1. Cooler classes. If you pick a Templar in ESO, every freaking ability you have is filled with light. More light. Light light light. Likewise, Dragonknight has to flame or earth-spike everything. Within the classes, while you can be very mechanically different from your comrades of the same class, you'll feel the same because your abilities look so similar visually. Also, classes were balanced in different ways. So while one class might be the best at assassinating people in PvP, another was entirely focused on providing group buffs. ESO provides this to an extent, but the stat caps have really limited peoples' ability to customize their classes with a specific job/focus in mind. Hopefully the 1.6 changes to stats will positively impact this, but standardizing buffs across the board is rarely a way to do this (it's great for balancing things, but at the cost of uniformity--obviously.) The changes should, at least, allow players to specialize a bit more, without becoming absolute monsters thanks to stacked group buffs.
2. The enemy alliances actually felt different when you were questing in them. To an extent you feel this with the environment in ESO, except with DAoC you had faction locked races, classes, and thus appearances (though I understand the reasoning for not having these, and see this as kind of a mixed pro/con.) When you saw the enemy, you knew it was the enemy.
3. You could enter enemy lands, at risk to yourself, and engage in World PvP.
4. Darkness Falls of course. (Though this is supposed to be on its way to ESO.)
5. Battlegrounds for low level PvP. Though the new level limited campaigns are an interesting compromise.
6. Years to polish itself. Because #1 and #4 weren't there to begin with.
--------------
So yes, DAOC had some things ESO doesn't. But judging by the strides made since release, and the upcoming changes in 1.6 and the promised DF-like dungeon, I suspect that won't last long. If we could get some real world PvP outside of Cyrodiil, that would be pretty awesome. Other than that, ESO has many, many things DAoC didn't. People always forget that the fastest way to level in DAoC was doing repetitive kill quests from level 20 to max, unless you had friends willing to set aside a good deal of time to power level you. They also forget the vague, bland quests, dead-eyed NPCs that never moved or did anything, the terrible animations, inability of the client to handle too many people on screen, clunky siege engines and targeting, etc etc.
For me it was my first MMO so I have rose colored glasses and realize it. Yet I didn't know what it was to truly love a game until I played FFXI which was my third MMO after DAoC and SWG. All three were extremely different games. Unlike today where they all feel very similar.
The biggest reason is honestly 'realm pride'. WIth a secondary one being Darkness Falls (a PvP dungeon that you could only enter if you controlled RvR). The catch with DF is that anyone still inside it didn't get kicked out, so there was plenty of fighting whenever it flipped.
That said, realm pride is the main reason, and unfortunately so. Because 'realm pride' isn't really a feature to be absent, but more of something that's missing from us, the gamers. We just don't care as much as we used to. I think a large part of this, was because of how new RvR was with DAoC. It's a really fun system when people take it seriously, however burn out happens A LOT with this system. People get tired of leading, commanding. People get tired of keeps flipping back & forth, etc. etc. etc.
And there's only so much a game can do to make people give a crap about that over a prolonged period of time. It's one of the issues GW2 in particular is dealing w/ right now, and a problem ESO has, but hasn't really been talked about much.
Originally posted by NEOGEO75 I was there when the game launch. It's the first MMO that feature RVR and pvp progress. The pve experience however is like today theme park MMO. They trimmed down the massive sandbox nature of EQ and turn it into a one way progress from start till the end. It's like moving from one quest hub to another on wow except there is no quest and only one town available at each level range. The 3 faction are just copycat of each other. If DAoC was to release today, it would fail miserably. Lucky for them, the game was release back when nobody thought of doing pvp progress and massive pvp battle. EQ pvp was just terrible, you got corpse camp till you logout. UO pvp was too chaotic and lack of purpose. DAoC hit the sweets pot at that time
First welcome to the forums here =-) Second, what part of EQ was sandbox?
If you log into Everquest Free to Play and go back to the old zones you will see mobs of a lot of different level ranges all scattered around each zone. There are even a few super high level mobs that wander around. On top of this the old zones are not arranged in a manner in which you go from 1-10 to 10-20. You might have a zone with mobs 1-10 (plus a few 30s/40s) and then the next zone over has mobs that rang for 30-50. It's not always this way, but there generally isn't a clear path. You have to seek out the mobs of your level range and it wasn't always easy to find them in the old days. That coupled with the risk of higher level mobs wandering right next to them constantly made it kind of sandboxy. At the least it wasn't linear questing where there are a few quest lines you can follow that will take you from the beginning to the end and show you exactly where to go.
Oldschool DAoC had a pretty big frontier and no maps. This added a lot to roaming gameplay and relic/keep raids. You had to actively scout your frontier for invading forces (especially when some keeps were already taken and you knew something big is going on). Your main forces needed time to react and mount a defense. You needed drivers who knew the terrain and keep locations.
As others mentioned, pre-SI and in the SI era the realm pride was really strong. You worked with your realm to achieve the common goal and hated the enemies.
It was not uncommon to have a realm wide call to arms, where the message got passed along through guilds and alliances and most xp/PvE groups dropped what they were doing and quickly headed out to the frontier for a defense.
If you did more than just big keep/relic raids you actually knew your enemies after a while. You knew which groups and players were good in the other realms. You developed respect/hate relationships. I am still great friends with several people I met as enemies in DAoC and we play games together now.
Group vs group combat had depth and was mostly well balanced between the realms, which resulted in a constantly evolving meta of group setups and tactics.
As others mentioned 1vs1 balance was mostly crap, no question, but that wasn't the game's focus.
Small well organized groups could take on much larger unorganized forces. Zergbusting was actually really fun.
Was DAoC perfect? No ofcourse not. Did it have balance issues? Sure. Would we still love it as much if they rereleased the vanilla version now? Most likely not. Audiences have changed. Preferences have changed.
But still, for me, no game has recaptured the stragetic and deep group combat feel since, where positioning, peeling, pre-kiting, interrupting, group setups, protecting your healer/casters, splitting on inc, and many more things were all crucial.
GW2 and ESO both capture almost all of this. A smart group of players will vastly outmatch any zerg in a 2v1 sometimes 3v1 setting.
GW2 3 faction war is all zerging. DAoC balance spells/skills and classes so tactics were more important. Small groups could take out large groups of players if they worked together well. Myself I have been in a battle of 40 vs over 100 players and we won out using tactics. This is something GW2 does not have. ESO is getting there. Removing the cap as of late to AoE skills is a step in the right direction but it still not there.
Just because you can't make it, doesn't mean it can't happen. Even with AoE caps in Gw2, 40 tightly grouped players can humiliate 100 randoms. And it has been done, just look up youtube.
Originally posted by k11keeper For me it was my first MMO so I have rose colored glasses and realize it. Yet I didn't know what it was to truly love a game until I played FFXI which was my third MMO after DAoC and SWG. All three were extremely different games. Unlike today where they all feel very similar.
1 SWG - Sandbox
2 Daoc - RvR game
3 - FFXI themepark with PVE core game
Ofcourse are diferent
stupid market try attrac now with hybrids but you cant make hybrid
its not same and game itselfs dont work well together
Originally posted by NEOGEO75 I was there when the game launch. It's the first MMO that feature RVR and pvp progress. The pve experience however is like today theme park MMO. They trimmed down the massive sandbox nature of EQ and turn it into a one way progress from start till the end. It's like moving from one quest hub to another on wow except there is no quest and only one town available at each level range. The 3 faction are just copycat of each other. If DAoC was to release today, it would fail miserably. Lucky for them, the game was release back when nobody thought of doing pvp progress and massive pvp battle. EQ pvp was just terrible, you got corpse camp till you logout. UO pvp was too chaotic and lack of purpose. DAoC hit the sweets pot at that time
First welcome to the forums here =-) Second, what part of EQ was sandbox?
If you log into Everquest Free to Play and go back to the old zones you will see mobs of a lot of different level ranges all scattered around each zone. There are even a few super high level mobs that wander around. On top of this the old zones are not arranged in a manner in which you go from 1-10 to 10-20. You might have a zone with mobs 1-10 (plus a few 30s/40s) and then the next zone over has mobs that rang for 30-50. It's not always this way, but there generally isn't a clear path. You have to seek out the mobs of your level range and it wasn't always easy to find them in the old days. That coupled with the risk of higher level mobs wandering right next to them constantly made it kind of sandboxy. At the least it wasn't linear questing where there are a few quest lines you can follow that will take you from the beginning to the end and show you exactly where to go.
That's not what sandbox means.
It's not a sandbox in the sense that you have tools to build and do whatever you want, but it did encourage you to go explore different places and to be careful where you were going. A good example of a sandbox like experience in EQ was people forming their own bazaars where people could trade with each other. There was no designated place to trade. The concept of having a bazaar didn't exist in game. People just got together and started trading in large groups.
Originally posted by filmoret I've searched around a bit and you always hear the glory days of DAOC. But my question, what makes this game better then GW2 or ESO? Please do not speak blindly and say because it was a 3 faction war or because there was castle seiging. Because GW2 and ESO both have this. I'm just looking for good ideas that aren't in these games.
"Better" is subjective. It is not "better" for me.
1)The big difference in DAOC is that all 3 realms had unique PVE / RvR areas and classes
GW2 and ESO are ultimately mirror matches since all factions have the same classes / abilities and geography. This creates a more balanced game and requires fewer design resources but it makes the game more repetitive and boring because you are always fighting the same things in the same zones.
In DAOC the three realms had their own unique styles which made fighting enemies interesting. As a Midgard player it was cool to fight things that I didn't see during the PVE side such as Albion plate mail, friars with robes and staffs and classes that used instruments which didn't exist in my realm.
These stark differences helped create 'realm pride' in that I resented the fact that Albs got plate mail which made me want to kill them and Hibs were weak fairy people who deserved to be crushed.
2) Travel times were much longer.
Newer games are all about instant action. People can get anywhere on the map very quickly which makes death meaningless and zerging very easy and keeps constantly flipping so fast makes sieges very repetitive and have little value.
In DAOC there was no in-game mini map so it took effort to organize people and get them to the battlefield. If your army wiped it was harder to get them back to the fight. This made sieges have more value and it gave realms time to mount a defense instead of just get steamrolled by superior numbers constantly.
Originally posted by NEOGEO75 I was there when the game launch. It's the first MMO that feature RVR and pvp progress. The pve experience however is like today theme park MMO. They trimmed down the massive sandbox nature of EQ and turn it into a one way progress from start till the end. It's like moving from one quest hub to another on wow except there is no quest and only one town available at each level range. The 3 faction are just copycat of each other. If DAoC was to release today, it would fail miserably. Lucky for them, the game was release back when nobody thought of doing pvp progress and massive pvp battle. EQ pvp was just terrible, you got corpse camp till you logout. UO pvp was too chaotic and lack of purpose. DAoC hit the sweets pot at that time
First welcome to the forums here =-) Second, what part of EQ was sandbox?
If you log into Everquest Free to Play and go back to the old zones you will see mobs of a lot of different level ranges all scattered around each zone. There are even a few super high level mobs that wander around. On top of this the old zones are not arranged in a manner in which you go from 1-10 to 10-20. You might have a zone with mobs 1-10 (plus a few 30s/40s) and then the next zone over has mobs that rang for 30-50. It's not always this way, but there generally isn't a clear path. You have to seek out the mobs of your level range and it wasn't always easy to find them in the old days. That coupled with the risk of higher level mobs wandering right next to them constantly made it kind of sandboxy. At the least it wasn't linear questing where there are a few quest lines you can follow that will take you from the beginning to the end and show you exactly where to go.
That's not what sandbox means.
It's not a sandbox in the sense that you have tools to build and do whatever you want, but it did encourage you to go explore different places and to be careful where you were going. A good example of a sandbox like experience in EQ was people forming their own bazaars where people could trade with each other. There was no designated place to trade. The concept of having a bazaar didn't exist in game. People just got together and started trading in large groups.
Indeed, but like I said, that's not what sandbox means.
Sandboxes really mean only one thing, that a game allows players to create their own content. Many people use the terms 'sandbox' and 'openworld' interchangeably, but they aren't the same thing. EQ1 had that open world, and a strong emphasis on exploration. It was still very much a themepark, but it had much better quest design than most MMOs today.
Oldschool DAoC had a pretty big frontier and no maps. This added a lot to roaming gameplay and relic/keep raids. You had to actively scout your frontier for invading forces (especially when some keeps were already taken and you knew something big is going on). Your main forces needed time to react and mount a defense. You needed drivers who knew the terrain and keep locations.
As others mentioned, pre-SI and in the SI era the realm pride was really strong. You worked with your realm to achieve the common goal and hated the enemies.
It was not uncommon to have a realm wide call to arms, where the message got passed along through guilds and alliances and most xp/PvE groups dropped what they were doing and quickly headed out to the frontier for a defense.
If you did more than just big keep/relic raids you actually knew your enemies after a while. You knew which groups and players were good in the other realms. You developed respect/hate relationships. I am still great friends with several people I met as enemies in DAoC and we play games together now.
Group vs group combat had depth and was mostly well balanced between the realms, which resulted in a constantly evolving meta of group setups and tactics.
As others mentioned 1vs1 balance was mostly crap, no question, but that wasn't the game's focus.
Small well organized groups could take on much larger unorganized forces. Zergbusting was actually really fun.
Was DAoC perfect? No ofcourse not. Did it have balance issues? Sure. Would we still love it as much if they rereleased the vanilla version now? Most likely not. Audiences have changed. Preferences have changed.
But still, for me, no game has recaptured the stragetic and deep group combat feel since, where positioning, peeling, pre-kiting, interrupting, group setups, protecting your healer/casters, splitting on inc, and many more things were all crucial.
GW2 and ESO both capture almost all of this. A smart group of players will vastly outmatch any zerg in a 2v1 sometimes 3v1 setting.
GW2 3 faction war is all zerging. DAoC balance spells/skills and classes so tactics were more important. Small groups could take out large groups of players if they worked together well. Myself I have been in a battle of 40 vs over 100 players and we won out using tactics. This is something GW2 does not have. ESO is getting there. Removing the cap as of late to AoE skills is a step in the right direction but it still not there.
Just because you can't make it, doesn't mean it can't happen. Even with AoE caps in Gw2, 40 tightly grouped players can humiliate 100 randoms. And it has been done, just look up youtube.
Played them both, DAoC is miles above GW2 as a tactical game. Maybe HoT will change that as they have said they want to remove the zerg but as it stands no 3 facting war has done it better. DAoC still the king when it comes to that.
I don't think it is fair to compare DAoC (or any other of the MMO dinosaurs) to GW2/ESO/etc. Neither for DAoC nor for the newer MMOs.
DAoC came out during the early MMO era. That was a totally different time than today with a different kind of MMO players. Todays players don't play an MMO like we did in the early days. But I am not going to judge which way is better or worse. It just makes no sense.
If DAoC were released today it wouldn't be much different than one of the other RvR games except for minor details. The different player's play style made the difference.
Different times... sorry, don't know how to describe it better.
3 factions is the primary thing that worked for it.
It was also nice that a single full group could hold its own against the zerg. This was mostly due to grossly overpowered CC and the fact most groups ran at least one map hacker. Never played a game with more exploiters than DAOC and they seemed completely incapable of fixing it.
GW2 3 faction war is all zerging. DAoC balance spells/skills and classes so tactics were more important. Small groups could take out large groups of players if they worked together well. Myself I have been in a battle of 40 vs over 100 players and we won out using tactics. This is something GW2 does not have. ESO is getting there. Removing the cap as of late to AoE skills is a step in the right direction but it still not there.
Just because you can't make it, doesn't mean it can't happen. Even with AoE caps in Gw2, 40 tightly grouped players can humiliate 100 randoms. And it has been done, just look up youtube.
Played them both, DAoC is miles above GW2 as a tactical game. Maybe HoT will change that as they have said they want to remove the zerg but as it stands no 3 facting war has done it better. DAoC still the king when it comes to that.
The thing is, you can absolutely own a significantly larger zerg with a smaller / coordinated one. There's enough skill and tactics to the game to allow for this, and there are numerous videos that show this off at various levels (both 1vx, 5vx, and 20-30v 80-100man zerg). Assuming equal skill, the larger numbers will always win, and this was also true in DAoC.
The primary difference (tactically) is that DAoC had classes that could completely negate a group of players on their own through CC. GW2 has classes w/ AoE CC, but the duration is much more toned down, and everyone has a few ways to counter them.
I have pretty much the same reasons as others (realm pride, different classes/races/lore/look and feel in each realm, etc.).
One thing I REALLY liked though, and that was never done again (to my knowledge), are the persitent battlegrounds.
They were simply great.
Granted that, on some nights, it could be pretty dead or too imbalanced, but most of the time, there was always fun battles to be had, and they prepared you gradually for The Real Deal! (They started small, with a single keep, then added towers, different layouts,etc.).
Also, when one realm outnumbered the other 2, both would normally rally together and fight the other.
I'm sure many will remember some guys from another realm that helped them in a fight against the third realm, and, once the fight was over, simply exchanged a /bow and went their ways. This gives me chills just thinking about it!!
Anyways... I can't count how much time I've spend in these battlegrounds... it was so damn fun...
I miss those badly...
(Side note: Why is this not happening more in ESO? 3 faction is supposed to be good for balancing because both underdogs should naturally band together against the biggest threat. In ESO, both underdogs will instead try to go against each other (thinking the other to be an easier target I assume), which just reinforces the position of the top dog who now fight even easier targets... )
GW2 3 faction war is all zerging. DAoC balance spells/skills and classes so tactics were more important. Small groups could take out large groups of players if they worked together well. Myself I have been in a battle of 40 vs over 100 players and we won out using tactics. This is something GW2 does not have. ESO is getting there. Removing the cap as of late to AoE skills is a step in the right direction but it still not there.
Just because you can't make it, doesn't mean it can't happen. Even with AoE caps in Gw2, 40 tightly grouped players can humiliate 100 randoms. And it has been done, just look up youtube.
Played them both, DAoC is miles above GW2 as a tactical game. Maybe HoT will change that as they have said they want to remove the zerg but as it stands no 3 facting war has done it better. DAoC still the king when it comes to that.
The thing is, you can absolutely own a significantly larger zerg with a smaller / coordinated one. There's enough skill and tactics to the game to allow for this, and there are numerous videos that show this off at various levels (both 1vx, 5vx, and 20-30v 80-100man zerg). Assuming equal skill, the larger numbers will always win, and this was also true in DAoC.
The primary difference (tactically) is that DAoC had classes that could completely negate a group of players on their own through CC. GW2 has classes w/ AoE CC, but the duration is much more toned down, and everyone has a few ways to counter them.
Tactical classes was not the only thing. GW2 does not just fall to the way side when inspecting each class but in DAoC each Realm had its own flavor. Tactics you used on Midguard may not work on Albion. Because each realm was better at something. This is before you get into just how DAoC Battlegrounds was set up with Keeps and Relic keeps. Then you were also fighting the same guilds in DAoC and the depth that added. You got to know your enemy. When you saw guild colors you had grudges. Alliances would form to take out the Realm that was over powered. GW2 just cant come close to it. How everything was done in DAoC ended up making you feel like everything mattered. When your side wins in GW2 whats the big deal? Just starting a new war and lets see what it brings. Unless you were their and really played it you just cant understand. I could go on for 1000 words on why DAoC was better just for PvP alone but I dont have time for that. Gamers that really played both knows. Short cuts are made to keep casual minded gamers playing and that alone hurts the quality.
Then you were also fighting the same guilds in DAoC and the depth that added. You got to know your enemy. When you saw guild colors you had grudges. Alliances would form to take out the Realm that was over powered. ... you feel like everything mattered.
THIS.
This is what absolutely killed ESO for me. Everyone was anonymous, no name tags, no guild tags. PVP and PVE both felt like running around fighting unnamed and anonymous NPCS. You never even knew the difference between a player and an NPC standing next to you. No immersion, no social immersion, no guild pride or realm pride worth caring about, no meaningful chat interaction with other players. It was almost as bad a SWTOR in that regard. I think I remember my friend adding me to a large guild in SWTOR, but no one ever even spoke in guild chat or interacted with any other players - I couldn't name one person in my entire guild. These theme park games are turning into nothing but solo games with a multiplayer feature.
SOE changes name to Daybreak games, cause dey break games.
Originally posted by filmoret I've searched around a bit and you always hear the glory days of DAOC. But my question, what makes this game better then GW2 or ESO? Please do not speak blindly and say because it was a 3 faction war or because there was castle seiging. Because GW2 and ESO both have this. I'm just looking for good ideas that aren't in these games.
1.) Three Different Factions... not just copy and paste clones of the other two... distinct and unique Factions, with their own philosophies and ideals and style.... it encouraged a Player to choose one and fall in love with it and defend it at all costs. Unique Classes for each Faction.... the other Factions had not learned Your class while leveling up so they were always doing a catchup dance trying to counter your actions, and so too were you trying to understand the enemy... it encouraged Players to delve deep into the game in a way GW2 can not replicate because when you fight in WvWvW in GW2 your just fighting yourself with different colored clothing.
2.) Guild Insignia that was noticeable and recognizable to all that fostered rivalries and the desire for memorable battles. We couldn't understand the language of the other Factions... but we sure could recognize their guild tabard. We would roam the Frontier looking for certain guilds... can that be said in any current three faction MMO? Afaik no it can't.
and to me the most important reason that can not be duplicated....
3.) MMOs were new and usually only attracted People who genuinely searched for online gaming, not People who were doing something considered cool or hip. The Players of old DAoC cared about the game in a noticeably different way than Players of MMOs now do, and it was those Players, and the Devs of that time, that made the Genre for me and others so awesome. The same can not be found now. DAoC was an awesome MMO because of the People who chose to play it and support it.
To those of you I played DAoC with, and I played against...Thanks Ladies and Gents. You all were great. Boy did we have a party, .... and oh boy what a hangover lol.
GW2 3 faction war is all zerging. DAoC balance spells/skills and classes so tactics were more important. Small groups could take out large groups of players if they worked together well. Myself I have been in a battle of 40 vs over 100 players and we won out using tactics. This is something GW2 does not have. ESO is getting there. Removing the cap as of late to AoE skills is a step in the right direction but it still not there.
Just because you can't make it, doesn't mean it can't happen. Even with AoE caps in Gw2, 40 tightly grouped players can humiliate 100 randoms. And it has been done, just look up youtube.
Played them both, DAoC is miles above GW2 as a tactical game. Maybe HoT will change that as they have said they want to remove the zerg but as it stands no 3 facting war has done it better. DAoC still the king when it comes to that.
The thing is, you can absolutely own a significantly larger zerg with a smaller / coordinated one. There's enough skill and tactics to the game to allow for this, and there are numerous videos that show this off at various levels (both 1vx, 5vx, and 20-30v 80-100man zerg). Assuming equal skill, the larger numbers will always win, and this was also true in DAoC.
The primary difference (tactically) is that DAoC had classes that could completely negate a group of players on their own through CC. GW2 has classes w/ AoE CC, but the duration is much more toned down, and everyone has a few ways to counter them.
Tactical classes was not the only thing. GW2 does not just fall to the way side when inspecting each class but in DAoC each Realm had its own flavor. Tactics you used on Midguard may not work on Albion. Because each realm was better at something. This is before you get into just how DAoC Battlegrounds was set up with Keeps and Relic keeps. Then you were also fighting the same guilds in DAoC and the depth that added. You got to know your enemy. When you saw guild colors you had grudges. Alliances would form to take out the Realm that was over powered. GW2 just cant come close to it. How everything was done in DAoC ended up making you feel like everything mattered. When your side wins in GW2 whats the big deal? Just starting a new war and lets see what it brings. Unless you were their and really played it you just cant understand. I could go on for 1000 words on why DAoC was better just for PvP alone but I dont have time for that. Gamers that really played both knows. Short cuts are made to keep casual minded gamers playing and that alone hurts the quality.
Lets not talk empty talks ... here's a clear example of how smaller coordinated group beats up a blob https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODMDRLsglb4 - it has nice musicz too :P
On your previous post, the zerg is a player made thing. The game absolutely does not promote zerging. Stacking numbers however is the easiest way, obviously, to get things done. Just for the record, a group of 10 can hold a keep against a blob if they know what they are doing. Counter siege weaponry and trapping.
On the "know your enemy" part ... if you play in EU, then if you see bunch of [df] guys coming at you, you should seriously consider turning around and run the fuck away. Same goes if you see [TUP] or [TA]. You'll be either brave or stupid to go against those. And that is a thin line.
Also from what you are writing, I suppose you've never played in a top 5 server? In EU, WvW is a huge thing for Seafarer's Rest, Desolation or Kodash. Those guys know how to give ass kicking and its all about prestige.
Then you were also fighting the same guilds in DAoC and the depth that added. You got to know your enemy. When you saw guild colors you had grudges. Alliances would form to take out the Realm that was over powered. ... you feel like everything mattered.
THIS.
This is what absolutely killed ESO for me. Everyone was anonymous, no name tags, no guild tags. PVP and PVE both felt like running around fighting unnamed and anonymous NPCS. You never even knew the difference between a player and an NPC standing next to you. No immersion, no social immersion, no guild pride or realm pride worth caring about, no meaningful chat interaction with other players. It was almost as bad a SWTOR in that regard. I think I remember my friend adding me to a large guild in SWTOR, but no one ever even spoke in guild chat or interacted with any other players - I couldn't name one person in my entire guild. These theme park games are turning into nothing but solo games with a multiplayer feature.
Just turn on nameplates in ESO. They do need to get some guild colors or guild tags that would be cool. Sad that this one little thing ruined the game for you. Yes there is guild pride and realm pride. I have seen people get kicked out of the pve guilds for arguing over their realm pride and such its quite funny to watch.
it was all about being able to do anything you wanted with out having to hit max rank .. .you wanted to pve .. no problem ... wanted to pvp no problem but ...im only lvl 15 dont matter had battlegrounds ... want to go with the guild to rvr ..np ... and you could pve while doing rvr if you wanted ... i loved the crafting .. and lets not forget DARKNESS FALLS a cross realm dugeon that if you were in when it changed hands you didnt get out until the damn hibbies or mids came and killed you
the game was active .... it changed as you were playing .... that plus the pve -pvp- rvr-- rvr dugeons ... castle takes ... battle grounds for very lvl ... how could u not want to be there ..i would be first in line for a daoc 2 ... !!!!!
P.S. i played solo as a stealther one weekend and i was at a spot close to the mids portal keep waiting for solo people to kill and im stealthed and all off a sudden i see anought play ... (my realm) before i knew it there were like 6 of us stealther just waiting to jump some poor solo mid .. this was tooo funny ..later the tree i was at came to be know as the office .... we would all gather there ... we didnt even group up ...just helped each other ... soo fun
Comments
The only things DAoC had on ESO were:
1. Cooler classes. If you pick a Templar in ESO, every freaking ability you have is filled with light. More light. Light light light. Likewise, Dragonknight has to flame or earth-spike everything. Within the classes, while you can be very mechanically different from your comrades of the same class, you'll feel the same because your abilities look so similar visually. Also, classes were balanced in different ways. So while one class might be the best at assassinating people in PvP, another was entirely focused on providing group buffs. ESO provides this to an extent, but the stat caps have really limited peoples' ability to customize their classes with a specific job/focus in mind. Hopefully the 1.6 changes to stats will positively impact this, but standardizing buffs across the board is rarely a way to do this (it's great for balancing things, but at the cost of uniformity--obviously.) The changes should, at least, allow players to specialize a bit more, without becoming absolute monsters thanks to stacked group buffs.
2. The enemy alliances actually felt different when you were questing in them. To an extent you feel this with the environment in ESO, except with DAoC you had faction locked races, classes, and thus appearances (though I understand the reasoning for not having these, and see this as kind of a mixed pro/con.) When you saw the enemy, you knew it was the enemy.
3. You could enter enemy lands, at risk to yourself, and engage in World PvP.
4. Darkness Falls of course. (Though this is supposed to be on its way to ESO.)
5. Battlegrounds for low level PvP. Though the new level limited campaigns are an interesting compromise.
6. Years to polish itself. Because #1 and #4 weren't there to begin with.
--------------
So yes, DAOC had some things ESO doesn't. But judging by the strides made since release, and the upcoming changes in 1.6 and the promised DF-like dungeon, I suspect that won't last long. If we could get some real world PvP outside of Cyrodiil, that would be pretty awesome. Other than that, ESO has many, many things DAoC didn't. People always forget that the fastest way to level in DAoC was doing repetitive kill quests from level 20 to max, unless you had friends willing to set aside a good deal of time to power level you. They also forget the vague, bland quests, dead-eyed NPCs that never moved or did anything, the terrible animations, inability of the client to handle too many people on screen, clunky siege engines and targeting, etc etc.
1. Class Diversity
2. Spell and Skill Diversity
3. Realm Identity
4. Darkness Falls
5. Equitable Reward Systems for both Crafters and Adventurers
6. Slower Paced Combat and Leveling Promoted Community
7. PvE and PvP Complimented Each Other
8. Good Mix of Solo and Group Content
The above are the primary reasons I even played a PvP oriented game as a PvE oriented gamer.
The biggest reason is honestly 'realm pride'. WIth a secondary one being Darkness Falls (a PvP dungeon that you could only enter if you controlled RvR). The catch with DF is that anyone still inside it didn't get kicked out, so there was plenty of fighting whenever it flipped.
That said, realm pride is the main reason, and unfortunately so. Because 'realm pride' isn't really a feature to be absent, but more of something that's missing from us, the gamers. We just don't care as much as we used to. I think a large part of this, was because of how new RvR was with DAoC. It's a really fun system when people take it seriously, however burn out happens A LOT with this system. People get tired of leading, commanding. People get tired of keeps flipping back & forth, etc. etc. etc.
And there's only so much a game can do to make people give a crap about that over a prolonged period of time. It's one of the issues GW2 in particular is dealing w/ right now, and a problem ESO has, but hasn't really been talked about much.
That's not what sandbox means.
Just because you can't make it, doesn't mean it can't happen. Even with AoE caps in Gw2, 40 tightly grouped players can humiliate 100 randoms. And it has been done, just look up youtube.
1 SWG - Sandbox
2 Daoc - RvR game
3 - FFXI themepark with PVE core game
Ofcourse are diferent
stupid market try attrac now with hybrids but you cant make hybrid
its not same and game itselfs dont work well together
It's not a sandbox in the sense that you have tools to build and do whatever you want, but it did encourage you to go explore different places and to be careful where you were going. A good example of a sandbox like experience in EQ was people forming their own bazaars where people could trade with each other. There was no designated place to trade. The concept of having a bazaar didn't exist in game. People just got together and started trading in large groups.
"Better" is subjective. It is not "better" for me.
1)The big difference in DAOC is that all 3 realms had unique PVE / RvR areas and classes
GW2 and ESO are ultimately mirror matches since all factions have the same classes / abilities and geography. This creates a more balanced game and requires fewer design resources but it makes the game more repetitive and boring because you are always fighting the same things in the same zones.
In DAOC the three realms had their own unique styles which made fighting enemies interesting. As a Midgard player it was cool to fight things that I didn't see during the PVE side such as Albion plate mail, friars with robes and staffs and classes that used instruments which didn't exist in my realm.
These stark differences helped create 'realm pride' in that I resented the fact that Albs got plate mail which made me want to kill them and Hibs were weak fairy people who deserved to be crushed.
2) Travel times were much longer.
Newer games are all about instant action. People can get anywhere on the map very quickly which makes death meaningless and zerging very easy and keeps constantly flipping so fast makes sieges very repetitive and have little value.
In DAOC there was no in-game mini map so it took effort to organize people and get them to the battlefield. If your army wiped it was harder to get them back to the fight. This made sieges have more value and it gave realms time to mount a defense instead of just get steamrolled by superior numbers constantly.
Indeed, but like I said, that's not what sandbox means.
Sandboxes really mean only one thing, that a game allows players to create their own content. Many people use the terms 'sandbox' and 'openworld' interchangeably, but they aren't the same thing. EQ1 had that open world, and a strong emphasis on exploration. It was still very much a themepark, but it had much better quest design than most MMOs today.
Played them both, DAoC is miles above GW2 as a tactical game. Maybe HoT will change that as they have said they want to remove the zerg but as it stands no 3 facting war has done it better. DAoC still the king when it comes to that.
I don't think it is fair to compare DAoC (or any other of the MMO dinosaurs) to GW2/ESO/etc. Neither for DAoC nor for the newer MMOs.
DAoC came out during the early MMO era. That was a totally different time than today with a different kind of MMO players. Todays players don't play an MMO like we did in the early days. But I am not going to judge which way is better or worse. It just makes no sense.
If DAoC were released today it wouldn't be much different than one of the other RvR games except for minor details. The different player's play style made the difference.
Different times... sorry, don't know how to describe it better.
3 factions is the primary thing that worked for it.
It was also nice that a single full group could hold its own against the zerg. This was mostly due to grossly overpowered CC and the fact most groups ran at least one map hacker. Never played a game with more exploiters than DAOC and they seemed completely incapable of fixing it.
The thing is, you can absolutely own a significantly larger zerg with a smaller / coordinated one. There's enough skill and tactics to the game to allow for this, and there are numerous videos that show this off at various levels (both 1vx, 5vx, and 20-30v 80-100man zerg). Assuming equal skill, the larger numbers will always win, and this was also true in DAoC.
The primary difference (tactically) is that DAoC had classes that could completely negate a group of players on their own through CC. GW2 has classes w/ AoE CC, but the duration is much more toned down, and everyone has a few ways to counter them.
I have pretty much the same reasons as others (realm pride, different classes/races/lore/look and feel in each realm, etc.).
One thing I REALLY liked though, and that was never done again (to my knowledge), are the persitent battlegrounds.They were simply great.
Granted that, on some nights, it could be pretty dead or too imbalanced, but most of the time, there was always fun battles to be had, and they prepared you gradually for The Real Deal! (They started small, with a single keep, then added towers, different layouts,etc.).
Also, when one realm outnumbered the other 2, both would normally rally together and fight the other.
I'm sure many will remember some guys from another realm that helped them in a fight against the third realm, and, once the fight was over, simply exchanged a /bow and went their ways. This gives me chills just thinking about it!!
Anyways... I can't count how much time I've spend in these battlegrounds... it was so damn fun...
I miss those badly...
(Side note: Why is this not happening more in ESO? 3 faction is supposed to be good for balancing because both underdogs should naturally band together against the biggest threat. In ESO, both underdogs will instead try to go against each other (thinking the other to be an easier target I assume), which just reinforces the position of the top dog who now fight even easier targets... )
Tactical classes was not the only thing. GW2 does not just fall to the way side when inspecting each class but in DAoC each Realm had its own flavor. Tactics you used on Midguard may not work on Albion. Because each realm was better at something. This is before you get into just how DAoC Battlegrounds was set up with Keeps and Relic keeps. Then you were also fighting the same guilds in DAoC and the depth that added. You got to know your enemy. When you saw guild colors you had grudges. Alliances would form to take out the Realm that was over powered. GW2 just cant come close to it. How everything was done in DAoC ended up making you feel like everything mattered. When your side wins in GW2 whats the big deal? Just starting a new war and lets see what it brings. Unless you were their and really played it you just cant understand. I could go on for 1000 words on why DAoC was better just for PvP alone but I dont have time for that. Gamers that really played both knows. Short cuts are made to keep casual minded gamers playing and that alone hurts the quality.
online games were relatively new.
THIS.
This is what absolutely killed ESO for me. Everyone was anonymous, no name tags, no guild tags. PVP and PVE both felt like running around fighting unnamed and anonymous NPCS. You never even knew the difference between a player and an NPC standing next to you. No immersion, no social immersion, no guild pride or realm pride worth caring about, no meaningful chat interaction with other players. It was almost as bad a SWTOR in that regard. I think I remember my friend adding me to a large guild in SWTOR, but no one ever even spoke in guild chat or interacted with any other players - I couldn't name one person in my entire guild. These theme park games are turning into nothing but solo games with a multiplayer feature.
1.) Three Different Factions... not just copy and paste clones of the other two... distinct and unique Factions, with their own philosophies and ideals and style.... it encouraged a Player to choose one and fall in love with it and defend it at all costs. Unique Classes for each Faction.... the other Factions had not learned Your class while leveling up so they were always doing a catchup dance trying to counter your actions, and so too were you trying to understand the enemy... it encouraged Players to delve deep into the game in a way GW2 can not replicate because when you fight in WvWvW in GW2 your just fighting yourself with different colored clothing.
2.) Guild Insignia that was noticeable and recognizable to all that fostered rivalries and the desire for memorable battles. We couldn't understand the language of the other Factions... but we sure could recognize their guild tabard. We would roam the Frontier looking for certain guilds... can that be said in any current three faction MMO? Afaik no it can't.
and to me the most important reason that can not be duplicated....
3.) MMOs were new and usually only attracted People who genuinely searched for online gaming, not People who were doing something considered cool or hip. The Players of old DAoC cared about the game in a noticeably different way than Players of MMOs now do, and it was those Players, and the Devs of that time, that made the Genre for me and others so awesome. The same can not be found now. DAoC was an awesome MMO because of the People who chose to play it and support it.
To those of you I played DAoC with, and I played against...Thanks Ladies and Gents. You all were great. Boy did we have a party, .... and oh boy what a hangover lol.
Lets not talk empty talks ... here's a clear example of how smaller coordinated group beats up a blob https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODMDRLsglb4 - it has nice musicz too :P
On your previous post, the zerg is a player made thing. The game absolutely does not promote zerging. Stacking numbers however is the easiest way, obviously, to get things done. Just for the record, a group of 10 can hold a keep against a blob if they know what they are doing. Counter siege weaponry and trapping.
On the "know your enemy" part ... if you play in EU, then if you see bunch of [df] guys coming at you, you should seriously consider turning around and run the fuck away. Same goes if you see [TUP] or [TA]. You'll be either brave or stupid to go against those. And that is a thin line.
Also from what you are writing, I suppose you've never played in a top 5 server? In EU, WvW is a huge thing for Seafarer's Rest, Desolation or Kodash. Those guys know how to give ass kicking and its all about prestige.
Just turn on nameplates in ESO. They do need to get some guild colors or guild tags that would be cool. Sad that this one little thing ruined the game for you. Yes there is guild pride and realm pride. I have seen people get kicked out of the pve guilds for arguing over their realm pride and such its quite funny to watch.
it was all about being able to do anything you wanted with out having to hit max rank .. .you wanted to pve .. no problem ... wanted to pvp no problem but ...im only lvl 15 dont matter had battlegrounds ... want to go with the guild to rvr ..np ... and you could pve while doing rvr if you wanted ... i loved the crafting .. and lets not forget DARKNESS FALLS a cross realm dugeon that if you were in when it changed hands you didnt get out until the damn hibbies or mids came and killed you
the game was active .... it changed as you were playing .... that plus the pve -pvp- rvr-- rvr dugeons ... castle takes ... battle grounds for very lvl ... how could u not want to be there ..i would be first in line for a daoc 2 ... !!!!!
P.S. i played solo as a stealther one weekend and i was at a spot close to the mids portal keep waiting for solo people to kill and im stealthed and all off a sudden i see anought play ... (my realm) before i knew it there were like 6 of us stealther just waiting to jump some poor solo mid .. this was tooo funny ..later the tree i was at came to be know as the office .... we would all gather there ... we didnt even group up ...just helped each other ... soo fun
its a GoOd dAy to diE !!
i guess it's all context
i had been playing EQ1 heavily for 2.5 years before DAOC released
DAOC released 2 months before EQ's 3rd expansion, Shadows of Luclin
EQ2 fan sites