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

Reader Comments (53)

Posted: Dec 23rd 2010 8:06AM The Protagonist said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It does seem familiar and certainly is inspired by many other MMOs in the genre, but thats not a bad thing really. As long as those features are done properly, are an improvement or feature slight variations which improve the game Im all for it. Personally, I was a WoW player for years but just got bored of it all so was always looking for something similar to it with slight differences and improvements done properly and not a cheap rip off. Hopefully this will be it, the same but different :-)

Posted: Dec 23rd 2010 8:10AM Grumms said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
In all seriousness and honesty,

It REALLY is a WAR/WoW hybrid.

Not saying that's a bad thing. Although, I'm anti-WoW mostly.

It's not a bad game, the beta was pretty polished and fun. Just seems like...I've played it before I've...played it?

Posted: Dec 23rd 2010 8:18AM gildhur said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Aion's visual style and some story similarities + War's PQ system (with added randomness) + every other MMO's quest/UI/gear system + new class concept = Fun™

Posted: Dec 23rd 2010 8:47AM Grendel said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I was searching around but couldn't find an answer: are there plans for a housing-system or something like that? I just need my place to hang around and rest my feet.

Posted: Dec 23rd 2010 9:06AM Morioch said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I'd say WAR but for different reasons than most.

RIFTS has some structural issues which I think will cause the game some long term problems.

The beginning experience is repetitious. There are only two starter areas with a very linear path forward. From what I was able to glean, you don't get much choice of where to go until level 20. The "it gets fun later" excuse has long outlived it's shelf-life. Most players want a game to be fun when it starts not at some later point.

Class selection is another problem. There are only three souls to choose from the start. What if I don't want to be a shaman, a ranger, a champion?


So if you start a second or third character, you'll always only have two places to start and the same low level zones to play through along with the same three souls\class to start with.

I think these will be big long term problems.

Posted: Dec 23rd 2010 9:58AM Gaugamela said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@Morioch

1st: WAR had a truckload of starter areas so I ca't see how that is similar to Rift.

2nd: You can choose from 4 archetypes and then a bunch of souls from there on. You can choose 3 different souls along the way from many choices and they are still tweaking the system.

3rd: Did you actually played the game till endgame to know it's replay value?? yeah, I thought so.
The starter experience can be improved and the first 20 levels aren't that important. Hell people reached level 20 in 3 days!!!

So stop spouting crap and misconceptions about the game.

The game doesn't even have a release date and trolls are already doing what they do best.

Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2010 10:15AM chum said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Gaugamela Guy...the article asked for opinons. Morioch isn't trolling at all. The game reminds him of WAR. I would say more WoW but the game uses the same engine as WAR and the Rifts feel just like PQ's. I'm sure the game will be moderately successful so don't take the criticisms to heart.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2010 10:24AM Gaugamela said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@chum

I don't take the criticisms to heart I just find moronic that he says that it suffers from structural problems comparing it to WAR and the examples he gives are the number of starter areas and the soul system.

WAR had 6 starter areas. Is that similar to Rift?

The devs stated that they will let people toy around earlier with the soul system.

So where the fuck are the structural problems he mentioned???

I get pissed off at people dissing games and spreading misconceptions based on a CLOSED BETA.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2010 10:26AM Screwie said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Morioch The devs have already said they're expanding on the number of starting souls and opening up all 8-per-calling from the start, perhaps as soon as the next beta.

As for your other point, yeah I'd like to see a bit more variety in pathing, but I'm not a fan of multiple starting areas (they're a barrier to stop me playing with my friends). Perhaps some of the zones that have been sealed off in beta so far are alternative levelling paths?
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2010 11:27AM Morioch said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@Gaugamela

The comparison was about "structural issues". I can see how it was unclear and how it seemed I was saying both had the same problems with starter areas. WAR had different structural issues that related to PvP - the way open rvr worked (from the rewards to having too many battlefronts).

I don't need to play to endgame to know about the beginning area replay value. The first approx 20 levels will be the same for each character you make in a faction.

It's a game. I find nothing more pathetic than someone who invests so much passion into a game, no less an unreleased game that they have financial stake in. I'm sorry to get you so worked up, princess.

I looked forward to RIFTS, but I found it to be lacking.

I doubt they will add more starter areas and low level zones at this point, based on prior experience with other MMOs. It sounds like they are ramping up for release.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2010 12:15PM SFGamer69 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Morioch

Agreed. Though I immediately found myself feeling like i was playing WoW with an updated skin, that was not a bad thing per se. It made it easy to get into the game right away. But the similarities in so many of the features (other than the rifts, which i quite enjoyed) were uncanny.

Is this innovative, not really, it's more of the same with a few sprinkles of new ideas, but thats the only way things will change in games...slowly and over time. As someone mentioned, investors want return on their dollar, and taking chances on untried mechanics and gameplay is dangerous ground for young studios, and sadly, the gaming masses dont provide strong enough support to the indie game makers willing to take those chances from the start.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2010 9:18AM Theeinferno said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
After playing it, it felt more like WoW than anything else. Just with a twist, that's all. So, I played it for 30mins, and went back to playing WoW.

Posted: Dec 23rd 2010 9:45AM mfresen said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Developers are stuck in a rut with MMORPGs. This is what happens when you have a business model based on pleasing as many people as possible across broad demographics -- you get bad art, like with TV and Hollywood: mediocre concepts hung on tried-and-true frameworks. It works because the lowest common denominator loves familiarity.

It's expensive to make games, and people who pay for said games (aka investors/publishers, NOT developers) want their money back and they want it back ASAP. That means: don't take risks, do what you know will sell not what you *hope* will sell. And, as any artist can tell you, this is not the spirit in which good stuff is created. Ever.

This is why it is so important to support games like Mortal Online and Darkfall, even when they're not perfect at launch. Much like indie/art-house movies, these are the places where real art is being attempted. So what if it fails at X, Y, or Z ... at least those titles are ambitious. There is nothing interesting or laudable about an effort like Rift; they should have saved everyone the trouble and not bothered, honestly.

Posted: Dec 23rd 2010 2:30PM eLdritchZ said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@mfresen Or, people just like the EQ slew of MMOs... I for one wouldn't touch Mortal Online or Darkfall if they'd pay me to do so... not because the games are bad but because I don't like that type of MMO...

The game itself doesn't really remind me of any other MMO, it's just certain systems and workings of the game that seem familiar, which is kind of obvious when one looks at what they set out to do. I dunno, I like the game and that's pretty much all that matters to me....

In the end, what's the point of saying "this is totally like GAME XY"? It's a generalization which doesn't even imply positivity or negativity... it's just as useful of a statement as saying "this tastes like chicken"...

normally i like your daily grinds but i have to say this one is kind of meh ;)
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2010 9:49AM Syesta said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It does to a point where it's preventing me from being excited about it or from playing it (during beta phases) for any extended amount of time.

Posted: Dec 23rd 2010 9:54AM RizzRustbolt said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
As I told people in the Beta, Rift has too many different colors to be Vanguard.

Posted: Dec 23rd 2010 10:01AM Gaugamela said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It gives me deja vu but I don't consider that bad. If it has the good things of WAR and Wow with a level of polish comparable to this last one then it will be a great game.

Plus, the developers always marketed the game as a traditional MMORPG with a twist (the rifts).
I just don't understand what some people were expecting from "traditional MMO with a twist".

Posted: Dec 23rd 2010 10:01AM Daelen said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
Hands down its a WAR redux. My problem with Rift is the performance of the engine. The last beta improved it but its still crap in comparison to every MMO thats already launched and launching in the short term. You can't look like WAR and perform like VG did at launch. VG today performs great, but if Rift launches without a magic +400% performance patch it'll be DoA.

Posted: Dec 23rd 2010 10:06AM Sharuk said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Daelen What type of performance issues out of curiosity?

After the patch I was getting 50 - 60 FPS and massive full zone invasions where there are 100s of players in the same area beating on the boss dropped my fps but there was no lag.

If the same number of people would have been on Aion sieges my computer would have crashed. If the same amount of people were in WoW's Wintergrasp my computer would lag for minutes.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2010 10:21AM Gaugamela said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Daelen

My brother played and didn't have a single problem with the game during Beta 1.
Maybe a problem on your end?

And making a full scale event with hundreds of players and mobs in the same area without a server crash and barely any lag is something that I don't know of any other MMO to have accomplished while in Beta.
Reply

Featured Stories

One Shots: Ignore physics and jump already!

Posted on Dec 28th 2014 10:00AM

Make My MMO: December 21 - 27, 2014

Posted on Dec 27th 2014 8:00PM

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW