Jump to content

ferroz

Members
  • Posts

    2,987
  • Joined

Everything posted by ferroz

  1. Really? So, you haven't experienced any server downtime due to the dev's patching fixes to broken patches, and don't agree that this actually happened? You haven't experienced the fact that harbinger went offline when all other servers were fine and disagree that it actually happened? You haven't experienced that space combat is on rails, or you disagree that this is the case? you haven't experienced having to load between your ship and and the planet or between instances and disagree that it happens? Your experience is that the player base isn't quite friendly and that the immature people are in the minority? (or you disagree that this is the case?) Really, if you claim that have not experienced any of the OP's remarks or disagree with all of the OP's remarks... that seems a rather untenable position.
  2. Ah, so they had the 3rd most subs for about 3 months, and then dropped to 4th. Nice catch. you did not qualify the statement in that paragraph with the word "western" No mention of western in that paragraph. In order for that to be a true claim you'd need that "western" qualifier again. The point remains: the reality is that you're adding qualifiers to make it look like SWG was actually successful; compared to the games that before it, SWG had virtually no staying power and compared to games after it, SWG had a very small player base. The one where you didn't say western.
  3. Can they do it when the game loses 20-25% of it's player base in a quarter? Chat bubbles, among other things.
  4. No, 2nd most was lineage2; 3rd most was EQ and then 4th most was SWG. You have to add qualifiers to make it actually be the 2nd most. the reality is that SWG had a very short spike in subscriptions (2 years) and then crashed and burned when the norm for successful MMOs was holding steady for 6-8+ years .... and even at it's best it barely edged out a game that was released in the previous decade... There's no western bit to ignore in that claim; there was a "western" qualifier in the pervious one, but not the one that about "> 1 million subs pre wow" .
  5. he's just upset because he didn't get a chance to get in on it before it was cool.
  6. and basically none of the new content would have voiceover.
  7. You left out a lot of them. Among them: UO was nearly as popular as SWG, even at SWG's peak see http://web.archive.org/web/20110714105823/http://www.mmogchart.com/Chart2.html http://web.archive.org/web/20110714105201/http://www.mmogchart.com/Chart3.html
  8. meh, it barely edged out a game that was 6 years older than it, and never touched the one that was 4 years older than it. No, both lineage and lineage 2 had more than 1 million before wow launched. You can qualify that with "western mmo" but that throwing qualifiers on it like that is bordering on doublespeak.
  9. No, there aren't any quotation marks, and no reference to Lincoln in the post that you quoted (unless I just scanned it too quick to notice it), so the text that you quoted isn't marked as a quote of Lincoln. So that means he's not misquoting, he's paraphrasing. So he paraphrased Lincoln. the successful ones didn't feel empty when the game had only been out for 6 months... No, that definitely wasn't the case in other MMOs. Easy example: in EQ, the low level zones had people in them even after multiple expansions had occurred. Crushbone, oasis, and similar old world zones were pretty heavily populated even after the 3rd expansion, and the kunark zones remained populated long after that.
  10. The idea that the quality of the content is better than other themepark mmos (let alone significantly better) is laughable at best.
  11. Indeed, and people don't want to because it's useless. the fact that the current lfg tool is useless for some people does not not mean that SWTOR is "not the game for them" ... it just means that the current lfg tool is useless...
  12. Eh, I 'm sure he's just as capable of guessing as you are. Without official numbers it's kind of silly to claim that it's a tiny fraction
  13. No, getting badges and gear is certainly not an effect that people have to tolerate (having to tolerate it means that it would need to be a negative effect), caused by the lfg tool, and by cross server in specific. If you want to use that as a counter argument, you need to show that the lfg tool, specifically one that's cross server, caused a negative effect on the game.... you need to show cause, not just show a correlation. You also need to show that they can't be totally avoided by simply not using the tool, and that it's intrinsic to having any lfg tool (or of adding cross server in general) because otherwise it's not a given that adding a cross server lfg tool tool to swtor would cause that effect. In your example is "rewards, to be able to do daily & weekly pve quest´s" ... that not a valid argument because you can totally avoid those rewards and daily and weekly pve quests by simply not using the tool. and? No... the calim is that it never happens in wow. If I can give a single counter example of it happenging, his claim is false. His experiences are irrelevant to that fact. No, we casual players love using it. Certainly it was present. It was also extremely common by the time that TBC rolled around, pretty much the norm by early wrath (well before cross server lfg). You probably just stuck to playing with your friends rather than doing much pugging and therefore missed it. That behavior had been common in MMOs, even before wow launched and made the genre mainstream.
  14. No, I don't play alliance, so there was very little reason to go there other than exploration Yes. Yes. And I quested in both of them after they added lfg as well; no actual difference in the number of people in those zones from my dk and druid alts (in the 3-4 months prior to the lfg tool) and my mage and hunter alts (several months after lfg, and several months after cata released, respectively) edit: I waited quite a bit before starting my goblin hunter... if I had played my goblin hunter immediately after cata launch, I have been playing in more populated zones, since there were quite a few people doing the new quest lines (I did some of them on my shaman main, when I was way past the level for them and ran into quite a few people). But that's an outlier due to the expansion, so isn't all that relevant. Except that didn't happen... the zones were dead long before the lfg tool entered the picture.
  15. I deny that there are any effects on the game from the tool. Demonstrate that this is true, or stop pretending that it's the case. If you can't show that there are actual effects on the game, that are caused by (not just correlated with) the existence of tool that do indeed affect the people who choose not to use the tool, then this isn't a valid counter argument. How are your experiences relevant? The claim was that it doesn't happen... at all ... to anyone. I'm saying that what you've said is false, because I have had it happen, repeatedly. Your experience doesn't have any relevance, unless you're claiming to have been present in the groups that I had that occur in... /shrug ... worked fairly well for us. in xlfg they get booted or the team would drop and find another one. The 'tank' would get ignored and be down another 4 players. seems exactly the same to me. yes indeed it was ... a huge number of servers in EQ swtiched from nbg as the default looting method in pugs to open rolls during pop (particularity for ornate armor molds/patterns, but also scrolls and runes, and other drops in PoS/BoT/Tactics). There was quite a bit of discussion on that on the old EQ caster's realm forums. The idea that it was "everyone for themselves" has been common in mmo pugs since before WoW was released. I'd say that it started changed in late velious/early luclin in EQ and by the time PoP had released it was pretty much the norm. I've already said how it goes for me ... you're response is that you didn't believe me.
  16. No, the same thing happens in an lfd group ... the tank kept dying on ozruk (partially by not dodging, and partially by dispelling the shield before the healer could self dot). Likewise, several fails on Asaad because the healer hadn't spec'd into being able to dispell magic and people couldn't time the jumps to avoid static cling. Same for Baron Ashbury (variety of fails, some related to interrupts, some related to not enough dps at the end burn phase, etc). Same for Ripsnarl, 2 dps with bad burst dps, and an undergeared healer). If I sat down and took more than a minute to think about it, I could come up with dozens of examples where pug groups in lfd stayed and worked through the issues and learned the fights. Personally I didn't find Bulwark to be rocket science; for the most part, you just hit it like you mean it...
  17. No, it's not created by xserver; it's the result of pugging in general. The same attitude was just as common in pugs in EQ ~a decade ago (say, during the PoP and ldon expansions).
  18. I had about 1 in 50 runs wind up as a bad because of any of the problems that you're citing here. I had somewhere over 1000 full pug lfg runs (plus about as many that were either guild groups or partial guild groups with pugs), just to put that in perspective. I suspect that you either had a couple of bad experiences and are just exaggerating, or that you went from never pugging before lfg to doing lots of pugs after lfd (and are therefore treating problems that are strictly due to pugging as being specifically caused by cross server), or you're just making this up.
  19. No, in general players really think that most people don't log into the game... they're not even bothering to log into fleet and sit there doing nothing.
  20. Yeah... so the one that doesn't do anything and is far less effective than standing around in fleet spamming for 3 hours. Got it. We're aware of that "tool"; it's useless. In particular, it doesn't help someone get a mid 30s group together when there isn't a healer logged on that's between level 25 and 45. On the other hand, a cross server lfg tool puts those people into a group in seconds.
  21. No, I'll ask for an xserver lfg tool and point out how it fixes the problem and how a single server one doesn't fix the problem, as well as why the current lfg tool doesn't fix the problem. In addition to that, I'm not interested in re-rolling on another server. Not at all. I can make friends-a-plenty with cross server lfg. No, game developers that want to please the majority of their audience cause content nerfs, especially when they've used content nerfs for that reason for several years. The exact same number of bad players showed up with cross server. Nothing you said above contradicts that fact: Nerfs to content cause changes to the challenge. Cross server lfg does not in any way require nerfs to content. Actually, they nerfed that content into the ground before single server lfg came out, and then followed that up another half dozen or so nerfs well before cross server was released. No, they've done more nerfs before cross server than after cross server. And even if it did (which isn't the case) you're still not showing anything other than correlation. The reality is that both games were already nerfing the content to make it more accessible, and that cross server didn't cause the nerfs in the slightest. That's just totally false: the dungeons were already easy, and could already be aoe stomped through in 10-30 minutes before lfd. If you were taking 2+ hours to do a dungeon before lfd was released, it's kind of laughable for you to be calling people "bads"
  22. interesting theory. The cross server lfg tool doesn't make anything easier. It just makes it less tedious.
×
×
  • Create New...