Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

horizons

herculeshercules Member UncommonPosts: 4,925

 

Comments

  • FinweFinwe Member CommonPosts: 3,106

    DAoC sucked though.....it brought no glory days....

    As for horizons, its been a dissapointment ever since they scrapped the old idea, and brought out the new idea.

    "The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis

    "If a mother can kill her own child, what is left before I kill you and you kill me?" -Mother Teresa when talking about abortion after accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979

  • CalmCalm Member Posts: 17

    DAOC was bad, and it did good because there were not any real competitors at the time.  Thats the problem, a game come out if it has no competition it does good...and people look at it as a good game but then when another MMPOG the fan base shifts and moves. 


    DAOC

    when I played a little in beta and 2 months after.  It took for ever to lvl, it was boring and the whole realm conflict was ::shrug:: might of got better now but at the time it reminded me of a prettier AC.  Horizons should do good but a lot of MMPOG's are coming out or already out and kicking.  So it will have to comeout strong in every category and none of this infamous half done crap what a lot of MMPOG's do.  No rushing of the beta.  With the way things are if you rush at any point you will likely loose a nice chunck of fans what could make or break the game, and always remember annoyed fans whine and complain at every chance they get there a virus who can also ruin a game...especially if there are enough of them.

  • nalanala Member Posts: 173



    Originally posted by Finwe

    DAoC sucked though.....it brought no glory days....
    As for horizons, its been a dissapointment ever since they scrapped the old idea, and brought out the new idea.



    I acutally think that all of the info they have been putting out as of late compared to what I read about long ago sounds great. And its not like the said they will never ever have one of the original 15 races added into the game at some point maybe as a subjugated race. I am really excited for this game and definately voted yes here as I think it has major potential and possibilites

  • FinweFinwe Member CommonPosts: 3,106

    I'm not talking about the races, which seems they've already crapped around with, removed some, added some, changed some around (half-giants). I'm talking about the whole, epic idea. Race wars, blood wars.


    The game was about freedom. A giant continent, surrounded by islands. And a great ocean. Every race varied in power, but inturn, took longer to develop. There was an epic PvP system, but those that did not want to PvP could avoid it to an extent. You could be what you wanted, everything from a councilman in a town. To a feared and terrible dragon that terrorized towns, and slew everything from dragon hunters to peasants.


    The game was huge, original and epic. Now its just cookie cutter classic EQ. Oh....i forgot, cookie cutter classic EQ with dragons.

    "The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis

    "If a mother can kill her own child, what is left before I kill you and you kill me?" -Mother Teresa when talking about abortion after accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979

  • ChilledPenguinChilledPenguin Member Posts: 51

    [edited]

  • KingBuddy30KingBuddy30 Member Posts: 59
    Horizons will be a good game i think. But the downside is no pvp and to alot of mmorpg gamers pvp is a big thing. As for DaOc that was just a shit game all round. It was just a small step better than eq.

    Igsharmik

    Games I Play:

    Quake Live
    Track Mania Nations Forever
    Runes of Magic

  • FinweFinwe Member CommonPosts: 3,106

    "Far from it, i think Horizons is going to be a fierce competetor in the MMO market. Just because it doesnt have PVP doesn't mean you can't do anything you want. The problem with PVP is that in any type of implementation you cant "do anything you want" because you always have the occasional griefer that will kill you or ruin your day, just because he knows there will be little to no real life consequenses for it (AKA me....yes, i admit it. But hey, i played quake...). Eliminating the PVP aspect wasn't a bad move on their part, and the new Horizons has so many innovative features you seem to be overlooking. The old concept for horizons was intreaguing, but it had obvious flaws. EVERYONE, and i do mean everyone, would level a dragon in the long run. That would mean that everyone would be running around with an insanely strong PVP death machine. All it would take was 1 griefer dragon to ruin a cities day. Now, the battle still rages on, only this time it is with a massive undead hoard that dominates the lands. The first step to unvealing the secrets of Horizons is to eliminate the undead. THEN, who knows what they will add =). Im sure they will poll the players, and act accordingly. I SERIOUSLY love this concept. Step 1) Recover the lands. Step 2) You decide
    Sogar Gofin"

    I'm not talking about only PvP, yes, it was a main concept, but they scrapped everything original as well. And tell me how the old concept was flawed?


    And if you remember, they fixed that whole idea you mentioned about dragons.

    1. The life of a dragon was extremely hard, everyone would of wanted to hunt you for your organs scales and claws.

    2. You couldnt just stay off and log on later and level, if you remember, there was a leveling treadmill as where you could only level a certain amount a month. And it'd take about 2 years for a fully grown dragon to be fully grown, and until about a 1 and a half years, he was weaker to the other races.

    3. If you stayed logged off to avoid the ferocity of the life of a dragon, you'd become weak, and fat, and you'd be an ancient dragon that couldnt kill a bunny rabbit.

    4. An ancient dragon terrorizing a town, yes, but it would of been the same as the humanoid races hunting down the dragons, griefing them, over and over again for the resources they'd get off them. Thus minimizing out the ancient dragons.


    5. As you would become more and more notorious, you wouldnt be able to get near any cities, and you would be KOS to almost all PC players.


    6. There is nothing original about the new idea, kill an endless hoard of undead? Please, its bash monsters all day and all night. The trade system is pretty epic, able to craft anything, although its also screwed up, considering that its AC2 all over again, player run economy, trust me, it doesnt work. Other then the large trade system, which is already coming out in all the new MMRPG's, the game is cookie cutter clone.

    "The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis

    "If a mother can kill her own child, what is left before I kill you and you kill me?" -Mother Teresa when talking about abortion after accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979

  • livelyclivelyc Member Posts: 110



    Originally posted by Finwe

    DAoC sucked though.....it brought no glory days....
    As for horizons, its been a dissapointment ever since they scrapped the old idea, and brought out the new idea.



    agreed daoc broguht nothing new into mmorpg's , i found that the games that did so were ultima (one of the first) and eq. They seemed to be the glory days in my oppinion , Before developers started to pump out an mmorpg ever other month image

    king really hates eq. Why the hate man lol ? What was soo god awful about it , u gotta admit the monsters were better than daoc i mean those guys just made the monster bigger and called it something different , you could see the same monster at level 40 u saw at lvl 7 lol. But really what was so bad about Eq , you dont think it changed the mmorpg genre ?


    This message has been brought to u by Death, the fulltime sponsor of the lively cadaver

    This message has been brought to u by Death, the fulltime sponsor of the lively cadaver

  • HairfootHairfoot Member Posts: 21

    The idea of subjugated races is another new aspect to mmorpgs that Horizons will introduce.  You will be able to play as one of these races only after the race has been freed from the "evil undead hoard".   This is not a cookie cutter idea and one of (along with the crafting system, and yes dragons) the interesting new concepts that Horizons is introducing. 

  • FinweFinwe Member CommonPosts: 3,106

    "The idea of subjugated races is another new aspect to mmorpgs that Horizons will introduce.  You will be able to play as one of these races only after the race has been freed from the "evil undead hoard".   This is not a cookie cutter idea and one of (along with the crafting system, and yes dragons) the interesting new concepts that Horizons is introducing. "


    Sorta like Jedi in SWG? lol. You get more races, that still doesnt add something new to the game that will make it more enjoyable. You conquer, you free a race, now you can play it. ok....whats so fun about that? 2. I have a feeling it'll be like SWG, no one has become a Jedi yet, why, I have a feeling it's because it hasnt been implemented yet, and they're waiting until they have it done. I have a feeling they'll do the same with the subjugated races, they work on a race for awhile, its not ingame yet. And they allow when, and how you find the race.


    Yes, its original, but it'll add no more depth to the game, just another race.

    "The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis

    "If a mother can kill her own child, what is left before I kill you and you kill me?" -Mother Teresa when talking about abortion after accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979

  • herculeshercules Member UncommonPosts: 4,925

    omg my first ever post is still alive and not even archived yet.WOW 2003 it was.

    Sorry have to perform necromancy here

  • EggFteggEggFtegg Member Posts: 1,141

    Originally posted by hercules


    omg my first ever post is still alive and not even archived yet.WOW 2003 it was.
    Sorry have to perform necromancy here
    Heh, that got me confused. For a moment I though Horizons was being revamped or something.

    Well, do you think it brought back the glory days?

  • herculeshercules Member UncommonPosts: 4,925
    Originally posted by EggFtegg


     
    Originally posted by hercules


    omg my first ever post is still alive and not even archived yet.WOW 2003 it was.
    Sorry have to perform necromancy here
    Heh, that got me confused. For a moment I though Horizons was being revamped or something.

     

    Well, do you think it brought back the glory days?



    Sadly if anything this just shows that the recent letdowns of mmorpg dates back  couple of years really.Nah horizons is toast sadly.

  • AirspellAirspell Member, Newbie CommonPosts: 1,391

    ROFL, more of threads like these need to be brought back , in order to make fun of the OPs and their silly ideas :P

    image

  • HexxeityHexxeity Member Posts: 848

    Anyone still cheering for Vanguard needs to go back and read the history of Horizons.  The direct parallels are uncanny.  The only difference is that SOE is a slightly savvier publisher than Atari.

  • AirspellAirspell Member, Newbie CommonPosts: 1,391

      Well Horizons didnt have as big a budget or publicity but yah the problems they have as almsot identical.

    image

  • IijsIijs Member Posts: 457

    There is no way Horizons has more subscribers than Vanguard. That's BS.

  • orlacorlac Member Posts: 549

    I liked the music and crafting in Horizons....but nobody else seemed to play.

  • ZippyZippy Member, Newbie CommonPosts: 1,412

    Originally posted by Hexxeity


    Anyone still cheering for Vanguard needs to go back and read the history of Horizons.  The direct parallels are uncanny.  The only difference is that SOE is a slightly savvier publisher than Atari.
    There is a huge difference between Horizons and Vanguard.  Vanguard's core systems are very well done.  Its combat is very good.  What kills Vanguard are the system requirements, graphical problems, bugs like falling  through the world and compete lack of polish.  They both share the same similarity in they revamped the  core systems of the gamevery late in development.  But the differences here are large.  Horizons although they promised, they never redid the their combat system or much of anything.  Sigil's problem was trying to being over ambitious and doing to much.  They revamped and redid the core combat, crafting and diplomacy systems.  Revamped all of Thestra and introduced the continent of Kojan all in a 6 month period.  While it was admireable a developer attempting to do to much when they normally do to little. Sigil would have been much better served by shelving diplomacy, Thestra and Kojan and releasing with one more polished continent.

    But the big difference here is vanguard at its core is a very very good game.  Arguably the best game we have seen released since Daoc.  But its flaws and hardware requirement problems make it very difficult for many to focus on what Sigil has rather than focus on what it is lacking. 

    Horizons outside crafting which was amazingly well done and arguably the best crafting/building MMO ever made, was deeply flawed in almost every other area particularly its combat system.  It had possibly the worst combat of any game released in the last 5 years with the exceptionof  DnL.  Artifact could have had 10 additional years and my bet is they would have released a very bad game.  Sigil was on the right track but they needed another 1-2 years to release a polished product.

  • OBK1OBK1 Member Posts: 637

    Originally posted by Zippy


     
    Originally posted by Hexxeity


    Anyone still cheering for Vanguard needs to go back and read the history of Horizons.  The direct parallels are uncanny.  The only difference is that SOE is a slightly savvier publisher than Atari.
    There is a huge difference between Horizons and Vanguard.  Vanguard's core systems are very well done.  Its combat is very good.  What kills Vanguard are the system requirements, graphical problems, bugs like falling  through the world and compete lack of polish.  They both share the same similarity in they revamped the  core systems of the gamevery late in development.  But the differences here are large.  Horizons although they promised, they never redid the their combat system or much of anything.  Sigil's problem was trying to being over ambitious and doing to much.  They revamped and redid the core combat, crafting and diplomacy systems.  Revamped all of Thestra and introduced the continent of Kojan all in a 6 month period.  While it was admireable a developer attempting to do to much when they normally do to little. Sigil would have been much better served by shelving diplomacy, Thestra and Kojan and releasing with one more polished continent.

     

    But the big difference here is vanguard at its core is a very very good game.  Arguably the best game we have seen released since Daoc.  But its flaws and hardware requirement problems make it very difficult for many to focus on what Sigil has rather than focus on what it is lacking. 

    Horizons outside crafting which was amazingly well done and arguably the best crafting/building MMO ever made, was deeply flawed in almost every other area particularly its combat system.  It had possibly the worst combat of any game released in the last 5 years with the exceptionof  DnL.  Artifact could have had 10 additional years and my bet is they would have released a very bad game.  Sigil was on the right track but they needed another 1-2 years to release a polished product.

    QFT!

    Which makes VGs premature launch even sadder 

Sign In or Register to comment.