Gaming Forums => General Gaming => Topic started by: Robageejammin on November 16, 2005, 10:41:19 PM
Title: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Robageejammin on November 16, 2005, 10:41:19 PM
Hey, not sure if anyone made a thread for this yet but just wanted to know if any of you guys play WoW. If so, list your character name and your server if youd like...or just gloat about your l33t level 60 Pally that will PWN!!1! that NE Rogue who's LFG ULD while WTS [Heavy Leather]x52 for 5g at AH....or something
Server: Durotan
Alliance: Drachma, Kamek Horde: Axelum
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: KDR_11k on November 17, 2005, 02:15:41 AM
Nerf Shammies!
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Kairon on November 17, 2005, 04:11:46 AM
Hehe, I'm such a Blizzard fanboy! Too bad I'm a casual player and can't really raid or pvp much...
Sallow Lvl60 Warlock Shadowsong (PvE)
*ahem* Now for the requisite shoutouts.
OMG NUB LERN TO PLAY KEKEKE
...oh and... nerf pally bubbles!
~Carmine M. Red Kairon@aol.com
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Shecky on November 17, 2005, 04:41:47 PM
I *used* too, was registered probably for 4 months or so.
I stopped after getting no where day after day.... I'm still bitter about the cookie incident...
Cookie incident: long story short 1) Blizzard has a holiday quest to make holiday cookies which require eggs. 2) I know from playing a tauren that said eggs can be found outside of their major city 3) I take my primary troll and *walk* to said major city from the orc major city. This takes a lot of time. 4) I gather said eggs 5) I fly back to the main city only to find that the special quest givers are gone.
The game is engineered to waste your time... I believe a lot of people know this but have a hard time stopping and cutting their losses
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Robageejammin on November 17, 2005, 06:09:50 PM
Quote The game is engineered to waste your time... I believe a lot of people know this but have a hard time stopping and cutting their losses
In that case you can probably say that about any game ever. Having fun doesnt make it a waste of time
But yea, bad luck with that holiday quest fiasco. Very strange.
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: KDR_11k on November 18, 2005, 02:47:35 AM
Robagee: No, MMOs are a special case. They aren't designed to be as fun as possible (because then you'd blow through them way too quick), they are designed to provide just enough fun and rewards to keep you playing while stretching the content as thin as possible. I mean, MMOs don't have more content than your average singleplayer game but they take months of playing to get somewhere as opposed to the hours the singleplayer game takes. I think the reward scheme in MMOs is fashioned after Pavlov's observations on how much reward is necessary to create a behaviour pattern. WoW seems to stretch less than other games but it still isn't completely beyond that problem.
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Kairon on November 18, 2005, 05:18:01 AM
But where do you draw the line? Regular RPGs also involve a lot of levelling just to keep up with the progression of difficulty. MMORPGs are certainly the largest example of elongated game scales, but they aren't the only games that do this.
Besides, MMORPGs also need to inherently build a community. Players need to be in the game in the long term so that they can actually start to form social connections with each other. A wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am game experience where players join and leave the community would be absolutely horrific for an MMORPG, it would be a complete waste of the massively online capability, and would be more akin to player-matching than to persistantly-online social communities.
And of course, if all WoW was was another MMORPG, I probably wouldn't be playing it. I've wanted to play an MMORPG since I read abouyt Sierra's The Realm in 1997, but I just haven't...because there was something missing. And WoW has that something: Blizzards amazing job with art design and lore. In a way, that makes me a real Blizzard fanboy. Part of the reason I'm playing WoW 3-7 hours every week is because I enjoy Blizzards actual work in those areas.
~Carmine M. Red Kairon@aol.com
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: KDR_11k on November 18, 2005, 08:27:30 AM
An RPG should never require more levelling than happens during normal play (i.e. you go into a dungeon, you come out on the other end, you have enough experience, at least if you didn't run from every fight). RPGs are mostly played for their story, not for their combat (and traditional RPGs don't involve a lot of combat unless you want to play Hack&Slay) but since the lack of a GM reduces interactivity computer RPGs tend to require a bit more combat and less non-combat. Japanese "RPG"s are not really RPGs because you don't play a role, you play the combat sequences and watch the cutscenes.
Sure, the players need to stay in an MMO to create a social world but unfortunately they're doing it by the wrong means. An RPG should NEVER be a race to the finish "look ma I got level 60", then it's not a ROLE PLAYING game. But the userbase for MMOs seems to consist of a lot of people who think you have to "finish" the game by reaching the max level, getting all the "phat loot" and the other players are only people you have to compete with for that loot.
Of course a race to the finish-style game will be hard to keep fun all the time. That's why games like that tend to last maybe twenty hours offline. And the severe difference between a high level and a low level character makes for a lot of rushing in these games. What about a game where you have maybe nine levels to get that give you new tactics and abilities but don't make you some invincible killing machine? I think most cyberpunk (or generally futuristic) RPGs are pretty close to that idea, a bullet to the head will kill even a veteran.
Games like Guild Wars tend to do pretty well despite a very short levelling process by introducing much more player interaction (grouping in every instance, PvP missions, etc). And the hardcore will stay long after they've hit maximum level because they feel they have a function in the world. Be a famous blacksmith, member of a guild of assassins, king, whatever. Those who have a social environment they feel happy in will stay no matter how long it took to reach maximum level and get all the 1337 gear.
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Sir_Stabbalot on November 18, 2005, 04:04:31 PM
The only MMO I really liked was Dark Age of Camelot. Nothing like dumping boiling oil on foes to brighten up your day and heat up their, uh, ex-life. I loved the frontiers. PvP at its finest.
Can't wait for Imperator to be finished* by Mythic.
*Yes, yes, Gamespy and everyone else made it seem like Imperator was canned, it wasn't. The Devs have said its been postponed so they can work on other things for a while.
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: KDR_11k on November 18, 2005, 09:06:16 PM
Imperator is dead. Trust me, that's what all the devs are saying. And they are saying the game wasn't turning out very well anyway (I'm not sure whether they meant the actual game or the public reaction but apparently the public hates non-generic-fantasy MMOs).
Forum Post SyaPed: Was it completely canned? I thought it was just put on the backburner or something so they could concentrate on Warhammer...? Arshlevon: believe me, and everyone else who worked on it.. cancelling it was the BEST thing they could of done.. Matabus: A-goddamn-men.
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Sir_Stabbalot on November 19, 2005, 02:17:50 AM
Well that goes completely against what I heard: Link.
Quote We try never to say never around here. The assets we developed aren't going anywhere, and we still think the concept and the story have a lot of potential. We had great feedback at E3 from those who actually did a little play testing. For those reasons and more, we won't say cancelled - but we wanted to be very honest with fans in the press release, and make it clear that we weren't actively pursuing development for the time being
So, who's right? The artist or the PR person? I would be able to point out numerous posts the devs made on the VoxPlebis forum, but the site's been taken down.
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Uglydot on November 20, 2005, 06:35:55 AM
Alliance: Dainsharr on shadowmoon
Horde: I forget now..heh...
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: theRPGFreak on November 20, 2005, 10:23:15 AM
I have a pally on Kargath named Legiont and a preist on Bonechewer named Azamaria
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: nemo_83 on November 20, 2005, 11:02:11 AM
On the subject of Warcraft; does anyone here play Warcraft 3?
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: MysticGohan24 on November 20, 2005, 07:04:17 PM
I do Nemo, and TFT and have WoW, Server: Firetree, Paladin, lv.60
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Toruresu on April 27, 2006, 12:02:29 PM
I got WoW like 2 months ago...yeah, I no longer play DS or my GC.
Server: Kirin Tor Name: Morious lv 30 Mage
pst me if you see me : )
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: MysticGohan on April 27, 2006, 08:13:34 PM
heh, this old thread again? heh, You could always play me :P although I don't have a current subscription to WoW, I'm thinking about renewing.. dunno though
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on May 25, 2006, 09:44:08 PM
I started playing out of spite. I ganked 169 people yesterday, without even going in battlegrounds. I hope to god I got some GM tickets sent out and some people in tears. Also, I pretend to be a girl to get free items, and it works. Also, I'm going to sell my account at the end of summer.
Edit: if you do not roll horde on a pvp server, chances are you are a child http://ganked.ytmnd.com/
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: KDR_11k on May 25, 2006, 11:54:51 PM
I suppose that means the horde is in the minority on your server?
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: vudu on May 26, 2006, 09:16:38 AM
What does gank mean?
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on May 26, 2006, 01:10:59 PM
Gank = player kill And yeah, I think horde is the minority on this server, and pretty much every server @_@
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: KDR_11k on May 26, 2006, 11:00:16 PM
I've heard of Horde-majority servers...
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on May 28, 2006, 10:13:19 PM
On mine it's about 55-60% alliance. I've heard on some places it's been as much as 75%.
nubs
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Smash_Brother on May 29, 2006, 09:38:15 PM
Dalvengyr.
Quit the game because PvE servers were boring, then they opened transfers to a PvP server because no one would leave...only to find that PvP servers are just as boring because PvP mostly happens in the BGs anyway.
But Dalv is a horde-heavy server. The alliance has more 60s right now, but the horde has a 58% lead on levels 10-60 which means that those who will fill out the ranks of the BGs are on their way.
Quote Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R Gank = player kill
Specifically, a "gank" is a player killing another player who has no chance in hell of winning or fighting back.
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on May 30, 2006, 03:02:20 AM
I've never known gank to mean lower level specifically. On the other hand, I'm a nub. But on the other other hand, me and my buddy have "ganked" 60s tag teaming with our mid-40s characters.
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: KDR_11k on May 30, 2006, 07:33:14 AM
I think it also counts as a gank when you're using the class that is strong against your victim's class (e.g. rogue vs. mage).
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on May 30, 2006, 05:22:32 PM
More like anything vs mage, am I rite??
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Smash_Brother on May 31, 2006, 07:22:32 AM
I've always heard it means when you kill someone who either cannot fight back or in an inopportune situation, like they're fighting a monster at the time and you wait until they have low health and mana before attacking them.
Truth is, I'm only playing WoW until Nintendo gets off their ass and releases something better to occupy my spare time.
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on May 31, 2006, 10:26:04 AM
I hear Maple Story is coming out for DS
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Kairon on May 31, 2006, 10:53:31 AM
Grrr, I quit WoW!
~Carmine M. Red Kairon@aol.com ex-Blizzard Fanboi
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Smash_Brother on June 01, 2006, 09:02:08 AM
Quote Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R I hear Maple Story is coming out for DS
I was actually thinking about Star Trek online or Warhammer, or swearing off MMOs until someone does something new with the genre.
I'm waiting for someone to do something new and different with the concept, as the "grind for better items so you can grind for better items" paradigm has been around for far too damn long.
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: nemo_83 on June 01, 2006, 08:10:16 PM
Quote Originally posted by: MysticGohan24 I do Nemo, and TFT and have WoW, Server: Firetree, Paladin, lv.60
is it possible to play with custom maps over the net? want to set up a match some time? PM me.
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: wandering on June 01, 2006, 10:54:34 PM
Quote Originally posted by: Smash_Brother I'm waiting for someone to do something new and different with the concept, as the "grind for better items so you can grind for better items" paradigm has been around for far too damn long.
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: KDR_11k on June 02, 2006, 02:46:34 AM
There's Yohoho! Puzzle Pirates and Bang! Howdy which don't involve grinding AFAIK but other than that... Well, you better hope that Garriott's plan pans out.
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: mantidor on June 03, 2006, 07:38:33 PM
Regarding Blizzard games, Im still in Diablo II, and since we have to actually pay fees for WoW if we go online, I think I'll skip it. Thats if I pretend I could like online in the games, although I just discovered I can put my single player character online, so Ill give it a last chance.
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Kairon on June 03, 2006, 08:19:53 PM
I discovered Seed when I went to E3 and was really impressed with the PR speek. It sounds completely expandable (the concept is you're a bunch of colonists trapped on a downed spaceship with a broken orbital elevator and an unterraformed planet outside) where the players will work together as a society to accomplish goals (dynamic personal, and society-sized group projects) along with some socio-politics (should the playerbase work towards repairing the ship, or terraforming the planet?) and socio-politico-based classes with less emphasis on combat (more like repairers, administrators, etc.).
I just haven't had the time to check it out, but this is could be the next MMORPG in my life.
Oh, did I mention it's cel-shaded?
~Carmine M. Red Kairon@aol.com
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Smash_Brother on June 05, 2006, 09:04:40 AM
This will definitely be my next MMO if it does indeed make a comeback.
EDIT: Actually, my friend who was in the beta just informed me that the game was mostly just a big chatroom since all the puzzles had long since been solved. I need a game with some new gameplay concepts to get me back into MMOs again.
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: KDR_11k on June 06, 2006, 01:11:40 AM
As I said, Puzzle Pirates.
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on June 14, 2006, 08:45:44 PM
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: wandering on June 14, 2006, 11:54:03 PM
Quote This will definitely be my next MMO if it does indeed make a comeback.
EDIT: Actually, my friend who was in the beta just informed me that the game was mostly just a big chatroom since all the puzzles had long since been solved. I need a game with some new gameplay concepts to get me back into MMOs again.
. I'm more interested in the plot/role-playing/environments than the puzzles, personally...
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Sir_Stabbalot on June 15, 2006, 04:00:14 AM
I'm thinking about getting into a MMORPG, but I'm not sure which one. I don't really like Blizzard for reasons I explained in another thread. Right now it will probably be Warhammer: Age of Reckoning (WAAAGH!). Warhammer Orcs rock.
Quote Yerz got to make yer mark summhow. See as a Goblin, yer'll get killed an 'et by Orcs or even other Goblinz if theyz not scared of yer or if yer not useful to 'em. I wozn't all dat big but when an Orc tried to pull me arm off I made 'is 'ead explode. Then dey woz a bit scared of me, an' they knew I'd be useful too.
Orc-speek FTW!
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: KDR_11k on June 15, 2006, 04:48:52 AM
Orks believe in two gods - Gork and Mork- Gork being the god of cunning brutality; and Mork being the god of brutal cunning (the subtle distinction being that one hits you when you're not looking at him, the other hits you hard when you are). Orks can't agree which god plays which role, and debates about this topic often erupt into fighting.
Orks generally tend to distinguish between Gork and Mork as one being mean, and the other being meaner. Some divisions lie in determining who is meaner; another factor preventing Orks from being united.
Wiki (yes, that's the 40k article, the wording in the fantasy one isn't as funny)
EDIT: Come to think of it, why can't Orks use their 40k technology in WH if that stuff was programmed into their genes millions of years ago? Or is that just a low-tech settlement on the planet?
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Sir_Stabbalot on June 15, 2006, 05:00:23 AM
Depends on how you look at it and what part of Warhammer history you use and don't use. At first, the Warhammer world was just a primitive world in the 40k universe caught in a warp storm, but later Games Workshop made them both separate universes. In Warhammer, enough Waaagh magic flowing around will jar some greenskins to build war machines, so mostly its because the planet is so low-tech.
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: KDR_11k on June 15, 2006, 09:02:09 AM
Would be funny to see the orks fielding a friggin titan in medieval setting... Do tha red unz still go fasta?
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Smash_Brother on June 15, 2006, 11:08:35 AM
Quote Originally posted by: Sir_Stabbalot I'm thinking about getting into a MMORPG, but I'm not sure which one. I don't really like Blizzard for reasons I explained in another thread. Right now it will probably be Warhammer: Age of Reckoning (WAAAGH!). Warhammer Orcs rock.
