Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 07:02:34 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
we're back, baby
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  MMOG Discussion  |  Topic: War December Newsletter + Looks like it's coming to a console 0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 14 Go Down Print
Author Topic: War December Newsletter + Looks like it's coming to a console  (Read 281010 times)
Arthur_Parker
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5865

Internet Detective


on: December 21, 2006, 01:17:11 PM

Warhammer December Newsletter (hosted by Warhammer Alliance)

Details on the Chaos Zealot plus new empire careers Witch Hunter & Knight of the Blazing Sun.

Also looks like WAR is coming to a console (it was running on an xbox at E3)

Quote
Post Description
Producer ? WARHAMMER Console

Location:
Fairfax, Virginia (relocation assistance available)

Summary:

EAMythic is looking for a Producer to lead the production and design on an exciting EAMythic title being developed across next generation console platforms for the online MMORPG market.

EAMythic (formerly Mythic Entertainment) recently celebrated its ten year anniversary as one of the most successful independent developers and publishers of massively-multiplayer online role-playing games in the world. Credited with 15 online games, including the award winning Dark Age of Camelot, EAMythic's success is based on proprietary technology, innovative game design and exemplary customer service delivered by a talented staff of more than 190 people.


We?re a small team now, and growing rapidly. Apply today, and join us!

Responsibilities:

·          Leads producers and development directors to deliver on-time, high-quality products and features that meet the high standards set by EAMythic.

·          Supports the creative vision of the project and maintains creative alignment on the development team.

·         Helps establish and prioritize strategic goals to create a compelling game experience, including:

supervising project design and development to maintain state of the art gameplay in current and future interactive experiences;
providing leadership in the areas of videogame innovation, market trends, and customer requirements, both in the US and markets abroad.

·         Initiates, fosters and maintains positive working relationships with internal and external organizations (development team, marketing, sales, and PR) that are critical to both current and future development process.

·         Touches all parts of Game Creation; including design, gameplay balance, interfaces, focus testing, marketing, and innovation.

·         Effectively and creatively manage, schedule and track production team to achieve identified and quantifiable goals; with concentration on the day to day management of any Associate or Assistant Producer(s).

·         Be able to identify and quantify what makes quality/fun and what does not. Must be able to communicate this clearly.

Requirements:

-Minimum of 5 years experience managing internal teams within the video game or similar industry.
-Minimum of 3 years experience as a Producer.
-Demonstrated ability to direct teams through all phases of the product development process from pre-production to shipment.
-Proven developer of talent, both creative and administrative, and manager of projects and teams.
-Gamer with a passion for great gameplay.
-Understanding of issues facing various types of game play, artistic and technical considerations, and the ability to forecast the ramifications of decisions made during the concept/pre-production phase.
-Strong written, communication, and presentation skills.
-Experienced at pitching concepts and working with marketing partners to construct viable and marketable titles.
-Excellent interpersonal skills and be able to effectively communicate and work with all disciplines within a game team.
-Budget and financial management experience.

Preferred:

-Producer who has shipped multiple AAA titles and has a strong console and online background.
Previous work experience on a massively multiplayer products.
-Extensive knowledge and hands-on gameplay experience with high profile MMO?s such as WoW, EverQuest, Dark Age of Camelot and Star Wars Galaxies.
-Strong technical, artistic or content creation background.

Electronic Arts (EA) is the world's #1 independent developer and publisher of interactive entertainment. We offer a dynamic environment, talented co-workers, AAA titles, career growth and competitive compensation and benefits.

EAMythic is a small group of people dedicated to providing the very best in multi-player gaming. In addition to a professional team of programmers and artists, EAMythic works with experienced gamers to produce the highest quality products for the gaming public.
Yoru
Moderator
Posts: 4615

the y master, king of bourbon


WWW
Reply #1 on: December 21, 2006, 01:22:23 PM

I could've sworn that WAR on a console wasn't news.. I think they told us that at E3.. Llava, do you remember?

We might've gotten told to keep it on the NDA though.
tazelbain
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6603

tazelbain


Reply #2 on: December 21, 2006, 01:25:04 PM

I thought they had it on the xbox at E3, but hadn't decided if they were going to do it.

