Amen. I just accept that most players want to babysi their short attentive span and that every comapny will fail their made up 'needs' No one can sate immaturity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cutlass Jack
Printable View
Amen. I just accept that most players want to babysi their short attentive span and that every comapny will fail their made up 'needs' No one can sate immaturity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cutlass Jack
Kithicor scared me the first few times, people warned me I'd be KoS behind a human, except I was neutral so no probs :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Reiter
I remember sneaking out to the first toll booth, and the oasis. still remember the first time i found the PoK book in freeport, and my first trips to luclin. so much nostalgia
So support the few and accept little money or accept the many playstyle get alot of money and ignore people crying about it not being hard enough? Seriously before LFr in wow they said maybe 3% got to enjoy end game content. You really think the devs are stupid enough to support ONLY that 3%. Um nope. I mean you want hardcore they should just make certain arkfalls instanced and allow clans to go beat mobs twice the level end game content is now for some unique colored rewards and call it a day. There is not enough hardcore to cater to them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Archeus9
East commons was the area before the cave that would take player to the desert of ro used for trading in the old days. Started EQ with Lucien and played a Vah Shir bard on Fennen Ro named Realmreaver.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cynical Jester
SWTOR had raids....and it was still bad.
As for scaling AI difficulty depending on various player attributes: It's a great idea. But right now I feel as if the AI DPS is OP as shtako; mainly Raiders.
I have a 1700 capacity shield with a 40% recharge rate at 2.5 seconds - and I still get owned by a mob of raiders 70% of the time.
BUT I can live with this because it makes it so I actually have to dodge and run around for a couple of minutes rather than just standing there and annihilating all baddies in a matter of seconds.
But I have absolutely no problem with survivability in a co-op game or doing random emergencies with one or two other peoples, so I would say scale those instances.
I'm also a narwhal.
Seriously? I quit playing MMO’s for years because of raids and in WOW I was a key member of one of the top raid guilds on our server when doing the top dungeons were a lot harder than today. No raids are exactly what I want and why I’m playing this game. I would never argue individual players preference on this; however I would argue your arsine assumption that raids are what ALL or the majority of players want.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rumbleskin
It is more reasonable to argue the lower player base is due to the many bugs at launch which caused the across board poor reviews by professional reviewers. I personally love the game, yet I would like to see more incoming content in the near future. If raids become the endgame in Defiance I will definitely stop playing it.
I have no desire to do the tank, healer, dps raid crap with 25 plus people ever again!
you and me both XDQuote:
Originally Posted by Aryctic
Not only WoW, but City of Heroes as well. As a matter of fact, CoH launched April 2004 (WoW in November 2004) and catered purely to casuals before Blizzard actually entered the market. Meanwhile Everquest 2 was more hardcore by design when it launched (a week or so before WoW), and it completely failed to gain significant traction heading into 2005. Vanguard, another hardcore MMO by its own marketing, failed to gain any traction. If hardcore players drive a game's success, than EQ2 should have eventually pulled ahead of WoW in 2005, before SOE changed the game to be more casual in a hope of grabbing WoW's players.Quote:
Originally Posted by Malachi
But guess what? City of Heroes lasted 8 years. And lasted 7 years before it even touched the free-to-play option. Which is even more substantial, considering that superheroes have, and always will be, a niche market (and I say this as someone who writes them as part of his living).
Vanilla-WoW was harder than today's WoW, sure. But even Blizzard said that the changes happened because less than 10% of their playerbase was actually seeing/running that hard content. It was a waste of development resources in the long run. That means, by their datamining, that 90% or more of WoW players were not the hardcore raiders.
Hardcores have not significantly sustained an MMO for almost a decade. What made MMOs fail in the past several years (AoC, WAR, Aion, DCUO, SWTOR, et cetera) was not whether it was casual or hardcore, but the layers of MMO design they blatantly missed just to rush a product to market.
The main problem is that an MMO cannot compete with the market as it was in 2004. It must compete with the market as it is in the year it launches. While the hardcore fans of any MMO can forum-defend it with: "Well, game-x didn't have those features or content at launch," the argument is invalid when looking at consumer expectations and market share. New MMOs have the deck stacked against them because they have to compete with the older MMO as they stand at the time the new game launches.
That is also a major reason why no recent MMO has been able to touch WoW's market share, and a vast majority of them are in free-to-play hybrid mode just to survive. The required investment is prohibitive to launch an MMO that could compete with the content and features of a 2013 MMO market. But yet, it must be competitive!
Yes, it was much easier in 2003 or 2004, when there were barely a handful of MMOs out there and the market was much smaller. This isn't 2003 or 2004, though, and the market is much, much larger. You can't launch a shallow content game, never mind a shallow content bug ridden game, and expect to retain players at launch. Not with as wide as the market is, and the sheer number of MMO options out there.
They go hand in hand really.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eisberg
For instance you fight whatever Mini Boss in whatever MMO, said boss does an attack that does X amount of DMG unless you either;
A: Have enough HP to take the hit and still live. (Gear Progression on both you and your group's Healer)
B: Avoid the attack completely by Dodging or Interrupting the attack. (You and your groups Player Skill plays into this)
C: Use an Ability or Perk to reduce or avoid the DMG. (Character/Class Progression for you and your group)
Sure you can do the content in White Level 1 (starter) gear if you want with no Training, Talents or Perks. However that would just make it insanely hard for no reason other then bragging rights. Ideally you want a balance of all three for a successful PvE encounter, however I've yet to see anything "difficult" in Defiance.
That's just my view on it though.
player hp+gear/level creep < boss dmg+gear/level creep compensation is pretty much the simplest formula for it, especially when you assume gear/level creep = gear/level creep compensationQuote:
Originally Posted by QuikFoX3a
In most MMORPG i've played, the creep is so massive that even the weakest thing in current content will 1-shot you, and that is certainly what's appealing about Defiance, in theory.
In practice, we'd like a challenge. While it's great that many people can come in and appreciate the game regardless of skill and time played/gear acquired, many of us find it very trivial.