my hopes up.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: eldaec on May 05, 2006, 11:34:20 AM
Unless the developer is willing to include server transfers into their roadmap up front and make it a part of the server/game fiction.  i.e. Server A has a population imbalance (or just simple overcrowding).  Server "Race War" is brought online and the sides are defined as o-human + c-human, l-elf + d-elf, greenskin + dorf.  Folks choose to migrate ("betray" based upon the knowledge of what you're getting into).

AND/OR, the developer creates "cutthroat" severs and states up front - "on cutthroat servers alliances are temporary.  chat/guilds will be enabled for the duration of the alliance, but at some point all alliances will fail".  Players can only bitch about dynamics servers for so long before they put up (and play along), or shut up (and stop bitching about servers not having dynamic/changing stories).

I agree this would be cool.

I don't think for one moment that the collective wisdom of VNboard posters will put up with it.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Typhon on May 06, 2006, 05:30:41 AM
you always ruin everything with you "thoughtful analysis", "logic" and "bitter wisdom from experience".  bastard.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Johny Cee on May 06, 2006, 11:03:36 PM
Depends on what though, Having a 40k and WFB MMOg out at the same time would split a lot of their userbase when they'd be better off just trying to see how well they go against, say, Vanguard or the SOE stable. Why cripple your own game like EQ2 did if it's a success?

40k should possibly go the action route. Something like a BF2 with persistant stats would be perfect, but even a well-done SP-FPS on the Doom3/HL2 engine would be a good entry. Be a Space Marine, hell they could revive the Space Hulk FPS assuming EA doesn't have any longterm hooks into it, and a lot of people seem to look back on SH fondly.


A 40k game would be great, but....  I'm not sure how you'd ever shoehorn it into the MMO mold.  I mean.....  the world is based around quick death and huge and expendable armies.

You're basically left with everyone being either a Space Marine or Chaos Space Marine.

Although it would be fun to be a Kommisar and shoot cowards in the head.


Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: Azazel on May 07, 2006, 04:27:47 AM
Yeah, that's why I suggested it be either persistant-stats team-based a la BF2 or like Planetside if MMP.

For a 40k MMORPG then Necromunda would be the most appropriate, that or Inquisitor-based.



Title: Re: WAR- Computer Games Magazine - May
Post by: eldaec on May 07, 2006, 05:32:05 AM
[A 40k game would be great, but....  I'm not sure how you'd ever shoehorn it into the MMO mold.  I mean.....  the world is based around quick death and huge and expendable armies.

You're basically left with everyone being either a Space Marine or Chaos Space Marine.

Although it would be fun to be a Kommisar and shoot cowards in the head.

Total War the MMOG.

<-- still waiting.