I don't understand what both of you are looking for.
Something that changes the world more drastically with lingering effects. But don´t get me wrong, i like Rift, i just wanted to point out to the other poster that Rifts are not just PQ´s 2.0 and that this concept has been done before Warhammer.
You really don't know that, for all we know might they all release in late april or whatever.
GW2 have a lot more to the board then Rift, even though it is anybodys guess which of them that will be most them in the long run. But I have a feeling that Rift will compete more against TOR than GW2.
Besides, there is really no good reason (besides you hating them of course) to not buy both Rift and GW2, since GW2 have no monthly fees it is just like getting a single player game anyways.
Releasing a game too early is a disaster, it is better for both TOR and GW2 if they loose a few players to Rift because of that then if they released a buggy mess, if the word Vanguard means anything to you.
Not really sure where people get off saying that GW2 is bringing more innovation to the genre. Dynamic Events? Yea, sure.
Let's just wait for the beta for this one. I think the staff over there at Aranet and Ncsoft have been feeding us a line. Rift soul system seems to be innovating. What characters will you play in GW2 .. a Char? They all look the same. Flashy animations (such as those in aion) will not be enough to convince me to play. If the beta comes out and it has more to offer than rift, sure I may buy it and play, but innovating? Not so sure about that. TOR could prove to be more innovating than GW2.
I don't understand what both of you are looking for.
Something that changes the world more drastically with lingering effects. But don´t get me wrong, i like Rift, i just wanted to point out to the other poster that Rifts are not just PQ´s 2.0 and that this concept has been done before Warhammer.
It won't happen. The best you can hope in terms of perma changes is phasing WoW style.
- Rifts are extremely disturbing to what you planned. Like questing. Often I just wasn't able to dodge the rift mobs, because Telara is full to the rim with mobs, filling the landscape dense, and with the uber fast respawn, you just can't escape via some safe routes as in EQ2 or WOW or LOTRO. In many areas you are just trapped. I had 6 or 7 Epic high level rift groups passing by and stomping me into the ground several times this day. There were only a handful of other players around, so we had no chance to stop this super invasion or escape from the area to any place. It was just frustrating. They camped the quest zones, there weren't enough players to drive them off (it was mid-20ies mobs), and so I was stuck. I know it may feel cool and dangerous now that it's new. But trust me: over time the frustration will get the upper hand. People want to plan their doings, they love their routine and it can be very frustrating much faster than you guys think.
- All this leads still to the question: won't the entire quest hubs be conquered at some point, when people get apathic agains the constant invasions? It balances towards the number of player you say... I didn't see that in the beta! But even then, what if most people present have no will to fight the invasions? You'd essentially be stuck in that area.
- Let's be honest here: the rest of the game is ok, but not SO thrilling to really justify people leaving their fav. MMO where they invested time and hard work into, whatever it is. I just don't see that. It's an ok game. But not the hyper killer MMO to really keep people. Nothing in this game is anything else but "ok". Neither combat nor gameplay nor visuals are that special. Not bad, but not so great as well.
- I still think that this hectic aspect, feeling like playing Tabula Rasa, will in the long run drive away some players. I know, when you are young you think it is "cool" to have always stuff going on, you don't really know your own limits and have even less understanding that others prefer it slow. I don't blame you young guys to have this flaw, because such is the way of things. But reality is: both younger and older people WILL feel drained after some time. Some sooner, some later. When ALL is rush rush rush - gogogo, when there is nothing calm and serene to balance, a lot of people will feel burned out from the constant pressure, EVEN you who now claim that this is exactly what you seek. Or rather you THINK you seek. It WILL tire you. It has something to do with the natural "biorhythm" every human being has that just needs calm to contrast and balance the stressful moments. No human is above such things, and Rift just doesn't HAVE such "calmer" sides. It is all Yang and entirely devoid of Yin, so to speak.
I am really not trying to bash this game. And I wanted to like it, because it has a lot of likeable qualities. But some of the fundamental design ideas are IMO great mistakes, and the rifts may in the long run very well prove to be Rifts undoing.
Most of what you have said is a negative, to me, is only a positive.
I think this comes down to "different strokes for different folks".
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I don't understand what both of you are looking for.
Something that changes the world more drastically with lingering effects. But don´t get me wrong, i like Rift, i just wanted to point out to the other poster that Rifts are not just PQ´s 2.0 and that this concept has been done before Warhammer.
I understand the desire for that, and Rift clearly has the tech where they could do that. Even Tabula Rasa did (bases didn't go back to player controlled unless players intervened). Trion clearly didn't want to take the risk of nobody ever being able to progress at all because of lack of population or player apathy.
To claim that Rift isn't Dynamic is ridiculous however. I've seen entire zones covered in massive invasion forces that took hours for the players to clear out, challenging epic monsters that while certainly aren't on the level of a WoW raid, certainly took people working together to solve the problem. I've also seen the rather pale and boring by comparison spot rifts and little invasion forces here and there that while novel, weren't anything to write home about.
The fact that Rift eschews the quest grind (sure it's there if that's your thing) and allows you to decide to progress as you see fit, rift hunting, pvp, quest grinding or what have you while providing a context for the community to rally behind and work together are all plusses in my book.
You want something where the world changes based on player success or failure. Lasting effects. Like perma-death, the mmo population at large just isn't ready for it. Look at the complaining around Rift, as in the OP, who complains that he can't quest treadmill because the dynamic content gets in his way. He's risk averse, he'd rather gerbil it up on the ol' running wheel and call it a day. Just like the %90 of the WoW population that frankly, WoW will be their first and last MMO until Blizzard produces another non-innovative copycat game that they will flock to.
- Rifts are extremely disturbing to what you planned. Like questing. Often I just wasn't able to dodge the rift mobs, because Telara is full to the rim with mobs, filling the landscape dense, and with the uber fast respawn, you just can't escape via some safe routes as in EQ2 or WOW or LOTRO. In many areas you are just trapped. I had 6 or 7 Epic high level rift groups passing by and stomping me into the ground several times this day. There were only a handful of other players around, so we had no chance to stop this super invasion or escape from the area to any place. It was just frustrating. They camped the quest zones, there weren't enough players to drive them off (it was mid-20ies mobs), and so I was stuck. I know it may feel cool and dangerous now that it's new. But trust me: over time the frustration will get the upper hand. People want to plan their doings, they love their routine and it can be very frustrating much faster than you guys think.
- All this leads still to the question: won't the entire quest hubs be conquered at some point, when people get apathic agains the constant invasions? It balances towards the number of player you say... I didn't see that in the beta! But even then, what if most people present have no will to fight the invasions? You'd essentially be stuck in that area.
- Let's be honest here: the rest of the game is ok, but not SO thrilling to really justify people leaving their fav. MMO where they invested time and hard work into, whatever it is. I just don't see that. It's an ok game. But not the hyper killer MMO to really keep people. Nothing in this game is anything else but "ok". Neither combat nor gameplay nor visuals are that special. Not bad, but not so great as well.
- I still think that this hectic aspect, feeling like playing Tabula Rasa, will in the long run drive away some players. I know, when you are young you think it is "cool" to have always stuff going on, you don't really know your own limits and have even less understanding that others prefer it slow. I don't blame you young guys to have this flaw, because such is the way of things. But reality is: both younger and older people WILL feel drained after some time. Some sooner, some later. When ALL is rush rush rush - gogogo, when there is nothing calm and serene to balance, a lot of people will feel burned out from the constant pressure, EVEN you who now claim that this is exactly what you seek. Or rather you THINK you seek. It WILL tire you. It has something to do with the natural "biorhythm" every human being has that just needs calm to contrast and balance the stressful moments. No human is above such things, and Rift just doesn't HAVE such "calmer" sides. It is all Yang and entirely devoid of Yin, so to speak.
I am really not trying to bash this game. And I wanted to like it, because it has a lot of likeable qualities. But some of the fundamental design ideas are IMO great mistakes, and the rifts may in the long run very well prove to be Rifts undoing.
Most of what you have said is a negative, to me, is only a positive.
I think this comes down to "different strokes for different folks".
Sounds like you wanna just walk around and slowly kill stuff and craft all day. You just stated everything Rift does to shake things up and make it fun.
why do people comment about closed beta is like the end result of a game. There has been plenty of betas where games succeeded and failed after release.
oh forgot Tabula Rasa failed in both beta and release. Can't compare rift to it. The aspects of rift far surpasses Tabula 's ending days.
Now mind ya, I don' think Rift is a totally bad game. It has some very promising ideas. Potential. (Yes, again...) And of course it is in many aspects a matter of taste. But there are certain reasons I just think it will die down after a short time, similar to Aion or Warhammer. IMO the rifts are the crucial point of the game, and it offers way more problems, esp. in the long run.
- You always hear this "point X is under attack, defend it at all costs" "oh no, outpost X was lost". It is exciting the first dozen of times. But at a certain point I just felt like I cared less and less if outpost X was invaded or not. So the much needed feel of urgency just vanishes when you have 20 invasions per day, at some point you begin to lose the feeling that it is something special.
Based on lore (Telara is under attack) it is not supposed to be special.
- The Warhammer Castle-Siege issue: WAR castle sieges were fun. Really. For a few weeks. The issue was: one castle siege was in the end like every other. The same is true with the Rifts. Besides the visuals of Life/Fire/Death, they all function the exact same way. There is no variance in strategy whether you fight a life or a fire rift, whether you fight a level 7 or a level 29 rift. It's always the exact same. How long can that be exciting?
Roll PvP server and do stuff in SG. I agree that even on pvp servers first 2 zones can be just boring for each side.
- Rifts are extremely disturbing to what you planned. Like questing. Often I just wasn't able to dodge the rift mobs, because Telara is full to the rim with mobs, filling the landscape dense, and with the uber fast respawn, you just can't escape via some safe routes as in EQ2 or WOW or LOTRO. In many areas you are just trapped. I had 6 or 7 Epic high level rift groups passing by and stomping me into the ground several times this day. There were only a handful of other players around, so we had no chance to stop this super invasion or escape from the area to any place. It was just frustrating. They camped the quest zones, there weren't enough players to drive them off (it was mid-20ies mobs), and so I was stuck. I know it may feel cool and dangerous now that it's new. But trust me: over time the frustration will get the upper hand. People want to plan their doings, they love their routine and it can be very frustrating much faster than you guys think.
So basically what you want is just following a painfully linear scheme (quests in Rift) and you hate anything that randomly breaks a little bit your precious linearity. Second thing it's either that you are unlucky or not so smart. Neither myself nor any of my friends got ever trapped whatsoever.
Also you are assuming than 100% of human population wants to have their free time planned. When it comes to job it is true. When it comes to gaming I hate when everything goes according to plan as it just brings boredom quickly. And I give you a hint: I am not alone in this.
- All this leads still to the question: won't the entire quest hubs be conquered at some point, when people get apathic agains the constant invasions? It balances towards the number of player you say... I didn't see that in the beta! But even then, what if most people present have no will to fight the invasions? You'd essentially be stuck in that area.
I see now that we have played different games;-) It does happen and it does happen alot additionally.
- Let's be honest here: the rest of the game is ok, but not SO thrilling to really justify people leaving their fav. MMO where they invested time and hard work into, whatever it is. I just don't see that. It's an ok game. But not the hyper killer MMO to really keep people. Nothing in this game is anything else but "ok". Neither combat nor gameplay nor visuals are that special. Not bad, but not so great as well.
With that I agree. Without rifts and invasions pve progressing in Rift is simply dull. Instanced pvp is also just ok but nothing really exceptional.
- I still think that this hectic aspect, feeling like playing Tabula Rasa, will in the long run drive away some players. I know, when you are young you think it is "cool" to have always stuff going on, you don't really know your own limits and have even less understanding that others prefer it slow. I don't blame you young guys to have this flaw, because such is the way of things. But reality is: both younger and older people WILL feel drained after some time. Some sooner, some later. When ALL is rush rush rush - gogogo, when there is nothing calm and serene to balance, a lot of people will feel burned out from the constant pressure, EVEN you who now claim that this is exactly what you seek. Or rather you THINK you seek. It WILL tire you. It has something to do with the natural "biorhythm" every human being has that just needs calm to contrast and balance the stressful moments. No human is above such things, and Rift just doesn't HAVE such "calmer" sides. It is all Yang and entirely devoid of Yin, so to speak.
I am really not trying to bash this game. And I wanted to like it, because it has a lot of likeable qualities. But some of the fundamental design ideas are IMO great mistakes, and the rifts may in the long run very well prove to be Rifts undoing.
Given your gaming time is planned and work... I hope no devs are listening =P
GW2 dynamic events aren't new, WoW has been doing them and getting flack for ages for it. They call it phasing.
Rift is chaos for sure. Players have to be active in the world and they have to be aware of whats going on around them. Are there times where I want some drop over there and its currently being laid to waste by rifts? Yes. But then I have a choice, join the war or move along.
You have to be downright asleep not to see the changes they have made from beta to beta event. Will zones be remade... of course not. Will features continue to be added or tweaked... yes. I want a dungeon finder tool and resource tracking moved to the minimap and off my bars. Both reasonable and doable with the engine.
No offence intended SuperZero but perhaps you asked for it with yet another anti Rift post, from someone who has their nose out of joint and wants to throw portents of doom around. Yes, I realise it is just your opinion, but it's the annoying way you put your points across, with this total lack of logic and ... style. Exactly what qualifications do you (or any of the multitude of posts like yours) have to speculate on the success of the software? The thruth is you have no idea.
Comments like "Enjoy living in your bubble" and speculation on subscriber numbers ...who are you exactly?
Playing a lot of different MMO's does not make your opinion 'expert' or somehow more valid. If you have a limited illogical bias, then you will continue to have that no matter how many games you play. Once you even use the term 'wow clone' you lose a lot of credibility. It's such a moot point.
The graphics are clearly superior at the worst of times to the best of WoW, assuming decent hardware. That's an opinion. Perhaps if you wish to show how that's not the case you could submit your favourite Cataclysm screen. That will be amusing.
I think very few people who try Rift (from WoW) will be content to go back to Blizzards aging slurry, even if they end up unsatisifed with Trion. Cataclysm is not terrible. But it is flogging a dead horse. I admit I bought it to see if things had changed and they have, but it is still World of Warcraft. It's the same car with a new coat of paint and a few modifications, but nobody denies that underneath it's the same engine, premise, and functionality of WoW when it was released. It's done.
Rift is a similar car, it feels like many other cars you have driven, but it is also clearly a new model, and that's a good enough reason for many people to upgrade. It has new features, and in some cases just improves on things other vendors have done before. An example would be the class system. Cataclysm actually reversed the amount of choice you have about talents when levelling. Rift does the oppositve, opening up a huge number of options and allowing the switching of these sets to allow players to function in different roles, or just have some fun with different builds. (Yes I know WoW does this but not until 40, and not as well, and with far less options available)
The issue in my opinion as opposed to yours ( "that Rift is a solid game, but it isn't "amazing."") is that Rift is not just a solid game, it's a very solid beta and it still has over a month left before launch. I don't know how many betas you have played but I see Trion doing very well. There is clearly a lot of excitement and enjoyment being had in these Beta events and it seems that it's converting to PO box sales for Trion, since people often ask when you form groups "so PO yet?". I'm respectfully going to disagree with your box sale estimation and we can check back in after launch.
Lastly I don't think the problem people have with your post is that they can't take criticism. It's just that you're not all that.
You will never reach your destination if you stop and throw stones at every dog that barks ~ WC
Given your gaming time is planned and work... I hope no devs are listening =P
GW2 dynamic events aren't new, WoW has been doing them and getting flack for ages for it. They call it phasing.
/sigh
dynamic events and phasing aren't similar at all.
I've heard this one with the GW2 crowd for a bit now and I'm confused here. So I watch the vids they have out (since thats all anyone knows of it so far, period) and i hear them talk about how in this dynamic content I will be able to save a town and it will be saved for me from then on. And then I think about phasing. So let me see if I have this right, in GW2 dynamic content, I do a quest/event and save a town so the future FOR ME of that town is it is saved. But thats just for me, my buddy Joe who hasn't saved that town doesn't see it as I have, until he does it himself. And then I think about phasing in WoW. I do a quest, and the way I see the world changes for me, and ONLY me. Joe who didnt do that quest doesn't see it like I do until he does it himself. So I wonder, does the difference lie in the fact that in WoW I get to THERE by a quest chain but in GW2 I get there because that quest chain was called an event? What exactly is the difference between dynamic events as they describe in GW2 and phasing content in WoW? Honestly, the only dynamic events I've seen them show are PQ style events - they happen if your there or not and you can join in if you are and get something depending on your participation level. Sounds like GW2 is gonna be a WoW/Rift clone to me (hahahahahaha sorry I couldnt' resists that one).
Given your gaming time is planned and work... I hope no devs are listening =P
GW2 dynamic events aren't new, WoW has been doing them and getting flack for ages for it. They call it phasing.
/sigh
dynamic events and phasing aren't similar at all.
I've heard this one with the GW2 crowd for a bit now and I'm confused here. So I watch the vids they have out (since thats all anyone knows of it so far, period) and i hear them talk about how in this dynamic content I will be able to save a town and it will be saved for me from then on. And then I think about phasing. So let me see if I have this right, in GW2 dynamic content, I do a quest/event and save a town so the future FOR ME of that town is it is saved. But thats just for me, my buddy Joe who hasn't saved that town doesn't see it as I have, until he does it himself.
You have it wrong. That town is saved for everyone. There is no separate phases like in wow.
Only thing I can think of is that you are confusing it for the personal stories, and those are permanent for that individual player. But personal stories and dynamic events are completely different features.
No offen[s]e intended Super[X]ero but perhaps you asked for it with yet another anti Rift post, from someone who has their nose out of joint and wants to throw portents of doom around. Yes, I reali[z]e it is just your opinion, but it's the annoying way you put your points across, with this total lack of logic and ... style. Exactly what qualifications do you (or any of the multitude of posts like yours) have to speculate on the success of the software? The t[]ruth is you have no idea.
To begin:
First off, I think you need to look at the reply to my original post. As such, I quote:
...Problem is we can't seem to get any of you guys to play passed the mid-teens to experience anything...So we're stuck watching as you people spread lie after lie... It's sad tbh.
Here we have a guy accusing me of spreading lies, and I tend to think that's rather harsh for a guy who's simply giving an educated opinion on the success of Rift. When you sink to that level, I'm not afraid to follow you, as you're seeing first hand.
Secondly, what on earth do you mean by, "Exactly what qualifications do you (or any of the multitude of posts like yours) have to speculate on the success of the software? The thruth is you have no idea."
I ask you, what is speculation? I'm just considering what I believe to be the likely outcome based on what I've seen in past MMOs. Do I have to have some special qualification to voice my opinion on a subject? You say the truth is that I have no idea, but there are countless examples of games released to far more fanfaire than Rift that have failed because there simply wasn't enough of a reason to keep playing those titles when one can get nearly the exact same experience by playing World of Warcraft. History just doesn't support the idea of Rift being a huge hit, but that doesn't mean it can't be. I just don't have much faith that it will be. My guess is that it will be a cult-like success reaching, at best, comparative subscriber levels to pre-F2P LotRO.
Comments like "Enjoy living in your bubble" and speculation on subscriber numbers ...who are you exactly?
You tend to see a lot of fervent fanboyism amongst titles that are trying to compete with WoW. Hence it is nearly impossible to play for any extended length of time without seeing some negative reference to World of Warcraft in just about any game including EQ2, LotRO, Vanguardm EVE, Darkfall, Rift, etc. On the other side of the coin, those same people are completely and utterly unable to take any kind of criticism over their chosen game. WoW players, on the other hand, the love to criticize what they play.
If I ever criticized anything about any of the games mentioned or about others, I was immediately told that "I just didn't understand the game" or that "this isn't WoW." Others had the stupidest excuses as a defense, such as the time I complained about how time consuming looting items in Darkfall was compared to other MMOs. I was informed by more than one person that they liked it that way because it was more "realistic." Completely laughable when you think of your ability to swing a sword and jump around like a madman all while carrying a single bag filled with gold, suites of armor, swords, twigs, fish, roots, and whatever else.
This guy reminds me of those people. Instead of countering my argument, I'm fed fanboy rhetoric and accused of spreading lies. Then again, take a look at this guy's posts. He can't take anyone having anything negative to say about his precious Rift, and I hope he enjoys living in his bubble of 50,000 -100,000 subscribers while the rest of the world can be found thoroughly enjoying EVE, WoW, SW:TOR, or GW2.
Playing a lot of different MMO's does not make your opinion 'expert' or somehow more valid. If you have a limited illogical bias, then you will continue to have that no matter how many games you play. Once you even use the term 'wow clone' you lose a lot of credibility. It's such a moot point.
I've actually gone to great lengths in a prior post explaining exactly what I consider to be a WoW clone and how I think people who scoff at the notion misunderstand its usage. I won't post that here, but I encourage you to look it up in my post history and to give it a read.
The graphics are clearly superior at the worst of times to the best of WoW, assuming decent hardware. That's an opinion. Perhaps if you wish to show how that's not the case you could submit your favourite Cataclysm screen. That will be amusing.
I suppose this is where you bring the arbitrary argument of, "but you're talking about art design not graphics." I say that it's all the same thing. You can have five million polygons in an image, but if you don't know how to use them to create something with artistic appeal, you're simply wasting the resources of my hardware. Making the argument that Rift has a higher polygon count is just silly. Of course it does. I'm just saying the game is quite ugly in a lot of areas whereas WoW, while having several areas that look far more stunning than others, is a bit more balanced in its appearance.
I think very few people who try Rift (from WoW) will be content to go back to Blizzards aging slurry, even if they end up unsatisifed with Trion. Cataclysm is not terrible. But it is flogging a dead horse. I admit I bought it to see if things had changed and they have, but it is still World of Warcraft. It's the same car with a new coat of paint and a few modifications, but nobody denies that underneath it's the same engine, premise, and functionality of WoW when it was released. It's done.
I find it very odd that you can say WoW feels slurry and aging, yet you don't think Rift feels the least bit sluggish. Animations are far less fluid and movement in Rift just feels less responsive than it does in WoW.
Rift is a similar car, it feels like many other cars you have driven, but it is also clearly a new model, and that's a good enough reason for many people to upgrade. It has new features, and in some cases just improves on things other vendors have done before. An example would be the class system. Cataclysm actually reversed the amount of choice you have about talents when levelling. Rift does the oppositve, opening up a huge number of options and allowing the switching of these sets to allow players to function in different roles, or just have some fun with different builds. (Yes I know WoW does this but not until 40, and not as well, and with far less options available)
Rift innovates with its class system and expands on the idea of WAR's PQs. Literally everything else in the game has been done before and been done far better in Warcraft or similar titles. Just look at quest design. Both games are extremely linear, but what sort of quests do you do in Rift? You kill and you collect. What all do you do in WoW? You kill, you collect, you fly an airplane, you joust, you carhop drakes, etc. WoW "clearly" has a greater variety of quests.
The issue in my opinion as opposed to yours ( "that Rift is a solid game, but it isn't "amazing."") is that Rift is not just a solid game, it's a very solid beta and it still has over a month left before launch. I don't know how many betas you have played but I see Trion doing very well. There is clearly a lot of excitement and enjoyment being had in these Beta events and it seems that it's converting to PO box sales for Trion, since people often ask when you form groups "so PO yet?". I'm respectfully going to disagree with your box sale estimation and we can check back in after launch.
Lastly I don't think the problem people have with your post is that they can't take criticism. It's just that you're not all that.
I've heard this one with the GW2 crowd for a bit now and I'm confused here. So I watch the vids they have out (since thats all anyone knows of it so far, period) and i hear them talk about how in this dynamic content I will be able to save a town and it will be saved for me from then on. And then I think about phasing. So let me see if I have this right, in GW2 dynamic content, I do a quest/event and save a town so the future FOR ME of that town is it is saved. But thats just for me, my buddy Joe who hasn't saved that town doesn't see it as I have, until he does it himself.
You have it wrong. That town is saved for everyone. There is no separate phases like in wow.
Only thing I can think of is that you are confusing it for the personal stories, and those are permanent for that individual player. But personal stories and dynamic events are completely different features.
From what I've researched - the personal story (that some people can run with you if you want) and the home area are instanced. The events that take place in the world are not phased. It's scripted PQ events. Other than the storyline quest, all other quests in the game are PQs and there should be a few thousand of them I think they said.
It's definitely an interesting approach they are taking and it is not like WoW phasing afaik.
IMO, the thing that is going to make or break rift is how the company handles late/end game content. I see the game being developed from the ground up as a very mature game(overall solid interface, most late/end game raid lvl functionalities already built into the code, etc..) this is one of those games that can go anywhere if they put the time into doing it.
my main toon is only lvl 19 so i cant really comment on how the game will do. the content at low lvl can use some improvment in terms of
1. travel: by the time you FIGHT your way to the town that is being invaded it's already over:D low lvl mobs shouldn't have that big of an aggro radius and/or shorter leash based on the lvl difference between you and the mob. and they really need to tweek the respawn timer on some of the lower lvl content. there should be at least 15 seconds between respawn so you can run pass the area after you just killed the mob:D being knocked off the horse by a mob 10 lvl below you is an insult to the concept of riding a mount:D. anyway. some kind of inter settlement teleportation would be a big boon for the game so people can actually teleport to the town that is being invaded without having to deal with low lvl mobs running there.
2. inventory mgmt: quest items shouldnt take up bag space:( there should be optional bag types so consumables are auto sorted into a "consumable bag" etc... also there should be more bank access in the different towns/settlements. it should also be cheaper to unlock bag slots in the bank. 3rd bag slot already cost 1 plat+ to unlock which is rather rough if you are a trade skiller that needed the additional space.
3. loot system: I think the loot system is still kinda buggy since you have people using AE's in the begining to "claim" the kill and just collect after everyone else kill the mob for them...
BUT, overall, i think the game is solid and has alot of the advanced features for end game content already built in which is RARE for a new game. so IMO, it all depends on how they handle end game content (if there are any). I hate to see another AoC type launch where the game is great for the 1st 20 lvls and then it fell off the face of the earth:D IF they actually put in the time to script some really high end raid content so the end game guilds has something to chew through, then I think the game can be a success.
