Feb 12th 2010 7:08AM For me I feels much more like a TF2 or ET:QW clone than an MMORPG. Which is fine for me. But then again I enjoy ET:QW much more. Because, I don't know, but maybe ET:QW concentrates more on being just a good team-based FPS game, you see? Somehow GA feels it's neither a great FPS nor a MMORPG. Don't know. And speaking of many players in a FPS I enjoy both MAG (PS3) way more.
Aug 7th 2009 4:31AM I agree with DarkStryke. Both the game engine and net code are really total garbage. I've played a lot of games. And none of them had so many performance and scalability issues. For the kind of graphics this game delivers it needs way too much resources. I mean it's not as if there weren't any good game engines out there? Aion, for example, uses the CryEngine. And it delivers. Aion features pretty nice graphics with moderate resource requirements.
Sure, it's not all about graphics. But hitching, stuttering, lags, de-synced animations and horribly low FPS in crowded areas is a game breaker, no matter what. One might like Aion or not. But from a technical point of view this game shows what is possible. In the beta there were huge amounts of players running around. And guess what? No lags and no stuttering.
Jul 17th 2009 3:09AM I think it is perfectly ok to be able to play solo if you so wish. A game shouldn't penalize your playstyle. Speaking of WoW, I think the real problem is that this in this game teamwork pretty often doesn't scale outside of raids/dungeons or arena. For example there are several collecting quests in WoW which actually penalize you when you group up because the drop rate goes down. A good example is EvE imho. As a miner you can do all on your own. No problem. But if you work together you can gather resources much faster. Working together in EvE makes "sense". As I said before, playing solo has to be a viable playstyle. But working together should be a win win situation for every team member.
Another thing are the horribly outdated grouping tools. Sorry, but a chat channel and a simple search form doesn't cut it imho. I believe MMORPGs need much, much better ingame tools. Social network sites give very good examples.
Jun 19th 2009 12:59PM It seems that Global Agenda Online is trying to do this. A mixture of TF2, ET:QW and MMORPGS in an persistant online world. Whether or not it can be titled as a MMO is another question. But as long as the game itself is fun and has a good game design I do not care. Fact is, most recent MMORPGs were good at following the typical formula: throw in classes, lots of items to farm fort, bosses, a world, PvP here and there, add in some instances - ding, ding - and we have a new game - without providing a solid and fresh game design.
Being a long time FPS player I am really looking into the upcoming FPS games. Because auto-targeting, watching cooldowns of spells or watching cast-times (Zzzz) isn't my thing at all. The pace of Guild Wars, though, was actually not bad. But still the combat feels more like chess due to the controls of the game.
Jun 4th 2009 2:01AM Three weeks ago I wanted to give WAR another try. T1, again, was a lot of fun. Lots of RvR and scenarios. Even PQs were doable. But once I hit T2 things went downhill very fast. Most of the time I was standing around. No scenarios and no RvR. And if RvR happend it wasn't that much fun because we (Order) were always outnumbered.
Apart from this I am still not happy with how unfinished combat feels. For example combat animations still do not honor push-back properly. This is really unacceptable for me. Not in a combat game. Also there are still performance issues. I am not quite sure if the graphics engine is the fault or the network code. But whenever many players came together in RvR WAR turned into a slideshow.
At release I thought, ok, hey, it has been just released. But after all these months those issues should have been adressed. What good does new shiny content do if the core issues do not get adressed?
Finally, many testers say that the single target damage will go up dramatically with 1.3, while healers cannot keep up at the same time. So on the PTR players are one- or two-shotting each other. It might be fun for players of DPS classes. But as a healer I wonder why to keep playing ;)
Dec 21st 2008 7:35AM PvP balance in WoW is once again in a very bad shape. Actually I do not believe that Blizzard will get it right ever. I think we all have to accept the fact that there will be always FotM classes and classes that are not suited for competitive PvP. It's sad but what else can we do? I think that if you are truely looking for a balanced PvP game WoW isn't the right choice unfortunately. Guild Wars, for example, might be a better choice even though it has its own issues as well. Same goes for Warhammer which isn't very balanced at level 40 currently. So, yeah, I think it's the price we have to pay for PvP MMORPGs. It's either diversity or balance :(
Aug 7th 2008 10:31AM As others said: I feel it depends on the game. Take Guild Wars for example. In the Factions campaign hitting the level cap of 20 can be easily done in some hours of constant play. But since the focus in GW's PvE is on advancing the story the level of your avatar is not that important. Leveling is more a side-effect.
WoW, however, is a complete different beast, imho. WoW is all about the endgame, imho. And this endgame requires a character to hit the max level. Character progression in WoW is defined by getting better and better gear, which only can be obtained through raiding or arena play. And both sources are part of the endgame.
Furthermore the story telling in WoW lacks big time imho, especially compared to GW which features nice cut-scenes for example.
But I guess it's all a matter of taste. Some players prefer constant character pimping by farming better gear. Other players, like me, like story progression and exploration :-)
Jun 10th 2008 12:52PM I gave up on my shaman long time ago. The only hybrid class which is nice to play in PvP is the druid. Both paladins and shamans are not worth the effort. Especially since Blizzard has no clear vision for shamans anymore. Better play a "real" class or, if you really want to play a hybrid, maybe a druid. But be prepared to be forced into healing anyway.
I'd say Blizzard should remove both paladins and shamans from the game and give some of their tools to the remaining classes. Less classes = less balancing problems. Less classes = less work for proper itemization. Less classes = less flamewars and less cries from pure classes about dirty hybridz how-dare-you classes.
Apr 22nd 2008 2:55AM Well said, buenoexcellente. Add to this the problem with cast-time spells vs instant-spells. One of the reasons why druids are so string is their large pool of instant-spells. Their HoTs can work while the druid runs behind a pillar to get out of LoS (line of sight).
Every second in the arena counts. Standing still for some seconds and trying to cast a spell, either offsenive or defensive, can be pretty painful. Because the time you've tried to cast a spell your opponent might have run behind a pillar.
Apr 15th 2008 8:42AM And in the end no one will play a resto shaman or holy paladin anymore. Yeah, pretty cool. Let's boost resto druids in 2vs2 over 500%, shall we?