f13.net forums - Why no Fury Thread?

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 21, 2025, 05:57:41 AM

we're back, baby

No really. I'd love to hear (well read) Schild's comments on Fury (www.unleashthefury.com).

I played the open beta thing for a while. I thought the game sucked ass. However I do not have the time currently to express my disdain with the eloquence of some of the people here. Yet I would gain great pleasure from reading the vitriol which you would surely heap upon this product.

Someone, please, make my day.

There were several Fury threads. Advanced search -> Search for "fury" -> "Search in topic subjects only"

Well, to be fair, it did go and launch. Someone should have given us a play by play. IT'S NOT TOO LATE! awesome, for real

(had to use it!)

Quote from: Righ on October 19, 2007, 01:37:55 PM

http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=7501.0
http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=8033.0
http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=8815.0
http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=10131.0
http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=10189.0
http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=10213.0
http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=10712.0

etc...

Those are from either a year and a bit ago (July 06), or from the start of the summer.

I agree that there really are threads about it, but it did have a beta and has launched and I'm sure that other people here might probably want to hear some final comments about it. I mean really, we've beaten the SWG apology to death and no one has mentioned this?

EDIT: I'd like to know this largely because for the entirety of my beta I got 3 FPS. Not to mention other lag based issues. Maybe the thing is good (sounds half decent in theory) but I sure as hell couldn't test it.

Oh sorry, the last one was over a month old. Yes, good idea. Start a new thread about everything that hasn't been talked about in a month.

Bump.

Well it did launch two days ago.

And yet you're still discussing why there is no Fury thread that meets your expectations rather than the game. You could have waded in to the thread that last got an entry three weeks ago, but apparently the woeful lack of current Fury threads was of greater import.

This one is nearly half an hour old now. You know what to do. :-D

I don't think there's any release thread because the game just never tickled any kind of fancy. I tried playing the beta like 5 times, and each time it took less and less time for me to get bored fuckless and exit the game. It wasn't a BAD game, it just wasn't very good. I got no tingly feelings anywhere. The plethora of class/skill options thrown at a newbie was absolutely mind-numbing, which would be acceptable if the things the skills produced were evident. But it just felt like walk in an arena, grab a target and bash away on your buttons until either you died or your target did.

It didn't help that the low-spec renderer that my computer was forced to use was never completed by the time I just gave up on the game. It's like someone thought Guild Wars PVP was the greatest game ever, only it needed to be amped up on crystal meth and buried under mounds of skills.

Basically what Haemish said, a better (mo meth = mo better) GuildWars doesn't sell me on shit.

In a world where we suddenly find ourselves surrounded by awesome FPS titles playing fucking GW sport pvp sounds pretty retarded.

I third the above. I wanted to like it but there was too much in the way.

Quote from: Hoax on October 19, 2007, 02:17:45 PM

That's essentially what's breaking me of my MMO habit. Look at the fucking choices I have. TF2, UT3 alone could eat up a year of my pvp itch.

I'm in the QuakeWars is kinda cool camp & I still enjoy my freebie K-MMO-lites for sport pvp + the combat mechanics are typically more interesting.

When there's no thread for a new game launch, that's answer unto itself.

Main reason is if the game had no resonance at all. I don't care what kind of stupid contests get strapped onto a game or how whackily the developers or publishers dress. Unlike the easily PR-able derivative stuff out there like Halo, MMOs either are fun or they are not, and for enough people to be worth talking about or not. Merely competent games don't get the attention that controversial games or ones unarguably enjoyed by fuckloads of people do. Fury is maybe the former. Competent PvP for people bored of WoW BGs, but it's no TF2 nor has the stickiness of WoW Arenas.

It might be been interesting to know if it had a smooth launch or did a crash and burn ala AO and whether or not it had a decent sized population. Other than that, there isn't too much left to say that the other seven or so threads didn't already say, I think. I notice that on EB they have it listed as a best seller. Why do I find their best seller list to be dubious. I have a feeling they figure they'll sell more boxes if people think everyone else is buying one. Did that work with Vanguard or DDO?

I have brain freeze. huh

I joined LoTD and played with them in the Beta. It was great in an organized team situation, but felt way too limited. You had to have specific skills. They have to be of a specific rank.. then you have to be spot-on in the execution. Not bad, in aall, but the split-servers, large queue times and broken skills made it less fun as time went on.

Coupled with the exploitive ways certain guilds play and the absolutely broken ladder system, it just wasn't worth purchasing. The devs seem like they're really trying, but I dunno. After the first few weeks I didn't feel it anymore, and it felt a lot like they were trying to pretend it was going to become what they wanted it to be, while they ignored what it actually was.

I agree there's not much to say about it. It's not good enough to gush over and not bad enough to bash. I enjoyed the bit of it I played (aside from the hotbar-mashing-while-circle-strafing UI -- did they end up improving on that?), but I can't see it ever cutting into my TF2 time.

I really wanted to like Fury, but to take the lesson out of HAMMER FRENZY vs Schild on SFIV and about what makes certain fighting games successful, the learning curve sucked on Fury and I could never get past it.

Quote from: Samwise on October 19, 2007, 07:38:02 PM

It's not good enough to gush over and not bad enough to bash.

a title that's somewhere in the middle. Dr.Pepper?

Quote from: Merusk on October 19, 2007, 07:11:35 PM

The ladder system was ushered out right before retail and didn't have a lot of time for testing. They came up with this complex formula for rating/ranking that only a rocket scientist could understand, and it all revolved around having a large population to deal with. Needless to say the confusing ladder turned off a lot of people because they'd win 30 matches and never move up in the rankings.

The performance issues have steadily improved and the game can run on lower end systems now, but due to massive marketing attempts earlier in the year a lot of people tried the game only to have some major performance issue turn them off. When Fury had an FFA match making system in the early summer, the game was fun. But the company vision called for servers (or realms) and it split the small tester population. When that happened wait times for matches went through the roof, people quit, and wait times got longer. Bad word of mouth was the result, and tester populations stayed relatively small through release.

As Merusk said, Fury is a fast paced game with little margin for error. If you don't have a good team, you will die in under 5 seconds. If you don't bring the right skills, you will either die in less than 3 seconds or your offense will be so bad that you can't kill anyone on the opposing side. In Guild Wars we used to call it "Build Wars" because your build and how well you executed it was the main factor on winning or losing. Fury is basically the same thing, but much faster paced. Many people dislike combat that plays out so quickly and it turns off the casual player,but the Devs pretty much only listen to the hardcore players in this regard. Unfortunately that will cost them lots of casuals.

On the gameplay side, the game obviously needs more depth. The three basic tournaments (1v1, 4 man death match, 8 man capture the flag) are only fun for so long. However if the game can survive long enough for them to roll out more tournament types, then that combined with ladder rankings might give competitive players enough to do since they are only playing for a PVP fix in the first place.

Overall I love the Fury concept. I do feel that the game was rushed, it was marketed too heavily before it was ready for public consumption, the combat is too fast paced to draw and retain the casual gamers, and that its a game that currently only caters to the hard core arena/pvp types. Until it expands its scope and slows the pace of PVP more towards what you'd see in an MMORPG instead of an FPS then I don't ever see huge populations.

If Fury wants to lure the FPS guys into the game, then they've already failed because Fury is far inferior to the current crop of FPS games and also requires a subscription to play in the tournaments. People are obsessing over TF2, and not Fury and that's a perfect example of what I'm talking about. MMORPG players are already conditioned to pay a sub, WoW arenas show the vastness of player potential for arena type gameplay, and I would have tried to market there rather than make the game too much like an FPS experience.

On the player community side, they do have some official forums for players to use. Unfortunately they are heavily moderated so there is almost 0 opportunity for shit talking or rivalries to form, and there is no offsite fan forums where PVP guilds seem to congregate or converse. Everyone who ever plans to cater to a PVP community needs to understand that Forum PVP is a necessary evil, it promotes conflicts, and provides motivation for people to want to log in and kick another guild's ass. It is the fuel to the fire as surely as a flame produces heat. Other PVP players looking for a PVP game to play will check out a PVP games site and fan site community, and if its as boring as an episode of Mr. Rogers Neighborhood (and Fury's community is about that stale right now) then potential PVP customers see a dead game. A vibrant forum with insults and challenges will demonstrate to the potential PVP customer that the community is there, its real, and there's some serious shit going down that they might want to be a participant.

I hope I'm wrong, but based on current variables its highly likely that someone will write a post mortem on Fury within the year.

For the exact one thing that Fury offers, TF2 is far superior. And, it comes with the built-in self-improvement that is modders.

Quote from: waylander on October 20, 2007, 07:08:19 AM

I hope I'm wrong, but based on current variables its highly likely that someone will write a post mortem on Fury within the year.

The snark in me says you just did, but then I don't know how retail is going. Are populations decent enough to get matches going instantly rather than the 10+ min waits when servers were split? That alone kills it for folks before they even find out they'll get hammered into the ground in >10 secs.

Quote from: Merusk on October 20, 2007, 08:05:12 AM

Quote from: waylander on October 20, 2007, 07:08:19 AM

I hope I'm wrong, but based on current variables its highly likely that someone will write a post mortem on Fury within the year.

Populations seem ok, but right now Bloodbath is turned off I guess to fix the tag teaming issues.

I wonder how much of a "placeholder" game it is for the PvP oriented guilds? I wouldn't be surprised if the launch of AoC and/or WAR caused a massive decrease in subscribers. Maybe it's just me, but it didn't seem quite good enough to hold my attention for very long... even when my head is in total PvP mode.

Quote from: Signe on October 20, 2007, 08:55:12 AM

It has the potential to be a good PVP game for people who prefer arena/tournament PVP, but until it fixes the performance issues and adds more PVP content (i.e. tournament types) its going to struggle.

I don't see this as a competing game vs AOC/WAR. While PVP guilds could certainly gravitate towards Fury, it feels less like a persistent world and there's less server politics involved due to that. In AOC you have the pvp element, politics, resource control issues, etc that are the draw to that type of game. I don't know if a guild would play both, but if a guild wanted to have a PVP gaming chapter that didn't require the massive amount of time that a MMORPG pvp chapter would....I could see fury fitting that bill.

I sort of had the same issues as waylander, and the reason I made this post was to see if other people felt the same or if I was part of the problem.

What turned me off from the game was the fact that it was much too fast for what it was trying to do. An FPS is fine at that speed, because in an FPS you have about 3-5 weapons per player and they're easy to distinguish. To beat a dead horse, TF2 and the scout. Hi2u sniper. You see a scout, you know what the scout can do, will do, and is capable of doing.

In fury, you have like 500 skills per class. Easily 100 debuff icons and you'll die within 5 seconds of getting focus fired if you don't react. How the hell am I supposed to use on of the 20+ skills I have equipped to a react to a situation when I can't easily tell which 5 things I've just been hit with. The game speed is much too high. Unless you have a high end team, there's no way you can utilize even 10% of the skill combos that the game has to offer. MMORPGs do not play at FPS speed. There's no way to react in time, and no chance of using the complicated strategies that the skills lend themselves too if you're dead in an instant.

Quote from: waylander on October 20, 2007, 07:08:19 AM

If Fury wants to lure the FPS guys into the game, then they've already failed because Fury is far inferior to the current crop of FPS games and also requires a subscription to play in the tournaments.

That's a pretty good summation right there. It's got some good bits, but it doesn't have the worldy stuff I look for in a MMORPG and it doesn't have the polished gameplay I look for in an FPS, so it fails to satisfactorily scratch either itch.

Quote from: Phunked on October 20, 2007, 10:08:21 AM

This is the exact problem I had. As someone said earlier the game is not really more complex than other PVP MMOs but it is too fast-paced, and there is no real gradual introduction to the abilities available; you're dumped into the midst of a ton of them and coping with that is just really difficult.

Wait, Fury is charging some kind of subscription fee? Pika?

Even if it's only a fee for tournaments, that's made of massive amounts of fail.

Quote from: HaemishM on October 22, 2007, 12:06:16 PM

Wait, Fury is charging some kind of subscription fee? Pika?

Even if it's only a fee for tournaments, that's made of massive amounts of fail.

It's like $10 a month, and gives you 'priority queuing' an extra 'roll' slot for items, in-game VOIP, ladder rankings and a few other things. Yes, it's remarkably silly but if you're part of a PvP guild that wants bragging rights granted via ladders and tournaments you're going to pay it.

I thought this said: "Why no Furry Thread." my what do we have here?

So why can't I uninstall the beta thing? This pissing me off.

El oh el

And, hopefully I can stop thinking this guy looks legit

whenever I see this game mentioned. my what do we have here?

Too bad to hear. It's not that Fury was a terrible game, it's just that there wasn't really any room for it. Guild Wars pretty much offered the same thing and no monthly subscription fee. What Fury brought to the table was a movement system that felt more like Jedi Knight than Lineage 2 and a four-prong elemental shift thing that shifted as you activated your attacks.

The game was awful from Alpha to release.