Don't play WoW.
It's a fun leveling treadmill, but one of the reasons leveling is fun is because you think you're building a character which will be useful and powerful later on.
Then, once you reach the level cap, you learn that anything worth doing requires an army of 40 people to do and that you are worthless on your own.
Needless to say, it sucks.
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Sir_Stabbalot on June 15, 2006, 02:34:57 PM
KDR_11k: Heh, I have seen some concept art of an Ork siege tower... Lemme check... Here it is! Completely unsafe, just how Orks like it! And a dev said recently that one of the Orc methods of fast transport will be by catapault. Yes, launched from a giant catapault. Also, it's unknown if you will always survive. Once again, Warhammer OrKs rock!
Smash_Brother: Yeah, I heard the game really dies after you reach 60. And if you try to PvP, there's almost no one playing in the open world, and the battlegrounds are full of people loaded with the absolout best equipment. Warhammer: Age of Reckoning is looking to be a lot better, with city sieges and such.
Gah! I can't wait for the beta! I wantz ta shmash me some stunties*!!!
*Ork slang for Dawrf. Also, Orks and Dwarves are not the only races. Humans (Empire and those corrupted by Chaos), Goblins (or Gobbos as they're more commonly known) Dark Elves and High Elves will all be playable races.
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on June 16, 2006, 01:16:54 AM
Quote Originally posted by: Smash_Brother Don't play WoW.
It's a fun leveling treadmill, but one of the reasons leveling is fun is because you think you're building a character which will be useful and powerful later on.
Then, once you reach the level cap, you learn that anything worth doing requires an army of 40 people to do and that you are worthless on your own.
Needless to say, it sucks.
pvp
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on June 16, 2006, 01:24:13 AM
If any body wants to play with internet superstar, me, I'm starting an alt this weekend. Server: bloodscalp (horde)
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: KDR_11k on June 16, 2006, 02:45:29 AM
Sir_Stabbalot: Ya but where's the Chaos?
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Sir_Stabbalot on June 16, 2006, 05:05:17 AM
Oh, Chaos (corrupted humans) will also be playable. Thanks for reminding me.
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Kairon on June 16, 2006, 06:43:53 AM
The best thing about WoW is that it's so successful that everyone else will be forced to innovate or face being crushed under it's giant steel-toed boot.
~Carmine M. Red Kairon@aol.com
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on June 16, 2006, 06:46:24 AM
That's a funny way of saying that everyone will try to imitate it.
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Smash_Brother on June 16, 2006, 09:29:46 AM
Quote Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R pvp
I've followed someone on their grind to grand marshal. It's fun for a while, but all it takes is one week in which you don't PvP and your rank will slip. That, and you need to be in basically every battleground which starts up if you intend to advance in rank.
The other problem with WoW is that nothing matters, even temporarily. I like the idea of sieging cities because that will at least offer something in the way of having an actual effect on the world around you. In WoW, I can kill 5,000,000 enemy players and it's meaningless if I don't do it again the next week and all of those players are still up and about.
Kill all the NPCs in a town and they'll be back again like it never happened in 5 minutes. Kill an enemy leader, same thing. When the entire world will never change no matter how much you attempt to influence it, it's no better than a virtual amusement park: fun for a while, but you'll quickly realize how shallow it is.
And when you're gone, it'll be like you were never there at all.
Title: RE:World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on June 16, 2006, 12:39:25 PM
It's not about building your honor. It's about tormenting people. All day.
Title: RE: World of Warcraft anyone?
Post by: Smash_Brother on June 16, 2006, 02:38:55 PM
Heh, fair enough, but I never took an interest in ganking noobs.
Don't get me wrong: I love world PvP, but even on a PvP server, 90% of the PvP happens in battlegrounds, and usually against epic geared teams. The little world PvP I did participate in was always insanely fun, but since it only happens once in a blue moon, it ain't worth $15 a month for a game I enjoy playing maybe once a week.