Many of the issues discussed in this thread are ignoring that it is a beta. The "speed" by which certain things take place have been compressed to allow the heavy testing of them. Even after release, that "speed' is likely to be adjusted to find that happy medium.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
I've heard this one with the GW2 crowd for a bit now and I'm confused here. So I watch the vids they have out (since thats all anyone knows of it so far, period) and i hear them talk about how in this dynamic content I will be able to save a town and it will be saved for me from then on. And then I think about phasing. So let me see if I have this right, in GW2 dynamic content, I do a quest/event and save a town so the future FOR ME of that town is it is saved. But thats just for me, my buddy Joe who hasn't saved that town doesn't see it as I have, until he does it himself.
You have it wrong. That town is saved for everyone. There is no separate phases like in wow.
Only thing I can think of is that you are confusing it for the personal stories, and those are permanent for that individual player. But personal stories and dynamic events are completely different features.
From what I've researched - the personal story (that some people can run with you if you want) and the home area are instanced. The events that take place in the world are not phased. It's scripted PQ events. Other than the storyline quest, all other quests in the game are PQs and there should be a few thousand of them I think they said.
It's definitely an interesting approach they are taking and it is not like WoW phasing afaik.
Ok thanks, well thats how I got confused. I wasn't sure to be honest as there isnt a lot of official information on how GW2 is going to work. As long as it isn't heavy phasing I'm all for it, and the PQ style has always been my prefered content. Hopefully they take note of how Rift is doing the public/private group optioning and borrow it for thiers.
Oh and that picture a couple of posts back for Rift, that is a terrible picture. No ground clutter turned on, no character or environment shadowing active, no AA, radius is like set to 0 for just about everything. I guess if you wanted to compare Rift at its worst settings to something else you got the right image there. Thats almost as low as you can go from the looks of it.
No offen[s]e intended Super[X]ero but perhaps you asked for it with yet another anti Rift post, from someone who has their nose out of joint and wants to throw portents of doom around. Yes, I reali[z]e it is just your opinion, but it's the annoying way you put your points across, with this total lack of logic and ... style. Exactly what qualifications do you (or any of the multitude of posts like yours) have to speculate on the success of the software? The t[]ruth is you have no idea.
To begin:
First off, I think you need to look at the reply to my original post. As such, I quote:
...Problem is we can't seem to get any of you guys to play passed the mid-teens to experience anything...So we're stuck watching as you people spread lie after lie... It's sad tbh.
Here we have a guy accusing me of spreading lies, and I tend to think that's rather harsh for a guy who's simply giving an educated opinion on the success of Rift. When you sink to that level, I'm not afraid to follow you, as you're seeing first hand.
Secondly, what on earth do you mean by, "Exactly what qualifications do you (or any of the multitude of posts like yours) have to speculate on the success of the software? The thruth is you have no idea."
I ask you, what is speculation? I'm just considering what I believe to be the likely outcome based on what I've seen in past MMOs. Do I have to have some special qualification to voice my opinion on a subject? You say the truth is that I have no idea, but there are countless examples of games released to far more fanfaire than Rift that have failed because there simply wasn't enough of a reason to keep playing those titles when one can get nearly the exact same experience by playing World of Warcraft. History just doesn't support the idea of Rift being a huge hit, but that doesn't mean it can't be. I just don't have much faith that it will be. My guess is that it will be a cult-like success reaching, at best, comparative subscriber levels to pre-F2P LotRO.
Comments like "Enjoy living in your bubble" and speculation on subscriber numbers ...who are you exactly?
You tend to see a lot of fervent fanboyism amongst titles that are trying to compete with WoW. Hence it is nearly impossible to play for any extended length of time without seeing some negative reference to World of Warcraft in just about any game including EQ2, LotRO, Vanguardm EVE, Darkfall, Rift, etc. On the other side of the coin, those same people are completely and utterly unable to take any kind of criticism over their chosen game. WoW players, on the other hand, the love to criticize what they play.
If I ever criticized anything about any of the games mentioned or about others, I was immediately told that "I just didn't understand the game" or that "this isn't WoW." Others had the stupidest excuses as a defense, such as the time I complained about how time consuming looting items in Darkfall was compared to other MMOs. I was informed by more than one person that they liked it that way because it was more "realistic." Completely laughable when you think of your ability to swing a sword and jump around like a madman all while carrying a single bag filled with gold, suites of armor, swords, twigs, fish, roots, and whatever else.
This guy reminds me of those people. Instead of countering my argument, I'm fed fanboy rhetoric and accused of spreading lies. Then again, take a look at this guy's posts. He can't take anyone having anything negative to say about his precious Rift, and I hope he enjoys living in his bubble of 50,000 -100,000 subscribers while the rest of the world can be found thoroughly enjoying EVE, WoW, SW:TOR, or GW2.
Playing a lot of different MMO's does not make your opinion 'expert' or somehow more valid. If you have a limited illogical bias, then you will continue to have that no matter how many games you play. Once you even use the term 'wow clone' you lose a lot of credibility. It's such a moot point.
I've actually gone to great lengths in a prior post explaining exactly what I consider to be a WoW clone and how I think people who scoff at the notion misunderstand its usage. I won't post that here, but I encourage you to look it up in my post history and to give it a read.
The graphics are clearly superior at the worst of times to the best of WoW, assuming decent hardware. That's an opinion. Perhaps if you wish to show how that's not the case you could submit your favourite Cataclysm screen. That will be amusing.
I suppose this is where you bring the arbitrary argument of, "but you're talking about art design not graphics." I say that it's all the same thing. You can have five million polygons in an image, but if you don't know how to use them to create something with artistic appeal, you're simply wasting the resources of my hardware. Making the argument that Rift has a higher polygon count is just silly. Of course it does. I'm just saying the game is quite ugly in a lot of areas whereas WoW, while having several areas that look far more stunning than others, is a bit more balanced in its appearance.
I think very few people who try Rift (from WoW) will be content to go back to Blizzards aging slurry, even if they end up unsatisifed with Trion. Cataclysm is not terrible. But it is flogging a dead horse. I admit I bought it to see if things had changed and they have, but it is still World of Warcraft. It's the same car with a new coat of paint and a few modifications, but nobody denies that underneath it's the same engine, premise, and functionality of WoW when it was released. It's done.
I find it very odd that you can say WoW feels slurry and aging, yet you don't think Rift feels the least bit sluggish. Animations are far less fluid and movement in Rift just feels less responsive than it does in WoW.
Rift is a similar car, it feels like many other cars you have driven, but it is also clearly a new model, and that's a good enough reason for many people to upgrade. It has new features, and in some cases just improves on things other vendors have done before. An example would be the class system. Cataclysm actually reversed the amount of choice you have about talents when levelling. Rift does the oppositve, opening up a huge number of options and allowing the switching of these sets to allow players to function in different roles, or just have some fun with different builds. (Yes I know WoW does this but not until 40, and not as well, and with far less options available)
Rift innovates with its class system and expands on the idea of WAR's PQs. Literally everything else in the game has been done before and been done far better in Warcraft or similar titles. Just look at quest design. Both games are extremely linear, but what sort of quests do you do in Rift? You kill and you collect. What all do you do in WoW? You kill, you collect, you fly an airplane, you joust, you carhop drakes, etc. WoW "clearly" has a greater variety of quests.
The issue in my opinion as opposed to yours ( "that Rift is a solid game, but it isn't "amazing."") is that Rift is not just a solid game, it's a very solid beta and it still has over a month left before launch. I don't know how many betas you have played but I see Trion doing very well. There is clearly a lot of excitement and enjoyment being had in these Beta events and it seems that it's converting to PO box sales for Trion, since people often ask when you form groups "so PO yet?". I'm respectfully going to disagree with your box sale estimation and we can check back in after launch.
Lastly I don't think the problem people have with your post is that they can't take criticism. It's just that you're not all that.
I'm not sure what you expect to gain by highlighting my use of British english over US english in some places, but whatever floats your boat. Still, a nice response.
I'm perplexed about the image you chose from WoW, but to each their own. If anything I feel it perfectly reflects the difference between Rift and WoW, and that Rift is superior in both art direction and use of the GPU for added 'shiny' stuff. That picture of a Night Elf is something you think of as being nice?
It's obviously particular to my gaming experience but no I didn't find Rift sluggish at all, either in FPS or generally. I do deplore the current run animations, especially on my Bahmi, but I'm hoping they might fix that. It's not game breaking to me. I'd like better ambulation animations, way more emotes, furniture sit and swim animations too.
I'm not a massive fan of Trion. I had no idea who they were or even what Rift was until I came to mmorpg.com one day and saw a story on it. I have developed an appreciation due to the polished state of their beta releases, the degree of change between each beta and funnily enough their sense of humour (yes I've used British English again, feel free to point that out)
As you say in your last para response 'has been done before'. Yes I agree. I believe I mentioned that in my reply. Not a debated issue... Rift is clearly a mashup of several existing successful MMO's. Not a bad thing at all IMO.
The thing is I played Cataclysm to Lvl 30 recently. I don't remember the quests being remotely fascinating or interesting. Sorry. The art style just makes me cringe. The human avatars have literally remained unchanged since the original game, which is to say terrible.
The lack of options in class progression was a real problem, actually backwards from previous versions of the game I believe. People love to tweak and customise their characters. Why release a new version where you take some options away?
The combat is the same as it was when I used to play. I literally had to force myself to play, but in the end it's over for WoW in my opinion. For me at least. That is not to say that WoW won't remain the King of MMO's for several more years. Even if they do bleed subs to Rift, Tera, GW2 etc,. it will be a long slide I suspect.
Here is an example of the areas where I really have trouble understanding your thought process:
History just doesn't support the idea of Rift being a huge hit, but that doesn't mean it can't be. I just don't have much faith that it will be. My guess is that it will be a cult-like success reaching, at best, comparative subscriber levels to pre-F2P LotRO.
This is just a very unusual take on things to me. What do you mean exactly? It's not like many other recent MMOs I can think of. It's not based on established IP like LoTRO, AoC, WAR. It's not hardcore like Darkfall or EVE with their PVP and loot mechanics. It's not asian themed like Aion, Lineage II, etc., which is to say light on story and grindy on play. I suspect if we were to compare it to anything it would be EQ, with their IP developed specifically for their MMO vehicle. What makes you think it's likely to be cult-like with limited appeal? From what I have seen Trion has planned to appeal to the exact same audience as players of EQ2 and WoW amongst other games. Not a bad idea given the subscriptions they probably hope to get. It's my opininon that Rift looks to be one of the few MMO releases in the last year to be clearly aiming to bleed off subs - people who liked WoW and EQ2 but have lost interest in the ride. In that I believe they will succeed. Blizzard has only helped them with the release of Cata which demonstrates that they have nothing of substance left in the WoW engine.
I'll look up your post and have a read. In summation, I disagree with your take on Rift, and I do feel their seems to be a lot of Rift bashing going on. It is certaintly not remotely being represented in the 'actual' game where you see people really having a great time and making some pretty positive statements. I guess the people like you have already left though. Maybe we'll meet in the next Beta ;-)
You will never reach your destination if you stop and throw stones at every dog that barks ~ WC
I agree with the OP. Rift will have a small success at release, but will die off within a few months and people will go back to their previous game, realizing there's not much to do, the game is very very linear and lacking replayability.
Respect, walk, what did you say? Respect, walk Are you talkin' to me? Are you talkin' to me? - PANTERA at HELLFEST 2023
I agree with the OP. Rift will have a small success at release, but will die off within a few months and people will go back to their previous game,realizing there's not much to do, the game is very very linear and lacking replayability.
Sounds like a win situation in all its glory!!
how many players there are dosnt intrest me at all, as long as there is enough people on the server i play on!
Why should i care about the 300000 players on other servers? How does that make my gaming experiance different?
I agree with the OP. Rift will have a small success at release, but will die off within a few months and people will go back to their previous game, realizing there's not much to do, the game is very very linear and lacking replayability.
I don't think so. I think the game will take over the niche LOTRO had before, since it got F2P it means there is room for another P2P game a bit under 500K subs.
It will never be the next Wow unless they make the greatest expansion in history but the game is good enough to get enough loyal players to be like LOTRO and EQ2. Not huge but not small either.
Of course half of the initial subs will quit after a month or 2 but that have happened to all MMOs after Wow.
to the OP I don't think I have ever told anyone here this before but LTP becuase literally everything you complained about I had no issues with in the last 2 betas. A lot of what you complain about is not only subjective but showcases where you lack in playing the game.
Comments
Something that changes the world more drastically with lingering effects. But don´t get me wrong, i like Rift, i just wanted to point out to the other poster that Rifts are not just PQ´s 2.0 and that this concept has been done before Warhammer.
"i'm a leaf on the wind watch how i soar"
Not really sure where people get off saying that GW2 is bringing more innovation to the genre. Dynamic Events? Yea, sure.
Let's just wait for the beta for this one. I think the staff over there at Aranet and Ncsoft have been feeding us a line. Rift soul system seems to be innovating. What characters will you play in GW2 .. a Char? They all look the same. Flashy animations (such as those in aion) will not be enough to convince me to play. If the beta comes out and it has more to offer than rift, sure I may buy it and play, but innovating? Not so sure about that. TOR could prove to be more innovating than GW2.
"When it comes to GW2 any game is fair game"
It won't happen. The best you can hope in terms of perma changes is phasing WoW style.
Most of what you have said is a negative, to me, is only a positive.
I think this comes down to "different strokes for different folks".
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
I understand the desire for that, and Rift clearly has the tech where they could do that. Even Tabula Rasa did (bases didn't go back to player controlled unless players intervened). Trion clearly didn't want to take the risk of nobody ever being able to progress at all because of lack of population or player apathy.
To claim that Rift isn't Dynamic is ridiculous however. I've seen entire zones covered in massive invasion forces that took hours for the players to clear out, challenging epic monsters that while certainly aren't on the level of a WoW raid, certainly took people working together to solve the problem. I've also seen the rather pale and boring by comparison spot rifts and little invasion forces here and there that while novel, weren't anything to write home about.
The fact that Rift eschews the quest grind (sure it's there if that's your thing) and allows you to decide to progress as you see fit, rift hunting, pvp, quest grinding or what have you while providing a context for the community to rally behind and work together are all plusses in my book.
You want something where the world changes based on player success or failure. Lasting effects. Like perma-death, the mmo population at large just isn't ready for it. Look at the complaining around Rift, as in the OP, who complains that he can't quest treadmill because the dynamic content gets in his way. He's risk averse, he'd rather gerbil it up on the ol' running wheel and call it a day. Just like the %90 of the WoW population that frankly, WoW will be their first and last MMO until Blizzard produces another non-innovative copycat game that they will flock to.
Sounds like you wanna just walk around and slowly kill stuff and craft all day. You just stated everything Rift does to shake things up and make it fun.
why do people comment about closed beta is like the end result of a game. There has been plenty of betas where games succeeded and failed after release.
oh forgot Tabula Rasa failed in both beta and release. Can't compare rift to it. The aspects of rift far surpasses Tabula 's ending days.
Given your gaming time is planned and work... I hope no devs are listening =P
GW2 dynamic events aren't new, WoW has been doing them and getting flack for ages for it. They call it phasing.
Rift is chaos for sure. Players have to be active in the world and they have to be aware of whats going on around them. Are there times where I want some drop over there and its currently being laid to waste by rifts? Yes. But then I have a choice, join the war or move along.
You have to be downright asleep not to see the changes they have made from beta to beta event. Will zones be remade... of course not. Will features continue to be added or tweaked... yes. I want a dungeon finder tool and resource tracking moved to the minimap and off my bars. Both reasonable and doable with the engine.
Because WAR PQs don't give you useful stuff.
No offence intended SuperZero but perhaps you asked for it with yet another anti Rift post, from someone who has their nose out of joint and wants to throw portents of doom around. Yes, I realise it is just your opinion, but it's the annoying way you put your points across, with this total lack of logic and ... style. Exactly what qualifications do you (or any of the multitude of posts like yours) have to speculate on the success of the software? The thruth is you have no idea.
Comments like "Enjoy living in your bubble" and speculation on subscriber numbers ...who are you exactly?
Playing a lot of different MMO's does not make your opinion 'expert' or somehow more valid. If you have a limited illogical bias, then you will continue to have that no matter how many games you play. Once you even use the term 'wow clone' you lose a lot of credibility. It's such a moot point.
The graphics are clearly superior at the worst of times to the best of WoW, assuming decent hardware. That's an opinion. Perhaps if you wish to show how that's not the case you could submit your favourite Cataclysm screen. That will be amusing.
I think very few people who try Rift (from WoW) will be content to go back to Blizzards aging slurry, even if they end up unsatisifed with Trion. Cataclysm is not terrible. But it is flogging a dead horse. I admit I bought it to see if things had changed and they have, but it is still World of Warcraft. It's the same car with a new coat of paint and a few modifications, but nobody denies that underneath it's the same engine, premise, and functionality of WoW when it was released. It's done.
Rift is a similar car, it feels like many other cars you have driven, but it is also clearly a new model, and that's a good enough reason for many people to upgrade. It has new features, and in some cases just improves on things other vendors have done before. An example would be the class system. Cataclysm actually reversed the amount of choice you have about talents when levelling. Rift does the oppositve, opening up a huge number of options and allowing the switching of these sets to allow players to function in different roles, or just have some fun with different builds. (Yes I know WoW does this but not until 40, and not as well, and with far less options available)
The issue in my opinion as opposed to yours ( "that Rift is a solid game, but it isn't "amazing."") is that Rift is not just a solid game, it's a very solid beta and it still has over a month left before launch. I don't know how many betas you have played but I see Trion doing very well. There is clearly a lot of excitement and enjoyment being had in these Beta events and it seems that it's converting to PO box sales for Trion, since people often ask when you form groups "so PO yet?". I'm respectfully going to disagree with your box sale estimation and we can check back in after launch.
Lastly I don't think the problem people have with your post is that they can't take criticism. It's just that you're not all that.
You will never reach your destination if you stop and throw stones at every dog that barks
~ WC
/sigh
dynamic events and phasing aren't similar at all.
I've heard this one with the GW2 crowd for a bit now and I'm confused here. So I watch the vids they have out (since thats all anyone knows of it so far, period) and i hear them talk about how in this dynamic content I will be able to save a town and it will be saved for me from then on. And then I think about phasing. So let me see if I have this right, in GW2 dynamic content, I do a quest/event and save a town so the future FOR ME of that town is it is saved. But thats just for me, my buddy Joe who hasn't saved that town doesn't see it as I have, until he does it himself. And then I think about phasing in WoW. I do a quest, and the way I see the world changes for me, and ONLY me. Joe who didnt do that quest doesn't see it like I do until he does it himself. So I wonder, does the difference lie in the fact that in WoW I get to THERE by a quest chain but in GW2 I get there because that quest chain was called an event? What exactly is the difference between dynamic events as they describe in GW2 and phasing content in WoW? Honestly, the only dynamic events I've seen them show are PQ style events - they happen if your there or not and you can join in if you are and get something depending on your participation level. Sounds like GW2 is gonna be a WoW/Rift clone to me (hahahahahaha sorry I couldnt' resists that one).
You have it wrong. That town is saved for everyone. There is no separate phases like in wow.
Only thing I can think of is that you are confusing it for the personal stories, and those are permanent for that individual player. But personal stories and dynamic events are completely different features.
From what I've researched - the personal story (that some people can run with you if you want) and the home area are instanced. The events that take place in the world are not phased. It's scripted PQ events. Other than the storyline quest, all other quests in the game are PQs and there should be a few thousand of them I think they said.
It's definitely an interesting approach they are taking and it is not like WoW phasing afaik.
IMO, the thing that is going to make or break rift is how the company handles late/end game content. I see the game being developed from the ground up as a very mature game(overall solid interface, most late/end game raid lvl functionalities already built into the code, etc..) this is one of those games that can go anywhere if they put the time into doing it.
my main toon is only lvl 19 so i cant really comment on how the game will do. the content at low lvl can use some improvment in terms of
1. travel: by the time you FIGHT your way to the town that is being invaded it's already over:D low lvl mobs shouldn't have that big of an aggro radius and/or shorter leash based on the lvl difference between you and the mob. and they really need to tweek the respawn timer on some of the lower lvl content. there should be at least 15 seconds between respawn so you can run pass the area after you just killed the mob:D being knocked off the horse by a mob 10 lvl below you is an insult to the concept of riding a mount:D. anyway. some kind of inter settlement teleportation would be a big boon for the game so people can actually teleport to the town that is being invaded without having to deal with low lvl mobs running there.
2. inventory mgmt: quest items shouldnt take up bag space:( there should be optional bag types so consumables are auto sorted into a "consumable bag" etc... also there should be more bank access in the different towns/settlements. it should also be cheaper to unlock bag slots in the bank. 3rd bag slot already cost 1 plat+ to unlock which is rather rough if you are a trade skiller that needed the additional space.
3. loot system: I think the loot system is still kinda buggy since you have people using AE's in the begining to "claim" the kill and just collect after everyone else kill the mob for them...
BUT, overall, i think the game is solid and has alot of the advanced features for end game content already built in which is RARE for a new game. so IMO, it all depends on how they handle end game content (if there are any). I hate to see another AoC type launch where the game is great for the 1st 20 lvls and then it fell off the face of the earth:D IF they actually put in the time to script some really high end raid content so the end game guilds has something to chew through, then I think the game can be a success.
Many of the issues discussed in this thread are ignoring that it is a beta. The "speed" by which certain things take place have been compressed to allow the heavy testing of them. Even after release, that "speed' is likely to be adjusted to find that happy medium.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
Ok thanks, well thats how I got confused. I wasn't sure to be honest as there isnt a lot of official information on how GW2 is going to work. As long as it isn't heavy phasing I'm all for it, and the PQ style has always been my prefered content. Hopefully they take note of how Rift is doing the public/private group optioning and borrow it for thiers.
Oh and that picture a couple of posts back for Rift, that is a terrible picture. No ground clutter turned on, no character or environment shadowing active, no AA, radius is like set to 0 for just about everything. I guess if you wanted to compare Rift at its worst settings to something else you got the right image there. Thats almost as low as you can go from the looks of it.
I'm not sure what you expect to gain by highlighting my use of British english over US english in some places, but whatever floats your boat. Still, a nice response.
I'm perplexed about the image you chose from WoW, but to each their own. If anything I feel it perfectly reflects the difference between Rift and WoW, and that Rift is superior in both art direction and use of the GPU for added 'shiny' stuff. That picture of a Night Elf is something you think of as being nice?
It's obviously particular to my gaming experience but no I didn't find Rift sluggish at all, either in FPS or generally. I do deplore the current run animations, especially on my Bahmi, but I'm hoping they might fix that. It's not game breaking to me. I'd like better ambulation animations, way more emotes, furniture sit and swim animations too.
I'm not a massive fan of Trion. I had no idea who they were or even what Rift was until I came to mmorpg.com one day and saw a story on it. I have developed an appreciation due to the polished state of their beta releases, the degree of change between each beta and funnily enough their sense of humour (yes I've used British English again, feel free to point that out)
As you say in your last para response 'has been done before'. Yes I agree. I believe I mentioned that in my reply. Not a debated issue... Rift is clearly a mashup of several existing successful MMO's. Not a bad thing at all IMO.
The thing is I played Cataclysm to Lvl 30 recently. I don't remember the quests being remotely fascinating or interesting. Sorry. The art style just makes me cringe. The human avatars have literally remained unchanged since the original game, which is to say terrible.
The lack of options in class progression was a real problem, actually backwards from previous versions of the game I believe. People love to tweak and customise their characters. Why release a new version where you take some options away?
The combat is the same as it was when I used to play. I literally had to force myself to play, but in the end it's over for WoW in my opinion. For me at least. That is not to say that WoW won't remain the King of MMO's for several more years. Even if they do bleed subs to Rift, Tera, GW2 etc,. it will be a long slide I suspect.
Here is an example of the areas where I really have trouble understanding your thought process:
History just doesn't support the idea of Rift being a huge hit, but that doesn't mean it can't be. I just don't have much faith that it will be. My guess is that it will be a cult-like success reaching, at best, comparative subscriber levels to pre-F2P LotRO.
This is just a very unusual take on things to me. What do you mean exactly? It's not like many other recent MMOs I can think of. It's not based on established IP like LoTRO, AoC, WAR. It's not hardcore like Darkfall or EVE with their PVP and loot mechanics. It's not asian themed like Aion, Lineage II, etc., which is to say light on story and grindy on play. I suspect if we were to compare it to anything it would be EQ, with their IP developed specifically for their MMO vehicle. What makes you think it's likely to be cult-like with limited appeal? From what I have seen Trion has planned to appeal to the exact same audience as players of EQ2 and WoW amongst other games. Not a bad idea given the subscriptions they probably hope to get. It's my opininon that Rift looks to be one of the few MMO releases in the last year to be clearly aiming to bleed off subs - people who liked WoW and EQ2 but have lost interest in the ride. In that I believe they will succeed. Blizzard has only helped them with the release of Cata which demonstrates that they have nothing of substance left in the WoW engine.
I'll look up your post and have a read. In summation, I disagree with your take on Rift, and I do feel their seems to be a lot of Rift bashing going on. It is certaintly not remotely being represented in the 'actual' game where you see people really having a great time and making some pretty positive statements. I guess the people like you have already left though. Maybe we'll meet in the next Beta ;-)
You will never reach your destination if you stop and throw stones at every dog that barks
~ WC
Rift will have a small success at release, but will die off within a few months and people will go back to their previous game, realizing there's not much to do, the game is very very linear and lacking replayability.
Respect, walk
Are you talkin' to me? Are you talkin' to me?
- PANTERA at HELLFEST 2023
Sounds like a win situation in all its glory!!
how many players there are dosnt intrest me at all, as long as there is enough people on the server i play on!
Why should i care about the 300000 players on other servers? How does that make my gaming experiance different?
Respect, walk
Are you talkin' to me? Are you talkin' to me?
- PANTERA at HELLFEST 2023
I don't think so. I think the game will take over the niche LOTRO had before, since it got F2P it means there is room for another P2P game a bit under 500K subs.
It will never be the next Wow unless they make the greatest expansion in history but the game is good enough to get enough loyal players to be like LOTRO and EQ2. Not huge but not small either.
Of course half of the initial subs will quit after a month or 2 but that have happened to all MMOs after Wow.
to the OP I don't think I have ever told anyone here this before but LTP becuase literally everything you complained about I had no issues with in the last 2 betas. A lot of what you complain about is not only subjective but showcases where you lack in playing the game.