"Me am play gods"
Arthur_Parker
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5865

Internet Detective


Reply #3 on: December 21, 2006, 01:31:20 PM

Yeah, they proved they could do it but this is the first time it's (sort of) been confirmed as happening.
Numtini
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7675


Reply #4 on: December 21, 2006, 07:00:41 PM

It just makes sense. There's a big crowded market in the PC world for MMPORPGs. On the 360 it'll be Conan and War. If you put out a MMPORPG for the PS3 or Wii, you have a monopoly within the genre.

Anyone think FFXI would have 500k subs if it was PC only? I loved the game, but I don't.

If you can read this, you're on a board populated by misogynist assholes.
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11838


Reply #5 on: December 22, 2006, 02:50:34 AM

Only real information I could find....

Quote
Q: Tell us about slayers.

A: I have been really quiet on this topic, because we have been discussing it around here for months. We’ve got several options, ranging from the purely cosmetic to the other extreme.

We have decided once and for all to reject the purely cosmetic approach. We want to integrate the slayer status as part of an advanced system, along with such systems for the other armies, as part of a future expansion.

I know this will disappoint some of you, and I understand why, but we honestly believe that a purely cosmetic slayer option would ultimately be nothing but a disappointment.

Quote
Q: Will guilds be restricted by racial lines?

A: Guilds are restricted by Order/Destruction. Anyone fighting on the side of Order can guild with anyone on the side of Order, and ditto for Destruction advocates.
 

Quote
Q: Do you know anything more about the death penalty/resurrection mechanics?

A: I was told that at this time we do not plan any experience loss at death (but don’t take that to mean there will be NO loss of any kind – just that it won’t be XP). No corpse runs, no shadow crossing, etc, either – you will respawn at the point where you are resurrected, or at a designate spawn point such as a camp or a graveyard.

There will likely be different types of resurrection spells, and different penalties to the recipients for them all. But again, XP loss appears to be off the table.

As usual, I want to remind you all, that things can and will change before launch, and after launch to boot. This answer is dated December 7, 2006. If you try to bludgeon me with it in 2011, I will... well, admittedly I won’t actually do anything but sigh and curse the eternal nature of the internet. But it will be a BIG sigh.

Quote
Q: Will you be able to make characters on the same server for both factions? Example: an empire and chaos character on the same server?

A: Nope.

Quote
Q: Will a character of Tier 1 be able to compete at all, even if poorly, against a character of Tier 4? Will multiple Tier 1 characters be able to take on and defeat a Tier 4 character?

A: This is a question with many potential implications, so don’t read any more into this than my exact words. Also, please remember that we are still a long way from launch, and that this may change.

Higher tier players who enter lower tier zones will not be able to attack or be attacked by lower tier players. However, if a lower tier player wants to enter a higher tier zone, all bets are off, and attacking/being attacked can happen.

The specific answer to your question is that Tier 1 players cannot win a one on one fight with a Tier 4 player. A pack of Tier 1 players will be able to cause harm to a Tier 4. We have not yet set an exact level of intended damage (and it will vary hugely depending on the player and the circumstances), so I cannot give you a specific answer.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
stray
Terracotta Army
Posts: 16818

has an iMac.


Reply #6 on: December 22, 2006, 02:56:59 AM

On the 360 it'll be Conan and War.

Not to mention that Marvel game.

And who knows, maybe even PSU will actually have more things to do by the time these things are released.
HRose
I'm Special
Posts: 1205

VIKLAS!


WWW
Reply #7 on: December 22, 2006, 05:17:10 AM

Consoles ports can only do good to the genre.

It will force those lazy asses of the designers to rely less on a stupid number of hotbars and focus more on the gameplay.

-HRose / Abalieno
cesspit.net
stray
Terracotta Army
Posts: 16818

has an iMac.


Reply #8 on: December 22, 2006, 06:01:24 AM

Maybe for the future, but War will be the same ole' crap. They're making a WoW clone based on a license that WoW was based on itself. These guys have no imagination.
Daeven
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1210


Reply #9 on: December 22, 2006, 10:51:01 AM

Maybe for the future, but War will be the same ole' crap. They're making a WoW clone based on a license that WoW was based on itself. These guys have no imagination.

Is this one of this 'Tolkien was so cliche because he used elves and Orcs' moments?

"There is a technical term for someone who confuses the opinions of a character in a book with those of the author. That term is idiot." -SMStirling

It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion
WindupAtheist
Army of One
Posts: 7028

Badicalthon


Reply #10 on: December 22, 2006, 11:00:04 AM

It's more like a "I don't care how many fanboys scream WE WERE FIRST, this still looks and plays just like the same old shit!" moment.

"You're just a dick who quotes himself in his sig."  --  Schild
"Yeah, it's pretty awesome."  --  Me
stray
Terracotta Army
Posts: 16818

has an iMac.


Reply #11 on: December 22, 2006, 11:16:28 AM

Maybe for the future, but War will be the same ole' crap. They're making a WoW clone based on a license that WoW was based on itself. These guys have no imagination.

Is this one of this 'Tolkien was so cliche because he used elves and Orcs' moments?

Hmm? No, I'm just saying that Mythic has a hold of a license that inspired WC, as well as a staff that created another game that somewhat provided inspiration for some of WoW's features (DAoC), and the best they can do now is look to WoW for inspiration. It's like watching parents imitate their teenage son. It's pathetic. They're going to make something that doesn't live up to WH, doesn't live up to their previous efforts, and does nothing as far as "new" ways of combat for a console go. Whatever creativity they might have had in the past, it's gone now -- simply because of WoW's existence.

Also, EA.
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11838


Reply #12 on: December 22, 2006, 12:05:06 PM

Quote
Is this one of this 'Tolkien was so cliche because he used elves and Orcs' moments?

If WAR was shaping up as DAoC RvR++ then you'd be right.

Redesigning Daoc to apply lessons learned to RvR and to shorten/eliminate the PvE grind would be enough for me to give it a whirl.

So far, from their descriptions of WAR RvR it seems like they are pulling in the half-assed aspects of WoWs DAoC-wannabe RvR.

« Last Edit: December 22, 2006, 04:53:35 PM by eldaec »

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #13 on: December 22, 2006, 01:45:09 PM

So far, from their descriptions of WAR RvR it seems like they are pulling in the half-assed aspects of WoWs DAoC-wannabe RvR into WAR.

If that's the case, Mythic is making a terrible design decision.  Why would people play War just to experience what they already have in WoW? 

Mythic did a lot right in DAoC, it just wasn't on the PvE side.  I was hoping they would keep many of the better RvR ideas and reduce the grind in getting to them, but I'm beginning to expect that I'll end up disappointed.

"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."

-  Mark Twain
Arthur_Parker
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5865

Internet Detective


Reply #14 on: December 22, 2006, 03:53:26 PM

They have stated you will be able to level up and gain items purely from pvp.  Shadowbane and EVE don't even have that, it might well be crap but it's going to be worth a look.
stray
Terracotta Army
Posts: 16818

has an iMac.


Reply #15 on: December 22, 2006, 05:48:16 PM

That's probably the best thing going for this game....

But...

SB or Eve don't have much of a "grind" or leveling process to begin with anyways. Plus, their PvP carries more depth and breadth. Not this "Order" vs "Destruction" nonsense.

Arthur_Parker
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5865

Internet Detective


Reply #16 on: December 23, 2006, 01:49:46 AM

Quote
"But..."

Are you kidding? 

SB doesn't have a PVE grind because they weren't able to code a decent one and found by accident that most people didn't care, as that wasn't the focus of the game.  What people did care about in SB was the pvp which, surprise, surprise they couldn't code very well either. 

Eve has a time investment grind split over months that encourages people to pay a subscription fee without the need to actually log into the game that often.  I think that's clever and it's no surprise that players are willing to pay for a game they don't play, it's a great game though  rolleyes

Stray, you think WAR is going to be crap, that's fine, there's a high chance you are correct.  But stating the WAR pvp doesn't carry depth compared to EVE and SB when WAR still has at least a year of development time left, is flat out stupid, unless you have come from the future to warn us.
stray
Terracotta Army
Posts: 16818

has an iMac.


Reply #17 on: December 23, 2006, 04:44:07 AM

Stray, you think WAR is going to be crap, that's fine, there's a high chance you are correct.  But stating the WAR pvp doesn't carry depth compared to EVE and SB when WAR still has at least a year of development time left, is flat out stupid, unless you have come from the future to warn us.

As if "stupid" or "from the future" are the only choices I have in determining that...

There are other limited faction based games to give me a good idea what it will be, y'know. They aren't doing anything new here. And I say it won't have depth because I've yet to see a two faction/no conquest oriented system to have depth. Deep pvp systems are ones that can change the entire political climate of the game world. In War's case, the only people who can change the world in any significant way will be the developers. Which they won't do, since it works against a lot of their other ideas.

It'll be pvp focused on battles. Not War (ironically enough..). A fun diversion maybe, like WoW.....But not "deep" by any measure.
« Last Edit: December 23, 2006, 04:47:49 AM by Stray »
HRose
I'm Special
Posts: 1205

VIKLAS!


WWW
Reply #18 on: December 23, 2006, 06:47:46 PM

Stray, you think WAR is going to be crap, that's fine, there's a high chance you are correct.  But stating the WAR pvp doesn't carry depth compared to EVE and SB when WAR still has at least a year of development time left, is flat out stupid, unless you have come from the future to warn us.
"It's beta!"  ..?

Actually we know a lot of the structure of Warhammer's PvP. At least if they aren't going to revise and change everything.

Sure, it's possible. But I doubt it.

-HRose / Abalieno
cesspit.net
tazelbain
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6603

tazelbain


Reply #19 on: December 23, 2006, 11:07:46 PM

Well, if SB and Eve are the standard-bearers, than pointless clusterfucks is what he wants not structure.

"Me am play gods"
stray
Terracotta Army
Posts: 16818

has an iMac.


Reply #20 on: December 24, 2006, 05:49:28 AM

Before you start complaining about pk'ers, that is not what I'd want to force on anybody.

I do want structure. A pointless clusterfuck would be a system where there is nothing at stake for anything except individuals or instanced small groups. That's only a step above dueling imo, and a total waste of what massive games could be.

Also, if you make individual achievement the focus, then what you get are realm point/hk farmers, afk'ers, people too focused on completing this or that "pvp quest" for themselves, and those stupid rogues wandering around by themselves, not caring to cooperate with the rest of the team. I think a system with more beneficial (as well as detrimental) effects on a world, or at least, one that offers incentives at the guild level, encourages people to play with each each more. Alternatively, make the most efficient way of obtaining honor/realm/etc points to be through large scale objectives that can only be completed through teamwork (capture that bridge, destroy this or that keep, etc).
« Last Edit: December 24, 2006, 06:20:54 AM by Stray »
HRose
I'm Special
Posts: 1205

VIKLAS!


WWW
Reply #21 on: December 24, 2006, 06:37:09 AM

Also, if you make individual achievement the focus, then what you get are realm point/hk farmers, afk'ers, people too focused on completing this or that "pvp quest" for themselves, and those stupid rogues wandering around by themselves, not caring to cooperate with the rest of the team. I think a system with more beneficial (as well as detrimental) effects on a world, or at least, one that offers incentives at the guild level, encourages people to play with each each more. Alternatively, make the most efficient way of obtaining honor/realm/etc points to be through large scale objectives that can only be completed through teamwork (capture that bridge, destroy this or that keep, etc).
You know, that would actually require Mythic to have good designers. And not copy WoW.

DAoC moves AWAY from objective-based PvP with every patch. I'm just saying.

-HRose / Abalieno
cesspit.net
Falconeer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11124

a polyamorous pansexual genderqueer born and living in the wrong country


WWW
Reply #22 on: December 24, 2006, 07:11:17 AM

I'll repeat here a question I asked a few weeks ago in another topic that went the PvP way, but was left unanswered:

Please don't give me your opinion on Lineage 2 as a whole game, just on the PvP part of Lineage 2. Don't consider the ubergrind and/or the fact that you don't like this or that aspect of the game. Let's take it from the gamedesign side of the mirror:

What do you all think of Lineage 2 PvP? What's wrong with it, in your opinions? (Ask if you don't know how that works...)

I am asking this cause I keep seeing posts about how great DaOC PvP was, or Shadowbane's, or UO's.. and yo all keep avoiding Lineage 2 that definitely has a very interesting PvP model. It's ok you don't like it, but what do you think about it? And why you all don't even take it into consideration?

Sairon
Terracotta Army
Posts: 866


Reply #23 on: December 24, 2006, 07:51:04 AM

Was quite some time since I played L2, but I recall the concept being somewhat intresting, but the execution was off. There was to many ways to abuse the system iirc.
stray
Terracotta Army
Posts: 16818

has an iMac.


Reply #24 on: December 24, 2006, 08:32:47 AM

Falconeer: The ubergrind can not not be mentioned when talking about L2 PvP.  smiley PvP + Grind is retarded. Make one or the other.

DAoC had a grind too though (not nearly as bad however). I've never been one to praise that game either.

UO would fall under the category of the kind of pointless clusterfuck that Tazelbain had in mind. I don't praise UO for "deep" PvP. Most of UO's best features had nothing to do with PvP (skill system, some of the combat ideas, world and crafting).
Falconeer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11124

a polyamorous pansexual genderqueer born and living in the wrong country


WWW
Reply #25 on: December 24, 2006, 08:57:41 AM

Yes Stray, but my point is: take L2 PvP (Castels, Sieges, Manors, Clanhalls, Taxes and more) and re-do it in a different game without the endless eyebleeder grind. It smells good to me. Maybe it's not perfect, sure it isn't.. but it's the greatest PvP oriented in the world apparently and for some reasons.

How come no one of us and I mean NO ONE ever thinks about it as a repeatable and updatable model for a succesful PvP oriented MMO?
Again, I am not talking about L2 at all, just about the PvP model. What am I missing? Cause I think it's very good, and meaningful to the core. 
Why we keep talking about how good was the idea behind ShadowBane (that is the Emperor of CLusterfucks) and never ever mention L2?

I'd definitely play a game with that PvP but in a humanly playable environment.

stray
Terracotta Army
Posts: 16818

has an iMac.


Reply #26 on: December 24, 2006, 09:14:01 AM

Why we keep talking about how good was the idea behind ShadowBane (that is the Emperor of CLusterfucks) and never ever mention L2?

It's not even the same thing. Sure, sieges are cool and are focused on mass pvp, but it has little to do with conquest. It's more about garnering bonuses than changing the game world. Secondly, there are only like a handful of castles right? How is that the same as dozens of privately owned cities? The stakes are more personal in SB, and effects of winning more wide reaching.

I will that say that their particular implementation of siege warfare is better and more thought than SB. The act of sieging seems more fun. But I prefer the goal of sieging in SB more (play2crush, as opposed to play2bonus and tax). Make sense?
Falconeer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11124

a polyamorous pansexual genderqueer born and living in the wrong country


WWW
Reply #27 on: December 24, 2006, 09:20:34 AM

I see your point.

Honestly, I too prefer the Shdowbane model (*Biggest Wasted Chance* ever).
Just can't get why Lineage 2, a solid and interesting PvP model, is not considered worth a cloning of some sort by western MMORPG developers.

Venkman
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11536


Reply #28 on: December 24, 2006, 09:22:52 AM

Quote from: Nebu
Why would people play War just to experience what they already have in WoW?  
Because it's on a console with almost no competition.

Quote from: Falconeer
What do you all think of Lineage 2 PvP? What's wrong with it, in your opinions? (Ask if you don't know how that works...)
The process to get there.

Even in SB, getting to the soft cap (R5/level 50 when I played) was about a week's worth of work, shorter if you had a dedicated guild/alliance group helping you grind it out. AFAIK, there is no such path in L2. In fact, the primary player considers it a badge of honor to grind out their first and then second "class" template over such an arduous period of time.

In the West, you don't want to prevent people from getting to the portion of the game they really want to be in, unless you expect only a certain type of player to bother, and a relatively small amount of them at that. This covers both Raiding and relevant (as in, advancement-rewarding) PvP.
caladein
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3174


WWW
Reply #29 on: December 24, 2006, 02:15:36 PM

I think a system with more beneficial (as well as detrimental) effects on a world, or at least, one that offers incentives at the guild level, encourages people to play with each each more. Alternatively, make the most efficient way of obtaining honor/realm/etc points to be through large scale objectives that can only be completed through teamwork (capture that bridge, destroy this or that keep, etc).

How big of a guild do you require though? This is one of those things that I think L2 (and EVE) did right by having a well supported clan/alliance system. If whatever you'd like to define as your guild/clan/corp is too small to get to whatever Stray's critical mass is, you're able to join an Alliance that's supported by game mechanics with all the amenities (chat channel, logo, banking, etc.).

On the other end of the spectrum is MxO, which went too far with this idea. Individual crews (2-12 people) made up a faction (guild), but even as the faction leader couldn't see who was on a particular crew. Also, you could invite anyone to your crew, no matter their Reputation with the different sides, but only crews of the same affiliation (Machine/Zion/Mero) could make a faction. It was a minor nightmare, especially when a crew captain would quit on unfriendly terms, but you couldn't kick his crew.

Without a decent alliance system, from what Stray's saying, you'll just end up with a WoW raid guild... but for PvP. You need to be X size to play, either be absorbed, or go home.

"Point being, they can't make everyone happy, so I hope they pick me." -Ingmar
"OH MY GOD WE'RE SURROUNDED SEND FOR BACKUP DIG IN DEFENSIVE POSITIONS MAN YOUR NECKBEARDS" -tgr
Arthur_Parker
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5865

Internet Detective


Reply #30 on: December 27, 2006, 06:42:26 AM

Stray, you think WAR is going to be crap, that's fine, there's a high chance you are correct.  But stating the WAR pvp doesn't carry depth compared to EVE and SB when WAR still has at least a year of development time left, is flat out stupid, unless you have come from the future to warn us.

As if "stupid" or "from the future" are the only choices I have in determining that...

There are other limited faction based games to give me a good idea what it will be, y'know. They aren't doing anything new here. And I say it won't have depth because I've yet to see a two faction/no conquest oriented system to have depth. Deep pvp systems are ones that can change the entire political climate of the game world. In War's case, the only people who can change the world in any significant way will be the developers. Which they won't do, since it works against a lot of their other ideas.

It'll be pvp focused on battles. Not War (ironically enough..). A fun diversion maybe, like WoW.....But not "deep" by any measure.

Firstly the Warhammer ip is purely based on factions so if you are looking for a non faction based pvp game like Darktide, SB or EVE, in which the players form clans and hold territory, that's just not going to happen.  The main appeal/problem with Warhammer is that the world was designed so any army could fight any army (including their own race), although there are sometimes alliances, normally it's just two pure race armies beating the crap out of each other.  They had to invent a weak backstory for WAR just to get two permanent factions, player formed clans made up of all races go far far beyond that and just don't make sense for the IP or as Hrose says for the known zone structure.  In addition to that, they have hinted towards different server rulesets and although a lot of design detail has been released, the exact structure of how you obtain items in pvp, death penalty etc haven't and fine tuning those can make a hell of a difference.

As I said above, the reason WAR is going to be interesting to watch is because they have stated you can level up in PVP.  I fail to see how anyone can want more open ended pvp focused games where players can change the world in a significant way, while at the same time considering WAR not to be capable of offering anything "new".  You better hope it offers something new, because if WAR use PVP as an alternative to PVE advancement and flops badly, then the chances of innovation in PVP for future games decreases.

I'm not even going to bother responding in detail to the WoW clone comments anymore.   WoW is wildly successful, if someone is designing a mmorpg and is not heavily influenced by the most successful mmorpg ever, then they are either a genius who is on the verge of true innovation, or an idiot.  That goes for any mmorpg, not just WAR.
Fargull
Contributor
Posts: 931


Reply #31 on: December 27, 2006, 07:18:50 AM

WAR is doing two things I wanted to see and I will give it a spin specifically to see how those play out.  As Arthur mentioned, you can level strictly from PvP and some of the quests are not your character's sole responsibility, but a collective effort among your faction (side, whatever).  Right now the only thing that bothers me is it felt slow when I played it at Gencon, though the world looked stunning in a good way.  (by slow I don't mean character progression, but just in the general feel of moving about)

"I have come to believe that a great teacher is a great artist and that there are as few as there are any other great artists. Teaching might even be the greatest of the arts since the medium is the human mind and spirit." John Steinbeck
Fordel
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8306


Reply #32 on: December 27, 2006, 12:10:01 PM

I guess leveling in PvP is a good thing, but wouldn't it be better to not have to level at all? Or am I just living in a dream world  tongue ?

and the gate is like I TOO AM CAPABLE OF SPEECH
angry.bob
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5442

We're no strangers to love. You know the rules and so do I.


Reply #33 on: December 27, 2006, 12:14:31 PM

(by slow I don't mean character progression, but just in the general feel of moving about)

I wonder if this is just a Mythic development theory thing. Movement in DAoC was slow as well. I mean tortuously slow. If I recall correctly, it was done on purpose to make the world feel "bigger". Same with the world/roads. In Midgard roads would snake all over the place so going from town to town would take like 45 minutes, but in some spots you could literally see the buildings of one town while standing in another (Huginfel/Audliton)

Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muß man schweigen.
stray
Terracotta Army
Posts: 16818

has an iMac.


Reply #34 on: December 27, 2006, 12:30:37 PM

Firstly the Warhammer ip is purely based on factions so if you are looking for a non faction based pvp game like Darktide, SB or EVE, in which the players form clans and hold territory, that's just not going to happen.

I never said I was against the idea of factions. I'm just against the idea of only 2 factions pitted against each other.

I admit that guild vs guild warfare is more appealing to me, but I'm quite capable of accepting the middle road as well. Two factions is not the middle road though. Nor does it have anything to do with Warhammer, as you yourself admit.

Quote
In addition to that, they have hinted towards different server rulesets and although a lot of design detail has been released, the exact structure of how you obtain items in pvp, death penalty etc haven't and fine tuning those can make a hell of a difference.

Just by knowing that I can level off of killing individual players is enough to tell me that their pvp system will be largely based on kills as well (instead of larger goals). DAoC is another indicator.

And knowing Mythic, it'll be a pretty slow and hefty grind. PvP based or not. Make no mistake about it. When I see pvp based leveling held up as some kind of great feature, I'm still not impressed -- Because I know Mythic will make it a long, grueling process either way. I'd much rather prefer a game almost exclusively based on PvP and warfare, with as little grinding as possible (i.e. SB, Planetside, Eve to an extent, etc).

Quote
You better hope it offers something new, because if WAR use PVP as an alternative to PVE advancement and flops badly, then the chances of innovation in PVP for future games decreases.

If it flops, the situation won't be any worse than it is now for pvp games. I'm already screwed, so what the hell. No big loss to me.

Besides, Conan (which I'm not too fond of atm either...but it does have seige warfare) is catering to PvP'ers, as is Fury. I'm not going to let War be some flagship game where I rest all of my pvp hopes. That's hype that I'm not buying into.

Quote
I'm not even going to bother responding in detail to the WoW clone comments anymore.   WoW is wildly successful, if someone is designing a mmorpg and is not heavily influenced by the most successful mmorpg ever, then they are either a genius who is on the verge of true innovation, or an idiot.  That goes for any mmorpg, not just WAR.

WoW clone comments are a fair criticism, I think. Other game genres aren't built solely on the ideas of one game, and this one shouldn't be either.

[edit] Sorry, had to remove something.
« Last Edit: December 27, 2006, 12:54:59 PM by Stray »
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 14 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  MMOG Discussion  |  Topic: War December Newsletter + Looks like it's coming to a console  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC