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

Reader Comments (15)

Posted: May 16th 2011 8:09PM Yellowdancer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
...."although the fact that these servers still segregate PC and PS3 players will likely remain a sore point."...

No one is really complaining about this anymore.

Posted: May 16th 2011 8:12PM Furdinand said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Putting hundreds of thousands of folks on the same server felt Mega"
That number people per server bodes well for getting an epic feeling when cruising around the cities and for short queue times (although depending on role population balance some class might still have long waits).
That number also bodes well for the popularity of the game. Ideally we'd be seeing "millions of folks" but it is still a far cry from the total bomb that the trolls were claiming DCUO is.
The PC/PS3 server segregation really isn't a sorry spot for me. If anything it is the ways in which the two platforms are integrated (UI, updates) that I hate.

Posted: May 16th 2011 8:53PM Cam L Tow said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@Furdinand

"Putting hundreds of thousands of folks on the same server felt Mega"

Sorry not buying that for a second. There is a reason that they are doing this and it is not because overwhelming population numbers. In fact, it is just the opposite.

PR spin at it's finest.
Reply

Posted: May 16th 2011 9:04PM Suplyndmnd said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
@Cam L Tow

Hundreds of Thousands! HA! Unless there is a huge following on Consoles I don't see as I play the PC version. It's been a ghost town almost any time I get on and I think it should be criminal with their "wording" of stuff that is giving a HUGE false impression of this game. This game probably hasn't even SOLD Hundreds of thousands of copies. Hundreds or Thousands, yes, that I would be much more likely to believe.

I'm giving it a few days but between the crappy "We're sorry" stuff they give and the fact the game is dead there is no reviving this game. They need to start working on a F2P model fast.
Reply

Posted: May 16th 2011 9:48PM Yellowdancer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Suplyndmnd

Game sold over 800K the first month if you combine the two platforms. One of the webzines posted that. It did sell fast. Just no one stuck around afterwards.
Reply

Posted: May 17th 2011 8:30AM Lockisezmode said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Furdinand The server mergers this soon after the game launched proved what a total bomb is was. You can try and call a spade a duck but in the end its still a spade. DCUO was complete failboat just liked what many of the testers warned Sony it would become. They had time to add more content, playstyles, etc but Sony is terrible at producing MMOs. There is no arguing this.
Reply

Posted: May 16th 2011 8:19PM eyeball2452 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I get what they're trying to do. I just wonder how it will affect the community. However, anything that eliminates server xfer fees and allows friends to more easily play together is good in my book.

Personally, it sounds like the AoC instanced system that failed miserably though. Instance jumping was killer (bad) in that game. World instances didn't work so well in CoH either.

I think they key will be if they can get friends together in the right instance of the gameworld without having people typing, "I'm in Atlas 1" or whatever the AoC zones were. Just to reiterate, that breaks immersion and instance jumping was a huge problem in AoC, at least just after launch.

Posted: May 16th 2011 8:28PM Yellowdancer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@eyeball2452

One of the devs posted that an instance of Gotham or Metropolis would hold 1000+ players. So it won't be too bad.
Reply

Posted: May 16th 2011 8:38PM SKYeXile said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
heh, screenshot looks like they're fighting Malta...

Posted: May 16th 2011 11:12PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Hmm...it seems if there are name conflicts, the character who has the most logged time gets to keep the name and all the rest (if there are more than two) are offered renaming tokens.

This is a disaster in the making. There's really only two things that people care about when it comes to their superhero characters: the name and costume. Messing with either is just asking for trouble.

They should just implement Cryptic's method of a global name.

Posted: May 17th 2011 12:02AM Liltawen said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)
I agree.
It'll be a real mess.
The way they got around the 'naming' problem in Star Trek was for people to have a name plus a ship registry number which makes the name unique. In DCUo all the characters supposidly got their powers from Brainiacs nanobots-wouldn't the nanobots have unique registry numbers as well?
Yet another pointless controversy.
Reply

Posted: May 16th 2011 11:34PM Quarlo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I hope this solves some of the population problems. I joined the game bout 14 days after launch so I witnessed the 'Great Exodus'. Around the 30 day mark after launch the servers turned to ghost towns.

I gave it another 30 days, but the big flaw the game had for me was that it was too easy to level. You could reach max level in a week then you ran out of things to do. Their end-game content was your leveling content just harder.

Posted: May 17th 2011 5:39AM Averice said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I don't like f2p games, but this sounds like it could really use f2p. Kind of funny when a game starts failing the general attitude is to say it should go f2p.

Posted: May 17th 2011 6:28AM gandales said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It sounds to me like they are going to a similar version of CO, with the difference that instances can be for pve or pvp.
If the problem was high level instanced content with a version of wow battlegroup the problem should have been solved, but I guess they want to gather more open world teaming.

Hopefully, it will help the game to go back on track.

Posted: May 17th 2011 10:08AM Malagarr said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm still trying to figure out if this is a good thing or not. If they are simply trying to create a single shard, like how Cryptic handles CO, then this is a great thing...because folks will be able to use whatever character name they want (assuming it's legal) and will simply use an @handle to communicate. That was one of the best parts of CO...you could literally pick any character name that suited you (again, within reason) and not have to worry that someone else may have locked it. Furthermore, you don't have to worry about your friends playing on a different server than you. Anyone you know who plays will be playing on your server (unless they play a different ruleset).

But if it's just a glorified server merge, and we'll be forced to rename our toons in an FCFS fashion? Well, that will herald the end of the game.

Featured Stories

Make My MMO: October 19 - 25, 2014

Posted on Oct 25th 2014 8:00PM

Perfect Ten: My World of Warcraft launch memories

Posted on Oct 25th 2014 12:00PM

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW