DAOC - Darkness Rising Expansion

[Xanthippe]

What I'm saying is that in a game where the only thing to do at level X is to try to get to X+1, then players are not interested in the less efficient alternative.  They will always take the efficient, boring route, and then complain about the boredom. In response, simply saying that they could stop trying so hard to level is silly - its the game itself that demands that they level.  Its a confusion of purpose.

 Its not a DAoC thing, its a class/level-based game thing. 

That's not true of all players.  I don't like to watch the bar at all, not at all.  If my eyes stray to the bar, then that means I'm not having much fun.  Not having fun means I won't play. 

(ToA broke the DAOC fun for me, being generally a solo type who hates hanging about for an hour while a large enough group forms so that I could spend 4 hours on some dumb mob killing quest with 40 other people.)

I'm not sure that it's a class/level-based game thing.  I'm currently playing City of Heroes (again) and enjoying the content.  I don't care when I ding, I don't notice when I'm about to.  I drop into the game for an hour here or there, get into a pickup group (or not, I can still do missions and so on, grouping is not required), the missions are interesting.  My toon is 31 currently (out of 50).  I don't think there's an end game, so there's really nothing to race to, and no real reason to race through the content - unless I was dying for the next power or something, I suppose.

I think maybe it's a DAOC thing.  The fun of DAOC starts at 50 - unless you're playing the battlegrounds, which is also quite fun.  DAOC has the best pvp system around.  What would really make sense to me is if Mythic realized that the game is not in the pve portion, but the pvp.  I would go back in a heartbeat if I could have an insta-50 on a classic server that had hot pvp action.  But I don't want to level another toon in that painful way, not even if all it took was my free time for two weeks.

(Although I do have some fond memories of Huginfell, and Skona.  For some reason I enjoyed that content - also the Hib quests pre-35.  The travel speed of DAOC is just too damned slow for me, though.  It's like slo mo.)

I wonder how many people would sign up for a insta-50 DAOC old frontiers server (which would probably devolve into Emain ugh)?  How many people want to play on classic servers for pve?

[HRose]

I would go back in a heartbeat if I could have an insta-50 on a classic server that had hot pvp action.

This brings back an idea I suggested many times and that I still don't understand why they didn't implement:
- Instead of destroying the playerbase for new players through the /level 20 commands they should have just added a key-code in the expansion box that would /level one and only one character up to level 45.

This would allow the community at the low levels to still remain decent and for the new players buy the expansion the possibility to have an high level toon right out the box to experience the RvR from the start instead of weeks or months later.

The travel speed of DAOC is just too damned slow for me, though.  It's like slo mo.

This was changed recently.

[Xanthippe]

Well, that's encouraging news.  Whenever my husband saw me playing, he'd say, "how can that be fun, you're always running from one place to another?"

Insta-50 server.  Seems like a no-brainer.  What am I missing here?  What's the problem with that idea?  Sounds like a money maker to me.

[HRose]

Insta-50 server.  Seems like a no-brainer.  What am I missing here?  What's the problem with that idea?  Sounds like a money maker to me.

Because it's a mindset bringing nowhere.

ToA is broken? Ok, we remove it.
Levelling is dull? Ok, we remove it.
Too many casses? Ok, we cut a few.

This doesn't lead anywhere. It's just a superficial way to deal with problems and progressively discorporate the game. It makes the game poorer. It can be good in the short term but's it a  dead end.

[Nebu]

This doesn't lead anywhere. It's just a superficial way to deal with problems and progressively discorporate the game. It makes the game poorer. It can be good in the short term but's it a  dead end.

The game is like 4 years old.  Acting in the short-term may not be such a bad idea. If you can get blood from a stone, why the hell not?

[HRose]

The game is like 4 years old.  Acting in the short-term may not be such a bad idea. If you can get blood from a stone, why the hell not?

Nothing will ever make me change idea about this. DAoC has endless potential. It was always a big mistake to pull the brake and if the game is suffering down it's because that brake was pulled long ago. Dave Rickey could have a few ideas about this.

On the Vault Mythic asks the dreamer to dream and imagine the next expansion. Here's my work. I'm sure that if Mythic had the resources and concrete possibilities to pull it out, in a year DAoC would drastically invert the trend and strongly revindicate its role in this genre.

--
DAoC - INFERNO

+ Add in the exp pack a key-code usable only once. This key-code would allow a player to flag a character and instantly /level it to 45.

+ "The Evolution Server Project". Transform the "evolution servers" idea into the exp pack (sort of a DAoC 2 built directly on DAoC). This would be a way to go heavy on the development and keep these servers as a separate project that can be accessed only to those buying the expansion. An occasion for Mythic to go back and solve radically the basic mistakes and offer to every player an occasion to start again (and, in the case they choose so, use the key-code to have a levelled up character and enjoy the endgame without really having to repeat the grind). I won't go in the details about how the Evolution servers should be shaped up because it would go beyond the scope of these notes. But this is supposed to be the major content of the exp and not a superficial tweak to the rules.

+ (all servers) The possibility to use "formations" in RvR groups. These will be selectable by the group leader and will be triggered on/off just by /sticking to the group. Pressing a movement key would break the formation as it currently breaks the /stick.

+ (all servers) Follow and build on the Final Fantasy XI idea of adding NPCs henchmen. At level 20 the players will have the possibility to do a few duties for the realms (similar to the Chapters of DR, with missions based on the classic world) and receive a personal henchman (realistic or not) summonable only on PvE zones.

- These henchman will have their own classes based on the basic archetypes. All their skills and spells will be designed from zero and some can be "commanded" directly by the player (see below).

- An henchman gains experience and levels like the player. He acquires experience twice as fast compared to a normal player and his level cannot surpass the one of the player.

- An henchman can "respec" to different archetypes. Each respec can be executed freely but "burns" 20% of the current exp of the henchman for that level.

- The henchmen will have separate exp bars and levels for each archetype. So each archetype will need to be levelled separately or not at all if the player decides to specialize.

- This is also a chance to reword the AI of pets and the interface to make the controls more deep and interactive (like the possibility to "command" the execution of specific skills from the NPCs).

- The appearance of these henchmen can be customized, both in look and equipment. The henchmen can be equipped with the standard items used by the characters, special items and specific new items only usable by henchmen that will be linked to specific new quests.

- Each henchmen will be named by the player.

- Only two henchmen at max can join the same group.

(A note on the purpose of these henchmen: For a solo player, the possibility to have a bit more involving and interactive PvE and the possibility to level more efficiently, cutting down the downtimes some more. For the groups, the possibility to "fill" roles and classes missing from the group, for example to partially solve the problem of healers, or tanks, or whatever the group misses. The henchmen should never be more effective than a player playing the proper class and they should only count as a "half" player when calculating the group experience, so that the bonus should be inferior.)

+ Style redesign. This is an occasion for all the server types, included the Evolution servers to redesign the styles (both visually and the mechanics). The new style system would included simple "combo" skills that can be performed by coordinating some skills or spells with other players. These combos can also be used with henchmens (see the possibility to "command" the use of a skill). This change would affect players with or without the expansion.

+ Finally my favourite: Add INFERNO (all capitalized because it's more badass). "Inferno" is a brand new zone, graphically similar to the "Veil Rift", with chasms and floating platforms moving in circles around Lucifero's dark castle. This would also allow to introduce a new technical feature: a physic engine (borrowing from Warhammer development). The physic will only be applied to the chasms and platforms. Basically these platforms can "bend" in a direction, randomly, because triggered or because of how the players are distributed (so that the platform will bend if all the players are in one spot instead of spreading around and distributing the weight). The players will have to fight both on these unstable platforms while facing the difficulties added by the physical engine, as well on more stable constructions.

- The physical model won't factor the collision between the players and affects exclusively the inclination of the platforms. When a platform bends in a direction the players will have to move in the opposite direction in order to maintain the position and not fall off it. The different types of environmental happenings that the physical model includes will be: earthquakes (the player is shaken, making it lose the direction), dynamically opening chasms, and the inclination of the platform.

- If a player falls off a platform he will disintegrate. In this case he will reappear at the entrance of the zone at no loss after a short timeout (think to WoW's graveyards).

- This zone has hard PvE content tailored for at least three full groups and divided into consequent segments. The players will start on a floating platform and will progressively move around controlling it (like a manual elevator or a flying carpet). With this moving platform they'll access various points on the map where to fight a sequence of encounters and different mini-bosses to remove progressively the "locks" to the castle. Once the castle's seals (graphically shown as huge chains attached to the castle) are broken (graphically shattering and falling down in the void), the players can storm in and eventually kill Lucifero in a final, epic battle.

- If a player dies or falls off a platform, he'll be ported to the entrance as I already wrote. When there, he can have access to some sort of flying "taxi" that will bring him back to the main floating platform where the other players are. These taxis will be named "Charons" and should be shown graphically as gondolas driven by a masked dark figure. The Charons should speak through voice overs.

- Lucifero should be designed to be hard and as a very long fight.

- Once Lucifero is killed the zone will seal, porting out the players at the relic keep. The doors to the zone will remain closed at least for a week.

- The entrance to this zone will be placed in the center of Agramon.

- This zone is flagged for RvR, once open every realm can enter it, fight the enemy realms on these floating platforms (with the added fun of the physic model) and attempt to be the first to kill Lucifero.

These ideas would make DAoC stand out again among the competition and revindicate strongly its predominant role as an unparalleled RvR game for the years to come. The "Evolution server project" would be a way to appeal brand new players with the possibility to start in a brand new world refactored to eliminate all the radical flaws that plagued the game along these years. While the INFERNO would offer an innovating experience mixing brand new mechanics like the physic system of the platforms and chasms with the classic RvR wars for the ultimate RvR experience.

And let's see if WoW can outperform that.

[HRose]

And when I start to have foolish ideas I cannot stop anymore:

The expansion would also need an appropriate marketing strategy to become the phenomenon of the next year.

The idea is to launch another client contemporary to the expansion. This client will be free for everyone, subscribed or not and will work like a sort of trial. With the difference that it will work on a separate server and the accounts will never expire.

On this new server the players will start with one character already at 50 and equipped. Nothing can be customized or tweaked. The only zone accessible will be exclusively the INFERNO, working directly as a permanently active RvR battleground.

This special server would be open every weekend, from Friday evening to Monday morning.

This client will then be included in all the most important magazines about computer games.

[Hoax]

I'm going to go way out on a limb and assume that DAOC was/is your first MMO?  Or I could be completely misreading..

[Xanthippe]

That's a lot of good ideas you've got there.  Expensive to implement, all that new stuff.

I guess my take on DAOC is that it's an old game, and at some point it might make sense to just be done with it and let it go, more or less (hence, my insta-50 server idea - grab some old customers back for rvr, but forget about gaining new converts).

But if Mythic revamped the client, hell, they'd have to rewrite the whole thing, I imagine - so that the performance, graphics, sound, and so on, was all improved and modernized - then... I don't know.  I am horrible about trying to predict what people want, and how successful companies will be with products.  Visionary, I am not.  (If it was up to me, we'd all be driving Studebakers or something).

I keep thinking about AC2, EQ2, and stuff like that.  While I would buy DAOC2, would I play it a few months after launch? And would other people buy it? I don't know.  But I would buy DAOC insta-50 server and play it.  Especially if it had old battlegrounds in it.  (I liked em better).

DAOC was my first graphical mmo; although I tried EQ, I could never get into it, plus I heard too many bad things about the company that made me want to stay far away.  I will always feel a soft spot for DAOC, despite its shortcomings.  Pre-ToA DAOC, that is.  I wanted to throttle Mythic for ToA.  They broke my heart :(

[HRose]

I'm going to go way out on a limb and assume that DAOC was/is your first MMO?  Or I could be completely misreading..

No, I played MUDs for a long time before moving to mmorpgs and my first was UO as for many of us. DAoC is the very first game that got me "involved", though.

But if Mythic revamped the client, hell, they'd have to rewrite the whole thing, I imagine - so that the performance, graphics, sound, and so on, was all improved and modernized - then... I don't know.

But they did already. The client was always upgraded at least till ToA, the sound engine was tweaked many times, the graphic were redone. Only on the "design" they went lazy. DAoC is nowhere where it was. The technology supports now way fancier effects. That's in fact the very first quality of a mmorpg: the possibility to have a continued ongoing development and build upon what was before. After all, they'll HAVE to do that for Warhammer.

In fact I hate Warhammer. It represents the reason, like it happened with Imperator, why we'll never see the ideas I wrote above. Because Mythic's producers will never accept to dare in that direction and actually offer something that requires some brand new development beside a small "content team" pushing out a couple of zones, armors and skills like with happened with DR. That's, in fact, what we'll have in a year. We will here again discussing about product lifecycles and why DAoC has lost even more subscribers.

It loses subscribers not because its game-world has lost potential and quality. But because DAoC is in "maintenance" mode while Warhammer is in "development" mode.

That's what we get. Every idea about actually DEVELOPING the game would be discarded. Because all the work on the ideas is cut to just leave these game drift and disperse till they aren't more commercially viable and need sequels.

[HaemishM]

DAoC has endless potential.

Bullshit. No game has endless potential. It doesn't matter how much content you add on top of a decent foundation, EVENTUALLY human beings will just tire of the same game mechanics.

[Xanthippe]

While Warhammer is drawing a good deal of the dev resources, that will not necessarily be the case forever, nor can we assume that Mythic will let DAOC rot or just be maintained.  Warhammer is a very different game.  DAOC still has the most interesting pvp that I know of, what with the 3-realm system and fortress combat.  It makes sense for Mythic to continue to hone DAOC for the unique pvp system rather than recreate it completely.

But if the pve development mostly goes toward Warhammer, while DAOC only has improvements to what's existing, that'd be fine with me.  The DAOC pve system is quite dated; others have better pve content (by better, of course I mean "more interesting to me").

I would love to see espionage and diplomacy integrated somehow in DAOC's system - I'm not smart enough to figure out how it could be implemented to work and be fun; it's just a dream of mine to play a mmog with that stuff in it.  I want to be Mata Hari.

[HRose]

Bullshit. No game has endless potential. It doesn't matter how much content you add on top of a decent foundation, EVENTUALLY human beings will just tire of the same game mechanics.

When I say that a game has endless potential it doesn't mean that you have to play it for 20 years straight. My stance is about the appeal to new players. We still have Final Fantasy, Zelda and Super Mario. These *worlds* don't have life cycles and they already build on top of what they have till that point. You can get fed up with FF random battles and mechanics, but this isn't stopping that world to still remain so popular.

The players will move between these worlds and follow their preferences, but if the quality is maintained these worlds just won't need to be replaced as "disposable goods" that you eat and throw away.

Imho it's so much more important to build the game so that it remains appealing to the new players than trying to retain the players you have already. It's harder, but if done in the right way, it will pay off. All in this genre is a challenge and s risk. This is a fundamental one.

Of course you can just give up on this and go in the opposite direction. The final results will be appropriate to the mind-set.

[HRose]

Warhammer is a very different game.

I LOLed at that. Warhammer will use the exact same RvR system of DAoC.

[HaemishM]

Imho it's so much more important to build the game so that it remains appealing to the new players than trying to retain the players you have already. It's harder, but if done in the right way, it will pay off. All in this genre is a challenge and s risk. This is a fundamental one

There is so much wrong with that post.

I'm almost positive that in pure dollars, it is much less expensive to keep an old player than it is to recruit a new player. So constantly building the game to appeal to new players, especially if it's at the expense of old players, is going to cause asstons of churn. CHURN IS BAD FOR SUBSCRIPTION-BASED BUSINESSES.

Churn is also very bad for communities. Communities, which are and should be the heart of the MMOG experience, demand continuity and continuity means the same people. Churn destroys community because where you once felt like a well-recognized and appreciated person in town, all of a sudden you are a stranger.

You mention Final Fantasy, Mario and Zelda. The thing you are talking about isn't the gameplay, it's the brand. The brand keeps people coming back to these games. But what you are really missing is that these games are single-player games, with hardcoded endings. Thus a new FF game IS a new game, even if the mechanics are nothing but a rehash. They also do not have the same kind of in-game community that makes MMOG's so sticky; they have a metagame community that has little effect on gameplay.

It sounds like you are arguing for DAoC to be a series of sequels, which might work, but is not how the game world is structured. It is also not conducive to a subscription-based business. I'm not saying you should totally ignore bringing new players into the game, but the older an MMOG gets, the more barriers there will be between vets and new players, even if you don't take into account mudflation and level-based advancement systems.

[Johny Cee]

There is so much wrong with that post.

I'm almost positive that in pure dollars, it is much less expensive to keep an old player than it is to recruit a new player. So constantly building the game to appeal to new players, especially if it's at the expense of old players, is going to cause asstons of churn. CHURN IS BAD FOR SUBSCRIPTION-BASED BUSINESSES.

Churn is also very bad for communities. Communities, which are and should be the heart of the MMOG experience, demand continuity and continuity means the same people. Churn destroys community because where you once felt like a well-recognized and appreciated person in town, all of a sudden you are a stranger.

You mention Final Fantasy, Mario and Zelda. The thing you are talking about isn't the gameplay, it's the brand. The brand keeps people coming back to these games. But what you are really missing is that these games are single-player games, with hardcoded endings. Thus a new FF game IS a new game, even if the mechanics are nothing but a rehash. They also do not have the same kind of in-game community that makes MMOG's so sticky; they have a metagame community that has little effect on gameplay.

It sounds like you are arguing for DAoC to be a series of sequels, which might work, but is not how the game world is structured. It is also not conducive to a subscription-based business. I'm not saying you should totally ignore bringing new players into the game, but the older an MMOG gets, the more barriers there will be between vets and new players, even if you don't take into account mudflation and level-based advancement systems.

I'd suggest you leave off, Haemish....   

I 100% agree with you, but there's no way to convince the Italian of that.  We've been down this road in the last big DAoC thread to hit.  Reading his responses hurted my brain,  and tends to kill any other discussion.

For HRose:

Could we agree to let disputed points remain disputed points,  and move on in the discussion?

[Hoax]

The thing that really puzzles me about the whole DAOC thing is why play it at all?  The RvR is so great!

Planetside - twitch + a bunch of / commands = fun?   

Really good MMO pvp hasn't been even attempted since Shadowbane and we all know how that turned out.  By good MMO pvp I mean the potential for player conflict to influence events in the gameworld.  Please dont insult my intelligence by claiming that relic captures or DF does that for DAOC, which is a glorified CTF with all the meaningfulness of Planetside base captures.  SB really wasn't a grand attempt either, as the system was very simple (build castle, destroy other people's castles, rinse, repeat).

That is my gripe with DAOC threads, I could care less over what game's other people go fanboi about.  To do otherwise would be hypocritical, Hellgate:London doesn't even have a playable version and I'm thinking it might be robot jesus..

[Rasix]

Really good MMO pvp hasn't been even attempted since Shadowbane and we all know how that turned out.  By good MMO pvp I mean the potential for player conflict to influence events in the gameworld.

You're assuming by saying "good MMO pvp" that everyone wants that.  Not everyone does. Yep, that's why as you mentioned it's kind of stupid to interject yourself in these threads.  There's nothing here you want and never will be.

I simply don't participate because until there's a /level 50, I don't really even give a shit.  Even then, there's other crap that's probably a better bang for my buck.

[Hoax]

No, not everyone wants that but anyone who is still playing DAOC because "its the best MMO pvp" obviously is a pvp player.  I really can not imagine someone who cares first and foremost about PvP (or RvR or whatever you want to call it) not wanting a more influential form of PvP then we have now in games like WoW DAOC and Planetside.  Why bother to play MMO's at all if not for the fact that you have a character and a world that are persistent?  Higher levels of pvp challenge, with better systems and easier access can be found in RTS, FPS, TBS et all.  But conflict that influences the gamespace is a goal that can only be accomplished in MMO's.

Do not assume I'm implying the "play to crush" of SB is what I'm saying all pvpers want.  I'm just saying something that matters more then Pside/DAOC's never-ending capture the base, lose the base or WoW's instanced resetting BG's and meaningless bindrush outdoor pvp would sure be nice.  There has to be a happy medium tucked away between the two sides, pvp the matters but doesn't cause people on the loosing side to quit as they fall hopelessly behind the power of the winners.  Until that middle ground is found pvp in MMO's will continue to suck when compared to genre's that can focus on just making fun gameplay and having players kill each other aimlessly.

[Xanthippe]

Warhammer is a very different game.

I LOLed at that. Warhammer will use the exact same RvR system of DAoC.

Really? There are 3 sides?

[stray]

http://warhammeronlineforum.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1991

4) The game will be RvR-centric, focused on the ongoing battles between three separate groups (more information on these groups down the road).

[Xanthippe]

Oh that is cool.  I take it back, I take it back!

I was confusing Warhammer with Imperator - thinking there was no pvp.

So nevermind what I said.  It doesn't make sense for Mythic to continue to put a lot of cash into DAOC; makes more sense to put it into the new one.

[stray]

Well, it's nice that there's going to be PvP and all.....But 3 sided RvR just tells me they're not exactly shooting for the stars here (And it's not that in and of itself....It's just that it speaks of whatever other decisions they're probably going to make). It'll be DAoC with new skins, just like the naysayers (including myself) have been saying since it was announced.

Hell, keep the "RvR" if you must. But how about just making it 4 sided? Or maybe two sided? No wait --- One sided!

Yeah....

At least that'll tell me that they're at least trying to do something different.

[Johny Cee]

Well, it's nice that there's going to be PvP and all.....But 3 sided RvR just tells me they're not exactly shooting for the stars here (And it's not that in and of itself....It's just that it speaks of whatever other decisions they're probably going to make). It'll be DAoC with new skins, just like the naysayers (including myself) have been saying since it was announced.

Hell, keep the "RvR" if you must. But how about just making it 4 sided? Or maybe two sided? No wait --- One sided!

Yeah....

At least that'll tell me that they're at least trying to do something different.

The general design of the RvR system is the one thing that no one has any problems with.  Makes sense to keep.

It's all the rest of the details that will decide me, one way or the other,  on the game.  Crowd control, interrupts, what the pve experience is like, whether class min/maxing > anything else, stealth, etc.

If it's just reskinned DAoC (alliance: "Who has finns list???"), no thanks.

[HRose]

The general design of the RvR system is the one thing that no one has any problems with.  Makes sense to keep.

And buying that licence and designing the game to be exactly a DAoC's clone makes sense? Or "DAoC done better"? Or DAoC without the suck?

And if they know what are the problems of DAoC, beside new shiny graphic, why they don't solve them? And if they have so wonderful ideas waiting to be implemented, why we don't see them already?

The problem is right in the contradiction in Mark Jacobs words. Every few lines he repeats that "it's not DAoC2", but then everything he says beside that confirms that the game IS DAoC 2, will repeat the same models and will be targeted at the same public.

Or this is a problem of schizophrenia or someone is confused.

I hate Warhammer, but I'd appreciate some honesty about the true intentions at Mythic. Supporting (in the real sense, not just fixing a bug here and there and keeping up the servers) two identic games is neither possible, nor convenient.

[Llava]

No, not everyone wants that but anyone who is still playing DAOC because "its the best MMO pvp" obviously is a pvp player.  I really can not imagine someone who cares first and foremost about PvP (or RvR or whatever you want to call it) not wanting a more influential form of PvP then we have now in games like WoW DAOC and Planetside.

In Shadowbane, you got to make whatever you wanted and then pick a team.  Some guilds had rules, sure, but there was no in-game mechanism preventing a whatever from being in the same guild with whatever else.  And if you didn't like the direction your team was going, you could leave and join another team while keeping your character.

Not so in DAoC.  It's entirely possible for Hibernia as a realm to be faltering, but have a few select groups who are at the top of their game.  I find it hard to imagine a situation in which RvR would have a significant effect on world events without "punishing" all members of losing realms.  Perhaps an example could be provided?

Otherwise, DAoC already gives enough investment into the "forced teams" that the Realms are, and doing any more would discourage individuality moreso.

[stray]

I just want to see somebody do "Warhammer". Simple as that. Why is Dark Ages (and it's assorted mechanics) even relevant here?

Mythic should see it as an opportunity to be stewards of a great license. Not as an opportunity for their ideas per se. "Good" ideas or bad --- I do not care. Warhammer fantasy has been around as long as it has BECAUSE IT ALREADY HAS GOOD IDEAS. Whatever "ideas" Mythic brings to the table shouldn't even be "ideas" in the strictest sense of the word. "Interpretation" or "Translation" is more like it.

It's just entirely the wrong angle to approach it from. When does Warhammer itself actually enter the equation? All I ever hear or read about whenever WHO comes under discussion is actually more talk about DAoC.

It's the same problem (with all due respect) that Raph did with SWG.....Where the license becomes a simple backdrop, and the developer goes in the forefront. Bad idea.

[Typhon]

Good post Stray, I agree completely.  What I would have expected to hear is - we're focusing on RvR with three factions to start.  That would make me believe that they are creating a game that flexible enough to accomdate more factions as time goes by.  Instead, it does look like they are leaning toward using the DAOC game mechanic again.

Well, hopefully they learn something from the success/popularity of the battlegrounds and WoW's failure with wait queues.

[HRose]

Well, hopefully they learn something from the success/popularity of the battlegrounds.

Let's hope not, thank you.

If DAoC has NOTHING to learn from WoW it's about that completely fucked up PvP. Nothing in WoW's PvP is salvageable.

Btw, multiple PvP factions is possible, but it would be stupid to use them and not also allow the players to set their own. "Wish" had something similar and even my design ideas about the dream mmorpg start from there.

[Hoax]

In Shadowbane, you got to make whatever you wanted and then pick a team.  Some guilds had rules, sure, but there was no in-game mechanism preventing a whatever from being in the same guild with whatever else.  And if you didn't like the direction your team was going, you could leave and join another team while keeping your character.

Not so in DAoC.  It's entirely possible for Hibernia as a realm to be faltering, but have a few select groups who are at the top of their game.  I find it hard to imagine a situation in which RvR would have a significant effect on world events without "punishing" all members of losing realms.  Perhaps an example could be provided?

Otherwise, DAoC already gives enough investment into the "forced teams" that the Realms are, and doing any more would discourage individuality moreso.

Here's a thread with the type of open pvp ideas that are needed to avoid the pointless shit we have now AND the crushT mentality of a game like SB where eventually most people quit because they've been driven into the ground, their sword is broken and their land was burned then plowed with salt.

http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=4733.0

[HaemishM]

If DAoC has NOTHING to learn from WoW it's about that completely fucked up PvP. Nothing in WoW's PvP is salvageable.

Other than the fact that it's fun, right? But I guess that's not important.

Btw, multiple PvP factions is possible, but it would be stupid to use them and not also allow the players to set their own. "Wish" had something similar and even my design ideas about the dream mmorpg start from there.

Your dream MMOG design starts from a failed MMOG that never made it out of an Alpha stage? /sadf

[tazelbain]

To be fair Wish Alpha was pretty much a blank slate with a little bit of leanings towards UO.  It could have become just about anything.

[HRose]

If DAoC has NOTHING to learn from WoW it's about that completely fucked up PvP. Nothing in WoW's PvP is salvageable.

Other than the fact that it's fun, right? But I guess that's not important.

For who is fun? I've yet to know someone that is truly satisfied of WoW's PvP. If you think it's fun I won't argue with that, but considering the general impressions I got this is sort of surprising.

Grinding honor in a pointless environment without a purpose if not the girnd itself, isn't fun. Irt's nowhere satisfactory, nor rewarding.

If I have to join for a brief PvP skirmish without a purpose, a depth and just as a fun digression, I go play other games that are designed to do this, deliver this type of fun thousands times better and do not require a monthly fee.

Really, you are the first one I hear who likes the PvP in WoW.

Your dream MMOG design starts from a failed MMOG that never made it out of an Alpha stage? /sadf

You decided to start trolling my posts in your spare time?

I'm not going to justify my idea or some parts of "Wish" design. But I'll say that there are a bunch of reasons why a mmorpg can be canceled. And the "guild house" idea is surely the very last.

[Hoax]

Haemish, your making me side with the DAOC fanboi over you, why?  WoW pvp is fun, and might be more shiney, more balanced and less clunky interface-wise then DAOC.  But it is AS stupid, unsatisfying and completely inadequate as any other current generation MMO not named ShadowBane (which takes it too far to the other side of the scale).

PVP + raiding = WoW's endgame.  Anyone playing WoW for over 6 months falls into one of these catagories:

a)has to play a MMO and can't find anything else to play
b)is too invested in the MMO despite how much they hate it to quit  (this can be account accomplishments or social)
c)is too stupid to realize how pointless WoW pvp is and that <insert any fps here> provides a better pointless pvp excercise in every way
d)is a fucking uber raid loving whore

[Rasix]

So MMO RVR players (specifically the WoW folk) are either:

a) bored
b) stupid and delusional
c) stupid and oblivious
d) catasses
(Yike, this really pegs most people I've met in game. Especially if you add an e) all of the above. )


Is it impossible to enjoy pointless combat that doesn't involve headshotting someone at 100 yards with a handgun?  I mean, I'd love to see Mount and Blade's combat in a MMORPG. I think that'd provide a good buffer between twitch skill, tactics and ye ole dice roll.  But you're erring here on the side of gross over simplification.  FPS really doesn't do it for a lot of people, and those people aren't left with much. 

The group I play with in every one of these games REALLY loves PVP but hates the hell out of FPS games and really disliked Shadowbane.  Of course, that's kind of a bad yet relevant example as now they're playing nothing (quit WoW pre-battlegrounds). I think they would have loved the battlegrounds (it's right up their alley) but instead they went back to DAoC to give the new classic servers a try and ended up leaving more bitter than ever.