Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Thought about SWTOR vs ARRFollow

#77 Apr 16 2013 at 12:52 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
3,599 posts
Killua125 wrote:


Honest question, would you prefer quest themeparks over a game with more freedom? If you don't at least give your opinion, it's kinda pointless. I've certainly given mine.


Maybe I missed this whole themepark analogy but are you trying to suggest that quest chaining limits your freedom in an mmo, and that you would much prefer endless grinding?

Wow, that's novel, I would just love to play this Dynasty Warriors MMO you're dreaming of. Just hit things until your max level, then hit things somewhere else for loot. Sounds amazing.
____________________________

[ffxivsig]1183812[/ffxivsig]
#78 Apr 16 2013 at 12:56 PM Rating: Good
****
6,899 posts
Killua125 wrote:
I'm not talking about updates. I used the combat example like this: if you go from one area to the next, a game's combat isn't going to change entirely. The game isn't going to change from a themepark to a sandbox MMO by going to an unreleased area.

It's just a quest marker tedious fetch quest-fest. Deliver an item to some random lady. Go kill 10 critters. Go back to the lady. Give her the critter furs. Go back to the guy who sent you to her. Over and over. That's how these themepark quest games work. This is Yoshi-P's "vision".

If you want information on how the game works, go over the Q&As, producer letters, screenshots, Live Letters, interviews, etc...


I've read all the same information as you, and I certainly didn't see anything saying that this game would be a WoW clone. I read Yoshi say that WoW is a very successful game, and he'd like to incorporate parts of what make WoW successful because they were done properly. Not because it's WoW. So unless you are going to show me something I haven't seen, where Yoshi says something like "we're modelling FFXIV to be a copy of WoW with Final Fantasy flavorings", you are just making assumptions.

Since you haven't played a single quest in ARR, you have no idea what it will be like. Just because a few things are emulating WoW, doesn't mean everything is. That's my point.

preludes wrote:
Have you played many betas?

Imagine you are in charge of this game and there are deadlines (no matter what they say there are always deadlines) and you implement a new battle system now, imagine its worse or causes huge bugs or other massive delays for the programmers in other areas. They never change core features of an MMO from beta to release, they will probably tweak it but they won't make huge changes now. Only way huge changes would happen is if they stopped betas and went back to full development. Betas are all about tweaking and cutting off rough edges, they aren't going to do anything major now.


I understand how betas work, I have participated in several myself, including the original FFXIV beta and the swtor beta most recently. I never said they were implementing a new battle system, I said there are still plenty of changes that can be made to combat. I believe it was actually talked about in Live Letter 6, that phase 3 of the beta would see considerable updates to the combat system. I know I read it somewhere. When you get to Open Beta, or the last phase of closed beta I agree it's only for tweaking. Before that, plenty can still be modified without starting from the ground up.
#79 Apr 16 2013 at 1:05 PM Rating: Good
****
6,899 posts
Killua125 wrote:
I don't think I'm speaking for a silent majority, these people aren't silent, they're just not on ZAM.


I get it now. It's us, we're all the problem here. Clearly, ZAM, one of the larger forum groups around, must all be wrong because you and "your people" know better. Smiley: lol

It's funny though, because the people I'VE talked to about ARR, all agree that it looks great and not once has "WoW clone" come up in conversations. And shocking as it may seem, none of these friends even post on ZAM!

Killua125 wrote:
Honest question, would you prefer quest themeparks over a game with more freedom?


I know this wasn't directed at me, but I'll answer. If quests are well done and diverse, then I have absolutely no problem with them guiding me along to the next "hub". In fact, I prefer it because it keeps me focused on where I'm going and it just makes sense. As long as it's immersive content, that works for me. I'd rather have that then running around for hours at random questing or grinding because I have the "freedom" to do so.

Edited, Apr 16th 2013 3:10pm by BartelX
#80 Apr 16 2013 at 1:05 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,719 posts
Quote:
Honest question, would you prefer quest themeparks over a game with more freedom? If you don't at least give your opinion, it's kinda pointless. I've certainly given mine.


Ignoring the false choice you've provided here, here's my opinion..

Yes.

Yes, I want those things. I don't always want one or the other. I'm a person, not a brick.

Sometimes I want some mindless questing where I can just run around accomplishing quest objectives and gain some levels and some loot. Sometimes I want to craft for a while and make cool stuff, or skill up my tradeskills, or gear up an alt. Sometimes I want to farm mobs or herbs or ore. Sometimes I want to shoot things in the face for 3 hours. Sometimes I want to be swept away in a narrative where I really identify with my character because the story has developed around me and through my actions and choices.

I'm also capable of playing more than one game by the way.

I'm looking for FFXIV to give me a Final Fantasy-quality story as well as the MMO aspects I've come to enjoy. I'm hoping for combat that ranges from mindless directed grinding, all the way up to complex bosses that require solid strategy and execution to defeat. I'm hoping for meaningful crafting, but I'm also hoping it won't cause me physical pain to progress through.

And sometimes I want to shoot things in the face. Borderlands 2 is pretty good for that. Also Warframe.

I will be 100% honest with you right here, right now. When FFXIV was first announced back when dinosaurs roamed the Earth, I was honestly hoping for FFXI with WoW-style gameplay. Yes, that's right, my original hope for XIV was that it would be WoW but with Final Fantasy.

So much for nobody wanting that, huh?

I'm glad that SE is embracing modern MMO standards. I'm seriously hoping they can do that and keep it a Final Fantasy game. It's tough, but I think they can do it.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#81Killua125, Posted: Apr 16 2013 at 1:08 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) I didn't mean it like that. Fansites are naturally less critical.
#82 Apr 16 2013 at 1:11 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
3,599 posts
I've never heard of someone asking for LESS things to do in a game. "Oh man all these quests are getting in my way of walking around the world!"

What other forums are you frequenting where you encounter all this dissent? Because I know that hardly anyone here has the uniform opinion that ARR will succeed. That's because no one knows, and hardly pretend to.

The 14 subreddit is pretty much in line with this form of thinking as well, so.. care to share who your people are?
____________________________

[ffxivsig]1183812[/ffxivsig]
#83Killua125, Posted: Apr 16 2013 at 1:15 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) You seem to think I'm in favor of abolishing quests altogether. It's the handholding quest system which leads you from marker to marker in a predetermined fashion by the developer that I'm not in favor of.
#84 Apr 16 2013 at 1:16 PM Rating: Good
****
6,899 posts
Killua125 wrote:
BartelX wrote:
Killua125 wrote:
I don't think I'm speaking for a silent majority, these people aren't silent, they're just not on ZAM.


I get it now. It's us, we're all the problem here. Clearly, ZAM, one of the larger forum groups around, must all be wrong because you and "your people" know better. Smiley: lol

It's funny though, because the people I'VE talked to about ARR, all agree that it looks great and not once has "WoW clone" come up in conversations. And shocking as it may seem, none of these friends even post on ZAM!


I didn't mean it like that. Fansites are naturally less critical.


You haven't been around for that long, so I can understand how you'd think that. If you had been around longer, you'd realize that ZAM is not just a bunch of white knights for the game. Sure it has it's fair share, but it also has a HUGE group of people who call stuff like they see it, and a fair number of doom and gloom posters like yourself. Heck, during 1.0 the forums were FULL of people posting about the shortcomings of the game, unlike the SE forums which were still vastly positive and of the do-no-wrong mentality.

Regardless, I tend to believe that making assumptions before even having a chance to see what things look like is a pretty silly way to think.
____________________________
Bartel Hayward--- Ultros Server
The Kraken Club <ZAM>
50 WAR • 50 MNK • 50 MIN • 50 GSM • 50 ARM • 50 LTW • 50 CUL • 50 WVR
thekrakenclub.shivtr.com
#85 Apr 16 2013 at 1:21 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Louiscool wrote:
Killua125 wrote:


Honest question, would you prefer quest themeparks over a game with more freedom? If you don't at least give your opinion, it's kinda pointless. I've certainly given mine.


Maybe I missed this whole themepark analogy but are you trying to suggest that quest chaining limits your freedom in an mmo, and that you would much prefer endless grinding?

Wow, that's novel, I would just love to play this Dynasty Warriors MMO you're dreaming of. Just hit things until your max level, then hit things somewhere else for loot. Sounds amazing.


A lot of MMO armchair designers these days talk about theme parks vs. sand boxes (not sure where the terminology originated). Basically, there's an increasing number of players who want more sandbox games--games where rather than be assigned objectives by the developers, they give you more tools to play with and the players create their own games. Think "The Sims" meets traditional MMOs like FFXI/WoW/etc. More emphasis on player created content, including players as the enemies, etc.

Neither approach is inherently good or bad, though modern MMOs could definitely benefit from borrowing more features that enable emergent game play. I haven't touched WoW in so long, but GW2 is a pretty good example of a themepark MMO. You can't really interact with the world or its players in an especially meaningful way, but there are lots of tasks to complete.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#86 Apr 16 2013 at 1:38 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
3,599 posts
Kachi wrote:
Louiscool wrote:
Killua125 wrote:


Honest question, would you prefer quest themeparks over a game with more freedom? If you don't at least give your opinion, it's kinda pointless. I've certainly given mine.


Maybe I missed this whole themepark analogy but are you trying to suggest that quest chaining limits your freedom in an mmo, and that you would much prefer endless grinding?

Wow, that's novel, I would just love to play this Dynasty Warriors MMO you're dreaming of. Just hit things until your max level, then hit things somewhere else for loot. Sounds amazing.


A lot of MMO armchair designers these days talk about theme parks vs. sand boxes (not sure where the terminology originated). Basically, there's an increasing number of players who want more sandbox games--games where rather than be assigned objectives by the developers, they give you more tools to play with and the players create their own games. Think "The Sims" meets traditional MMOs like FFXI/WoW/etc. More emphasis on player created content, including players as the enemies, etc.

Neither approach is inherently good or bad, though modern MMOs could definitely benefit from borrowing more features that enable emergent game play. I haven't touched WoW in so long, but GW2 is a pretty good example of a themepark MMO. You can't really interact with the world or its players in an especially meaningful way, but there are lots of tasks to complete.


Ah, thanks for the clarification. And Eve is a good example of player-created systems then?

____________________________

[ffxivsig]1183812[/ffxivsig]
#87 Apr 16 2013 at 1:40 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Oh, durr. Of course. Eve is one of the more commonly talked-about sandbox MMOs.

(durr on me, not you)

Edited, Apr 16th 2013 12:40pm by Kachi
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#88 Apr 16 2013 at 1:43 PM Rating: Good
***
3,719 posts
So that's interesting. I was playing the Neverwinter beta a few weeks ago, and one of their big things is the ability for players to create quest chains for other players. They place all the mobs, write the text boxes, it's pretty cool and definitely emphasizes the D&D aspect of that game.

It also has an on-rails questing system.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#89 Apr 16 2013 at 1:45 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
3,599 posts
Killua125 wrote:
Running back and forth and back and forth fetching things and kill/come back quests is not enjoyable for me.

You've honestly never heard of any negativity towards those systems?

Quote:
"Oh man all these quests are getting in my way of walking around the world!"


Well, actually... that is kinda the issue. The predetermined quest chain/themepark is set up for you in such a way that you're penalized if you stray from it.

Edited, Apr 16th 2013 3:17pm by Killua125


Well it's a good thing that quest-chaining isn't the only thing planned for ARR, right :D

Seriously, everything I've read talks about varied leveling activities. FATE, Dungeons, Levequests, Quest Chains, Main Quests, Free Companies, Grand Companies, etc.

Obviously not a sandbox but.. I mean was that ever an option? You sound let down by this, when we knew it all along.
____________________________

[ffxivsig]1183812[/ffxivsig]
#90 Apr 16 2013 at 1:48 PM Rating: Excellent
Anterograde Amnesia
Avatar
*****
12,363 posts
Guildhests too.

If you don't want to do the quest chain, don't. After your first job does them I doubt they become available again for other jobs anyway so you can't rely on the quest chain for other jobs. I still think that is a unique feature of FFXI and XIV, being able to level every single job on the same char.
____________________________
"Choosy MMO's choose Wint." - Louiscool
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to convince the world he didn't exist.
Keyser Soze - Ultros
Guide to Setting Up Mumble on a Raspberry Pi
#91 Apr 16 2013 at 1:50 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
972 posts
Archmage Callinon wrote:
So that's interesting. I was playing the Neverwinter beta a few weeks ago, and one of their big things is the ability for players to create quest chains for other players. They place all the mobs, write the text boxes, it's pretty cool and definitely emphasizes the D&D aspect of that game.

It also has an on-rails questing system.


When I suggest a sandbox versus ARR's theme park quest system, I'm not using Kachi's definition (a game with a lot of creation tools).

I'm talking about a game which gives the players freedom to do what they want to do. It's that simple.

I haven't tried Neverwinter yet (nor do I know anything about it), so can't comment on that.

The problem with "just don't do it" is that these systems typically punish you for not following the set paths. That's their whole thing. They make you feel like you're being rewarded and progressing briskly by doing these fetch quests; in reality they're just penalizing you for doing anything else.

This is what happens in a themepark, where you're following the path that's lined out for you:

Person 1: I want to go explore 'x'!
Person 2: There's no point. We don't have any quests for that.

You're just on a ride and you have to let the current of the quest flow take you through areas and content as it pleases.

Edited, Apr 16th 2013 3:56pm by Killua125
#92 Apr 16 2013 at 1:57 PM Rating: Good
****
6,899 posts
Killua125 wrote:
Archmage Callinon wrote:
So that's interesting. I was playing the Neverwinter beta a few weeks ago, and one of their big things is the ability for players to create quest chains for other players. They place all the mobs, write the text boxes, it's pretty cool and definitely emphasizes the D&D aspect of that game.

It also has an on-rails questing system.


When I suggest a sandbox versus ARR's theme park quest system, I'm not using Kachi's definition (a game with a lot of creation tools).

I'm talking about a game which gives the players freedom to do what they want to do. It's that simple.


Then by your own definition, FFXIV is exactly what you are looking for.

Louiscool wrote:
Well it's a good thing that quest-chaining isn't the only thing planned for ARR, right :D

Seriously, everything I've read talks about varied leveling activities. FATE, Dungeons, Levequests, Quest Chains, Main Quests, Free Companies, Grand Companies, etc.


Add to that guildhests, solo grinding, and party XP and that seems like a great amount of freedom to do what you want to do.

Congratulations, you just became a fan of the game. It's that simple.

#93 Apr 16 2013 at 2:04 PM Rating: Good
***
3,719 posts
Quote:
When I suggest a sandbox versus ARR's theme park quest system, I'm not using Kachi's definition (a game with a lot of creation tools).

I'm talking about a game which gives the players freedom to do what they want to do. It's that simple.


But you're still operating within the confines of the game's space. You're still limited to things the designers and programmers gave you the ability to do.

You've said before that your objection isn't with the idea of quest chaining, but it really sounds like it is.

Wint has already mentioned that the quest chain won't be there for your second, third, fourth, nth class or however many it takes to use up all the lowbie quests. So clearly ARR has to account for that already.

You can't possibly know whether NOT following the quest chain is super punishing or not. Even if you're in the beta you're limited to Gridania and limited on side quests and class quests. So you'd be getting an incomplete picture there. (that's all in the roadmap btw).
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#94 Apr 16 2013 at 2:05 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
3,599 posts
Killua125 wrote:
Archmage Callinon wrote:
So that's interesting. I was playing the Neverwinter beta a few weeks ago, and one of their big things is the ability for players to create quest chains for other players. They place all the mobs, write the text boxes, it's pretty cool and definitely emphasizes the D&D aspect of that game.

It also has an on-rails questing system.


When I suggest a sandbox versus ARR's theme park quest system, I'm not using Kachi's definition (a game with a lot of creation tools).

I'm talking about a game which gives the players freedom to do what they want to do. It's that simple.



You do have that. Pretty sure your just trolling now, because you're ignoring the fact that you can do whatever you want. You can only craft if you like, or level solely on dungeons, or whatever you like.

Quote:


The problem with "just don't do it" is that these systems typically punish you for not following the set paths. That's their whole thing. They make you feel like you're being rewarded and progressing briskly by doing these fetch quests; in reality they're just penalizing you for doing anything else.

This is what happens in a themepark, where you're following the path that's lined out for you:

Person 1: I want to go explore 'x'!
Person 2: There's no point. We don't have any quests for that.

You're just on a ride and you have to let the current of the quest flow take you through areas and content as it pleases.

Edited, Apr 16th 2013 3:56pm by Killua125


So you want freedom to explore? I've never heard anything blocking you from exploring, or anyone getting to max level in any game by making maps.

In fact, there is the fundamental flaw in your argument. The world won't be changing THAT much, and as such, there isn't some long tunnel world to move through. 1.0 had 3 majors cities, no central hub (well Ul'Dah was because where everyone went but I hated it.) There wasn't some final destination, and very few areas were "only for high level" content.

Yoshi-P even said somewhere he doesn't want those kinda of barriers, and basically there won't be any aggressive monsters on roads, so as long as you stick to paths you could explore as a level 1.



____________________________

[ffxivsig]1183812[/ffxivsig]
#95 Apr 16 2013 at 2:05 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
972 posts
I'm not a fan, but I'm not... not a fan. I'm just waiting on my full product and commenting on things as the game inches towards completion.

If you can just explore with your friends and kill stuff and can go where you want and progress just as efficiently as people doing the quest chains, I'd be all in favor of it. I just doubt that will be the case.
#96 Apr 16 2013 at 2:10 PM Rating: Good
****
6,899 posts
Killua125 wrote:
I'm not a fan, but I'm not... not a fan. I'm just waiting on my full product and commenting on things as the game inches towards completion.

If you can just explore with your friends and kill stuff and can go where you want and progress just as efficiently as people doing the quest chains, I'd be all in favor of it. I just doubt that will be the case.


Why wouldn't it be the case? As has been stated a bunch now, there are tons of ways to level. As has also been stated, those quests are only available once, so clearly the other avenues of leveling will be just as efficient. I'm not sure why you would think that quest chains will be the only efficient way to level other than your obsession that the game must be an exact replica of WoW, something that has never been stated anywhere.

Literally all of your gripes are with these assumptions that you are making. Just open up your mind a bit, and realize that you really have no clue what the game will be like until you play it, so talking about how it's going to be is pointless. You don't know. You think you do, but you don't.
#97 Apr 16 2013 at 2:27 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
972 posts
BartelX wrote:
Literally all of your gripes are with these assumptions that you are making. Just open up your mind a bit, and realize that you really have no clue what the game will be like until you play it, so talking about how it's going to be is pointless. You don't know. You think you do, but you don't.


Not all of my gripes. If the fetch quests are totally optional and I absolutely can do what I want and ignore them, I'll give you that one (I'm still not convinced).
#98 Apr 16 2013 at 2:27 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Killua125 wrote:
Archmage Callinon wrote:
So that's interesting. I was playing the Neverwinter beta a few weeks ago, and one of their big things is the ability for players to create quest chains for other players. They place all the mobs, write the text boxes, it's pretty cool and definitely emphasizes the D&D aspect of that game.

It also has an on-rails questing system.


When I suggest a sandbox versus ARR's theme park quest system, I'm not using Kachi's definition (a game with a lot of creation tools).

I'm talking about a game which gives the players freedom to do what they want to do. It's that simple.

I haven't tried Neverwinter yet (nor do I know anything about it), so can't comment on that.

The problem with "just don't do it" is that these systems typically punish you for not following the set paths. That's their whole thing. They make you feel like you're being rewarded and progressing briskly by doing these fetch quests; in reality they're just penalizing you for doing anything else.

This is what happens in a themepark, where you're following the path that's lined out for you:

Person 1: I want to go explore 'x'!
Person 2: There's no point. We don't have any quests for that.

You're just on a ride and you have to let the current of the quest flow take you through areas and content as it pleases.

Edited, Apr 16th 2013 3:56pm by Killua125


Even most themepark MMOs have some level of freedom to do as you please. I think what you're struggling to articulate is the importance of an incentive structure that actually encourages you to do the things you want to do. For example, you could solo in FFXI at launch, but it would take an eternity compared to people who partied. Allowing players to do something in theory and actually making it a viable way of experiencing the game are different matters. And there are lots of lazy designers out there who will justify a lack of design by saying, "Well, they can do that if they really want to," which is tantamount to saying, "No, we didn't try to design an experience for players who wanted to do that." If that's what you're trying to get at, it's a legitimate concern.

Having said that, FFXIV probably won't do that part very well, but MOST MMOs don't do that part well. So FFXIV might not be especially good in this regard, but nor is it likely to be especially bad.

Are there any MMOs that you actually do enjoy? Seems likely that you're in the rather large boat of people who love MMOs in theory but can't find one they actually like.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#99 Apr 16 2013 at 2:29 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Killua125 wrote:
BartelX wrote:
Literally all of your gripes are with these assumptions that you are making. Just open up your mind a bit, and realize that you really have no clue what the game will be like until you play it, so talking about how it's going to be is pointless. You don't know. You think you do, but you don't.


Not all of my gripes. If the fetch quests are totally optional and I absolutely can do what I want and ignore them, I'll give you that one (I'm still not convinced).


I don't think I've ever even played a game where the quests were required. Most quests are totally optional. There might not be a lot to do otherwise, but you won't be forced to do the ones you don't want to.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#100 Apr 16 2013 at 2:32 PM Rating: Excellent
Killua125 wrote:
When I suggest a sandbox versus ARR's theme park quest system, I'm not using Kachi's definition (a game with a lot of creation tools).

I'm talking about a game which gives the players freedom to do what they want to do. It's that simple.


So, Skyrim Online?
____________________________
Our team is like a flock of woodpeckers in a petrified forest. We just need to keep working and keep an eye open for opportunity.

FFXI
Toofar - Asura (Formerly of Lakshmi (Garuda)) - WHM BLM SMN
Rafoot - Asura (Formerly of Lakshmi (Garuda)) - THF SAM BRD
#101 Apr 16 2013 at 2:47 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
972 posts
Killua125 wrote:
Even most themepark MMOs have some level of freedom to do as you please. I think what you're struggling to articulate is the importance of an incentive structure that actually encourages you to do the things you want to do. For example, you could solo in FFXI at launch, but it would take an eternity compared to people who partied. Allowing players to do something in theory and actually making it a viable way of experiencing the game are different matters.


Yes, that is exactly what I was trying to say.

I'm not disputing the fact that you'll be able to just run outside and kill monsters in ARR, the question is whether or not alternative options will really be viable compared to the fetch quest chains which the new build of the game appears to revolve around.

Kachi wrote:
Are there any MMOs that you actually do enjoy? Seems likely that you're in the rather large boat of people who love MMOs in theory but can't find one they actually like.


Tough question... Right now? Not really. I'm downloading Darkfall Unholy Wars right now, but I have somewhat low expectations. The ones I really enjoyed in the past?

Ragnarok Online
Final Fantasy XI
Mabinogi
TERA, sort of (one of the reasons I'm worried about FFXIV: ARR. Great gameplay ruined by the WoW fetch quest+instance system)

I've also enjoyed a few games that were objectively bad just because they had a player-killing system, lol (such as Wakfu. Fun player-killing, but I also love the Disgaea and FFT combat, as well as the original cartoon it's based on).

So that's a small handful of games I do like, and I've tried way too many. Smiley: tongue

Edited, Apr 16th 2013 4:52pm by Killua125
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 1 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (1)