| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (41)

Posted: Jul 16th 2010 8:28AM Khannington said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Hmm hard one to pick. My 2 options are:

1. Tabula Rasa - Second Playable faction - They really created an action/RPG shooter without an opposing playable faction?!

2. WAR - Add 3rd playable faction when in pre-beta. They did it with DAOC, the 3 faction balance in a PVP game is vital.

Cheers,

Khannage

Posted: Jul 16th 2010 2:48PM BrianH said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
3 factions certainly isn't vital.
even though it may not be your cup of tea, i know of at least one very "successful" game with only 2 factions, and pvp is thriving there.
Reply

Posted: Jul 16th 2010 6:16PM Regault said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
A 3rd playable faction in WAR would be completely unmanageable without heavily damaging the lore. I really don't see any way for lizardmen, wood elves, and skaven to team up, and the two undead factions are both centered around ridiculously powerful heroes backed up by mindless skeleton armies.

You might be able to work out a Brettonia/wood elf alliance, but lizardmen are isolationists living on a separate continent. Also, without mounted combat there is absolutely nothing to distinguish the Brettonians from Empire.


Personally, I'd go to Champions and STO and remove zone instancing from the game. I'd also make Champions endgame rewards focused on unlocking new power effects and costume pieces, and remove PvP from the game.
Reply

Posted: Jul 16th 2010 8:49AM Itanius said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Insert inevitable and sincere vote for Star Wars Galaxies. So much potential, yet so many bad decisions. Le sigh.

Posted: Jul 16th 2010 9:14AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Absolutely SW:G

Better design decisions (I won't spell out the J word), better graphics, balanced combat system. It would be a hit.
Reply

Posted: Jul 16th 2010 8:49AM Faryon said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
AoC: Open world and less focus on "the best" graphics.
Tabula Rasa: Agree with Khannage, that game really needed a second faction.
SWG: Redevelop the damn thing from the start with the original ideas behind it and a better game-engine.
STO: More time in development, make ground combat fun, PvE for Klingons at launch, ect.

Posted: Jul 16th 2010 9:06AM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Vanguard, As far as I can tell the highest potential in an mmo yet.

1) lower end performance requirements, wow had this idea right, you shouldn't need to know how to build and modify your own comp just for an mmo.
2) If Sony bought it Much earlier or never at all things would have been much better from the get go.
3) better starting experience, it was too difficult to grip the occasional "wow tourist"

Tera, Poor marketing (in my book)

1) I know sex sells, but please do not let the bulk of your leaked/previews be based on unreal woman that some Japanese hentai pervert draws.
2) Show up more action more late game, less scripted beauty.
3) Same deal as 1 above, I might give it a try, if every SS didnt make me think that my 1 gig ddr5 Radeon HD 5870: 8gb ddr3 1600 ram, and quad core processor was going to need to run it on low.

Warhammer Online:

1) Less servers from the get go
2) More scenario statistic monitoring from the get go
3) More pve emphasis, pvp is Dope but when a game is only good to play during prime time hours something is wrong.

Posted: Jul 16th 2010 9:08AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Edit:
2) Show us* more action and* more late game, less scripted beauty.
Reply

Posted: Jul 16th 2010 9:19AM macscarfe said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Quietly get rid of the guy who came up with the concept of End Game and thus making the remainder of the game up till that fictional point rather pointless in a lot of peoples minds. It's the journey not the arrival that's the most fun.

Posted: Jul 16th 2010 9:53AM Pewpdaddy said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I agree yet disagree, while the journey is part of the experience. I much prefer end game, though I don't feel the rest is pointless. The journey is how you learn and fine tune your skillz for end game.

To feel the ride there is pointless means your really missing the point. IMO the folks who fall into this category may as well save the rest of us some time and go DIAF. If you rush to end game you typically play your class like crap and flip out like Mr. -50DKP when someone needs help tuning their skillz to fill a role in a raid group.
Reply

Posted: Jul 16th 2010 9:57AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Your right, it should be, but mmorpgs are about comparative status and challenge, and you never seem to find either of those till max level, cause thats when mmorpgs truly offer the most experiences.

no one ever cared who the best level 40 was, but everyone wants to be the top dog, when you get to be 80. (to put it into a sad little wow box)
Reply

Posted: Jul 16th 2010 9:36AM Deadalon said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I played STO Demo last week and I have to say... What on earth was Cryptic thinking. Then I played Champions Online and I realised... They were taking the biggest shortcut in the history of MMOs by taking CO and slap ST on it.

Star Trek Online could have been an awsome game and very populare if done correct. But... Nothing is done correct. The game feels dead.... the groundcombat is moronic. Space combat is childish. And no onscreen message from inside the starship is playin stupid.

Cryptic studios get the vote from me as the worst possible ever handeling of an IP. Im really shocked that they were even allowed by the IP to release this horror.

Posted: Jul 16th 2010 10:32AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'd go back to what ever point the wow style of MMO came out where everything was safe and you just had a theme park style ride after ride to go on and then get bored of and swap it for the "players create the end game" mindset.

That and drum into people that "AWESOME QUALITY" is way better than "vast content"

Posted: Jul 16th 2010 12:33PM Sean D said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
MMOs have grown in accordance with the demands of the player bases. *We* are the ones that sacrificed quality for quantity and demanded a 'theme park' ride in every one. Aside from advances in one aspect or other such as complete VO, different pay models (arguably not an advance that is ultimately aimed at benefiting the player), improved graphics or unique graphics styles, single shard universes, etc., the industry is falling into a rut. Many concepts like 'the holy trinity' have found their way to the heart of all the mainstream MMOs (and table-top RPGs as a result - absurd) and now it's hard to imagine how anything could be different.

Blizzard did a great job showing the world that MMOs can be mind-blowingly profitable, but one of the side-effects and probably the most detrimental one to the industry was the belief they inspired that the way they did it was the right way - the only way.

Hell, look at SW:ToR. Bioware has long been a name synonymous with quality, immersive RPGs, but even they have a hard time breaking away from Blizzard-founded ideas. Just look at the UI and classes they've come up with. Many of us have said that Blizzard 'did a lot right'. I have. And they did. But that doesn't mean what they did is the only way or even the best way to do things anymore.

If I were to go back and change something it would be the player base. It's because of our whining that MMOs have become what they are. We've funneled developers into a single design-scheme. We've asked them to make every MMO the same and so the majority of them are so similar in so many ways it really doesn't matter which one you play - the experiences of playing (of leveling up, killing rats, button-mashing, etc.) are the same because of it.

I would encourage the player base to be more respectful, open, and supportive of new ideas in the industry and slower to condemn them.
Reply

Posted: Jul 16th 2010 9:58AM AllenJB said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I would find the key game that launched EA into the big time, go back and trash it. I don't know off hand what that game was -we may lose a real gem. But, I wholeheartedly believe that the loss of one gem will easily be countered by the massacre of the game studios that has been EAs career being averted.


Option number 2 would have to be going back to the point where Reakktor killed Neocron 1 and steering them in a better direction. I think I'd have to think quite hard about exactly what point this was tho. Off the top of my head, I think it's when they locked all the GRs down, making it much harder to jump into op fights, so they ended up being far too short and far too one sided.

Posted: Jul 16th 2010 9:58AM The Other Chris said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Tabula Rasa: playable 2nd faction, more emphasis on the runes/symbols and allow them to be augmented with other runes, allowing much higher character customization. Much more thought out (and balanced) character classes/tiers.

STO: Ship interiors should have been a focus, thus allowing for a number of missions from within the ship (you know, like the shows). Klingon faction actually fleshed out. Less emphasis on the C-Store. One more year in development.

Auto Assault: More focus on fun car-combat, rather than trying to shoehorn the 'holy trinity' into a car combat game. On-foot stuff needed an improvement as well.

WoW:LK: Stats on gear inflated way too much, too much emphasis on AoE, CC was useless, 5-mans too excruciatingly boring, still nothing for non-raiders to do at level cap.

SWToR: Less emphasis on the holy trinity, faster paced combat, Bounty Hunters and Smugglers should not be forced into a 'faction'.

Guild Wars 2: I should have been brought in as a tester at least a year ago.

Posted: Jul 16th 2010 10:19AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
how is it that you are able to add a game that hasn't released yet?

..oh wait ..TIME MACHINE! MY BAD NM!
Reply

Posted: Jul 16th 2010 10:33AM The Other Chris said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
See the pic at the top of the page, should explain everything. ;)
Reply

Posted: Jul 16th 2010 10:04AM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
1. WAR - For all the reasons stated above. So much potential wasted.

2. EVE - MUCH more intuitive and attractive UI. You shouldn't need 5 wikis and a graduate degree in geometry to understand basic combat/game mechanics.

Posted: Jul 16th 2010 10:03AM macscarfe said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Auto Assault: More focus on fun car-combat, rather than trying to shoehorn the 'holy trinity' into a car combat game. On-foot stuff needed an improvement as well."

What should have been Mad Max turned into Mad Devs

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW