Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Matthew Santiago

Real Name Matthew Santiago   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname Arcoril
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On Nov 6, 2004, 04:33
Total Comments 10 (Suspect)
User ID 22239
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >


News Comments > WoW Transcript
7. Re: Q&A Format Dec 14, 2004, 19:47 Arcoril
 
WoW is fun and I'm enjoying it at the moment, but there are some definite problems. All is not good at Blizzard.

For starters, people who die during encounters don't receive credit for completing them. Blizzard originally promised that dead players would receive credit for completing encounters even when dead, but they've pulled a 180 and are saying that there are no longer plans to do this. This policy is ridiculous. It may be trivial to redo a quick quest that only requires a single group, but what happens when you die during a large 40-person Onyxia dragon raid? If the team prevails, the team should be rewarded.

There are also a number of exploits that allow people to force non-PvP flagged people into PvP. This is a giant problem on PvE servers and Blizzard hasn't even commented on it. There's a running 24+ page thread on the Blizzard boards here: http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?FN=wow-general&T=286975&P=1. This thread has been running since Saturday. While far more trivial threads have received official responses recently, no devs or moderators have even confronted this issue. I mean, a canned "We're reviewing the issue but have no comment at this time" response would at least reassure us that they've at least clicked on the thread.

There's a huge difference between managing an RTS and an MMORPG community. What works for one won't work for the other; putting out the occasional patch and new map for Starcraft and WC3 isn't enough when we're talking about an MMORPG. We're not just dealing with exploits that affect a 30 minute Battle.net match. WoW is a persistent world with characters you'll be playing for the duration of your subscription. Issues must be addressed and dealt with immediately.


This comment was edited on Dec 14, 19:52.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ships Ahoy - World of Warcraft
25. Re: EQ2 Nov 23, 2004, 19:27 Arcoril
 
Would you guys say EQ2 is a heavy time sink like EQ1 was? I hear horror stories about 13 hour raids and whatnot...

No one outside of the devs/friends and family has done the super high-level raids yet, but I wouldn't rule out 13 hour raids. At the moment (level 23) the gameplay is much faster paced than it was in EQ. The downtime isn't as short as it is in WoW, but it's not frustratingly long either.

I suppose the bottom line is that long raids are probably going to be there for the people who enjoy that sort of thing. But for the non-hardcore player, there's plenty of content that isn't long and drawn out. EQ2 is a big timesink relative to WoW, so weigh that when you make your decision. I went with EQ2 because I liked its depth, but that may not be the choice for you. Pick what works for you.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ships Ahoy - EverQuest II
39. Re: General Question.... Nov 8, 2004, 19:56 Arcoril
 
Well.. techinically you can play classic EQ with no expansion and still be able to "compete". It's like playing Magic: The Gathering. You're going to have to buy the expansions if you want to have access to the full range of skills. And the skills will be appealing enough for people to buy the expansions, otherwise what would be the point of exploring new areas without significant benefits?

And you're right about EQ being expansions + monthly fees. I make no argument that MMORPGs are really expensive to play. But a lot of people who intend on playing Guild Wars come off with the belief that they're just paying a one-time fee for the box. While that's true to an extent, they'll still be forking over money if they want to stay current. It's a giant hole in their "if Guild Wars can pull it off with no monthly fee, then so can Blizzard and SOE" argument.

And yeah, EQ2 isn't as horrible as I thought it would be. I was disgruntled at SOE after EQ, but I think I'm having a change of heart. The beta was fun, the quests worked, and grouping felt pretty satisfying. I also hear that the reason there wasn't an open beta was because the client was a giant 5GB and SOE didn't want to rely on BitTorrent to distribute it. I don't think even FilePlanet + FileShack could distribute 5GB out to everyone who wanted a key.

I think I'll be giving EQ2 a go when my EB gets their copies tomorrow.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ships Ahoy - EverQuest II
36. Re: General Question.... Nov 8, 2004, 19:30 Arcoril
 
I'm always amused by people who say that Guild Wars won't have a monthly fee. Guild Wars will likely have four $30 expansions each year. Each expansion will probably render most of the previous skills and equipment obsolete, making it a must-buy. Sure, the expansions aren't required--unless you want to compete.

There's still a monthly fee. Just not the way you'd imagine it.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > DAoC: Catacombs "Open" Beta Plans
5. Re: Fraud! Nov 7, 2004, 12:21 Arcoril
 
What sets DAOC apart from EQ2 and WoW is that it has a real endgame. Realm vs. realm combat isn't for everyone--you either love it or hate it. If you love it, you're addicted and there's no real game on the horizon that's going to replace DAOC for you. If you hate RvR, you've probably stopped playing by now and already have a copy of EQ2 or WoW on pre-order.

I wish these companies would stop misleading consumers with their fraudlent claims. I thin I'm going to start reporting them to the BBB and various consumer agencies untill they stop lying and calling them what they are, limited beta.

I read this and re-read it again. I have no idea what you're trying to say, but I can safely assume that you're clueless about this whole thing.
This comment was edited on Nov 7, 12:24.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > EverQuest II to Ship, Beta to End
34. Re: No subject Nov 6, 2004, 09:12 Arcoril
 
Most of EQ2s income will come from players from Europe who has to wait for WoW.

And who cares about the hardcore players?? They are, what? 2% of the overall subscribers?

87.1378% of statistics are made up on the spot.

And most of the 400,000+ people currently playing EQ Live and Dark Age of Camelot would be self-described hardcore gamers. There is a market for hardcore gamers out there and it's a substantial one. Hardcore gamers are solid gold for MMORPG publishers--they're addicted and they maintain long-term subscriptions. So yes, companies are extremely interested in keeping the hardcore gamers addicted and playing their game.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > EverQuest II to Ship, Beta to End
32. Re: No subject Nov 6, 2004, 08:34 Arcoril
 
As polished and well put-together WoW is, the challenge just wasn't there for me . I found myself taking stupid risks all the time because there was absolutely no penalty for death except for a run back to my corpse. It just reiterates my point--WoW is casual. This is not a game for hardcore MMORPG fans. That's not an insult, mind you. The market has room for an MMORPG targeted at casual players and WoW fills that role quite well.

Blizzard is so afraid to introduce anything into the game that's not fun. That's an admirable philosophy, but be careful what you ask for--you just might get it. People who play through WoW have fun at most every corner and never really run into any frustrations or setbacks. This is good if you're a casual gamer. If you're more of a serious player, all of your achievements somehow feel hollow. Things are handed to you on a silver platter because you're never placed in a situation where you're challenged or have anything to lose. Even the misanthropic no-grouping-skills player next to you has the same gear that you have simply because he was persistent enough to repeatedly try encounters until he or his pickup group was successful.

As much as people hate frustration in games, getting any sort of real satisfaction isn't possible unless there was some risk involved. Unless you stand to lose something, anything you win will just feel hollow. Along with the poor state of grouping, this is where WoW fails in the eyes of more serious gamers.

Also, you preface your statements with the "pre-nerf Dwarven Mage". It's not the case anymore.

I'm not referring to any nerfed skills. In fact, mages today are roughly the same as when I played them months ago. By "pre-nerf Dwarven Mage", I'm referring to the change that removed the Dwarven Mage as a possible racial combination. Existing characters would be allowed to continue, but no new ones could be created. And really, a Gnome or Human Mage would be a far better choice as far as stats go. A Dwarven Mage isn't über--I chose it simply based on aesthetics. Regardless of the race/class combination, quickly leveling to 30 as a mage is still as much of a reality as it ever was.

I know how to powerlevel myself. Cheese made it seem like from casual playing he got to 30 in 3 days, which just isn't true. Then he deleted it from his HD? Doesn't that sound just a tad bullshitish to you? Why did he agree to beta test something, then just delete it 3 days later, and all of a sudden knows everything about the game?

But to address the fast leveling problem, I can level myself very quickly on any game for that matter. In EQ I could get to level 20 in a day...that's it...a day. One zone...Paludal Caverns. Does anyone complain about EQ being too quick to level?

I don't care what he said, but you flat out denied that 30 in 3 days was possible. I simply had to point out that it is in fact possible and that many people have done it.

Paludal Caverns doesn't really apply to this argument. That was added in, what, the LDON expansion? That zone has the highest experience modifier there is because it was designed that way. Much like DAOC, EQ is a mature game that's very content-heavy at the upper end. To help people get there, both games have introduced artificial ways to level your character through the lower levels. Camelot has the /level command (plus the free weekly levels) and EQ has high experience dungeons.

Both EQ and DAOC were different during their release, though. Leveling was relatively slow because much like WoW, the endgame wasn't in place yet. The difference in WoW is that it has the rapid leveling curve of a mature game without the high-level content. And considering the slow pace at which Blizzard added the little high-level content currently in beta, there's no way they can keep up with the pace at which serious gamers level and go through content.


This comment was edited on Nov 6, 08:45.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > EverQuest II to Ship, Beta to End
29. Re: No subject Nov 6, 2004, 07:31 Arcoril
 
Also, Cheese, you're simply lying if you say that you got your character to level 30 in 3 days in WoW. Yes, it's a bold face lie. If you wish to promote EQ2 then fine, promote it, but do NOT resort to blatent lying to do it. If you got your character to level 30 in 3 days, please, enlighten us on HOW you did that. What race/class combo did you use? Where did you go? How did you level so fast? Details? Hm...?

mysticgeek, I'm not speaking for Cheese, but I've also been able to level to roughly 30+ in around 4-5 days. 3 is certainly possible if I dedicated more time to it.

For instance, here's how I pulled it off as a pre-nerf Dwarven Mage:

My first character was a human, so I felt most comfortable outside of Stormwind. I left Ironforge for Stormwind as soon as I could and did random quests in Elwynn until I got to level 5. After level 5, I moved around to the area south of Goldshire and killed kobolds and random woodland creatures until 10 or so.

From 10-15, I went to Westfall and was grinding bandits and golems.

From 16-21, crossed over to Duskwood and killed wolves and spiders along the coast from Raven Hill to Darkshire.

From 22-26, killed undead inside the gates of Raven Hill. I also headed up to Southshore and killed bears and spiders in the surrounding area.

From 27-30, I went to Stonetalon and killed harpies in the valley.

If you can dedicate 8+ hours a day, this can easily be done in 3 days. You can also find complementary quests that ask you to kill the things you're grinding on. Harpies, golems, and wolves come to mind. Outside of those, though, doing any other quests will just slow you down because of the excessive travel time and poor experience rewards. After all, why spend 20 minutes doing a quest that nets 1200 exp when you could net the same 1200 exp in 10 minutes by killing 12 mobs that give 100 exp each?

And really, there's no need to be as rude to Cheese as you were. I'd like to point out that just because you can't pull off 30 in 3 days it doesn't mean that it can't be done. It can be done and I've certainly seen it done during the original stress test when people were competing to get the highest level characters. I'd also like to point out that the highest leveled people during the stress test all got there solo. Outside of killing the occasional hard mob, grouping was completely ineffective when it came to leveling.


This comment was edited on Nov 6, 08:14.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > EverQuest II to Ship, Beta to End
25. Re: No subject Nov 6, 2004, 02:18 Arcoril
 
Well Arcoril, if you prefer a game that forces grouping to gain any experience and discourages Noobs & casual play you can always play EQ2.
I for one LOVE the way they made WOW easy to play. It's the casual players MMORPG, but appeals to the hard core players as well to some extent.

Hey, I'm certainly not bashing WoW. It's a fun game and it's great for what Blizzard intended for it to be--a casual MMORPG. It's an easy game and it's not frustrating. Depending on what side of the fence you're on, this might be a good thing or a bad thing.

I can already tell that you're going to have a blast in WoW, and more power to ya. WoW was made with casual gamers like you in mind, and you're going to love being able to do things at your own pace and not be at the mercy of finding a group all the time.

I have tried EQ2, and I'll say straight up that it's not as fun as WoW. The difference is that EQ2 has been holding my attention for some months now. Does this mean that I'm encouraging people to play EQ2? Oh hell no. Chances are that if you're the kind of person who'd enjoy EQ2, you're already planning on playing it.

I'm not out to convert people to EQ2. I didn't even mention it in my last post. I don't think it's better than WoW. In fact, it could learn a lot from what WoW has done correctly. But for the people who are willing to listen, I am trying to point out WoW isn't everything the fanboys are saying it is. If you're serious about MMORPGs, you will have a ton of fun in WoW, but you'll burn out and get bored of it quickly.


Are you joking?!? WoW has excellent incentives to group. Every time I turn up to an area to complete a certain quest, I always find a few other people who also want to do it. Grouping with them takes a second, exp is shared, there are various settings for loot sharing, and most importantly quests can be completed simultaneously. ie: if we kill the boss and need to retrieve his head, then everyone in the group gets a copy of the boss's head - it's not realistic, but much more rewarding.

Although XP is halved when teamed with another player, I found that we cut through mobs much much faster, more than making up for that.

In fact, as I see it, there is no reason *not* to team up in WoW.

Collection quests are slower when grouped because the number of quest items you need to loot is multiplied by the number of people in your group. Keep in mind that the drop rate stays the same the entire time. And while other quests can be completed more quickly when grouped, there just aren't enough cooperative quests to keep you grouped all the time.

The point about things dying more quickly when grouped is moot. Things already die far too quickly and mobs in an area simply don't get repopulated quickly enough to support more than one person. Back when I was level 36, I was soloing all of the raptors that spawned near Refuge Pointe. This area was barely able to support one person, never mind two or more. And this isn't an isolated case either. It was the same thing everywhere--Desolace, Strangethorn Vale, you name it.

I could go on and on about what's wrong with grouping in WoW, but one of the most active members of the WoW community already made a very detailed post about it. If you're open-minded about listening to what we feel are serious flaws with the game, you can see the write-up here: http://www.fohguild.org/forums/showthread.php?s=140a616309e7f793d4acd7e136972e65&threadid=12685&perpage=15&pagenumber=2#post233063 (mirrored there since the WoW boards were wiped for the open beta/stress test)

This comment was edited on Nov 6, 02:30.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > EverQuest II to Ship, Beta to End
18. Re: No subject Nov 6, 2004, 00:01 Arcoril
 
I laugh at all the people who blindly think that WoW is great just because it's made by Blizzard. Have people already forgotten how horrible the company's policies were in Diablo 2? Sure, it wasn't a MMORPG, but Blizzard treated its customers like crap, insisted that duping was never taking place, and patched in changes that ruined people's characters without allowing them to re-allocate their skills.

Sure, WoW is fun right now and I'm having a blast playing it. But there are serious problems with this game that people aren't willing to admit to themselves. People suck tat this game because the game doesn't promote grouping. In fact, it encourages soloing. Experience is so much slower in a group that it's not even funny. What does this mean? The majority of people will still be n00bs at 60. The other day I met a 40 warrior who didn't know how to taunt. Priests commonly overnuke and draw aggro. Not to mention they go OOM and can't heal. Really, I mean, WTF?

It really pains me to say this since my hopes were so high for WoW, but it's shaping up to be Diablo 3. Sure, there are going to be a few guilds with people who genuinely know how to play, but they're going to be few and far between. WoW is so easy, never penalizes death, and rarely encourages grouping. You can suck at this game, but given enough time, you'll be just as uber as a good player.

People who are veterans of EQ/AC/DAOC and other challenging MMORPGs are already bored with the game and have lost interest because they've already done everything that the game has to offer. And while Blizzard promises raid content post-release, people will blow through it very quickly. Considering the length of time it took Blizzard to add non-raid content during the beta, it doesn't look promising that they can keep up with the rate that even moderate gamers go through content.

WoW is fun if it's played casually. If you consider yourself anywhere between a moderate and hardcore gamer, you're going to be disappointed in the long run. Unlike what many fanboys want you to believe, WoW is not the greatest thing since sliced bread. WoW fills a niche in the MMORPG market, but unless you only play for 30 minutes a day, you're not going to be playing it for as long as you've played previous MMORPGs.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
10 Comments. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo