Archives > Gaming
Kingdom Come. If RS dies we're moving to this game.
Mister Kyle:
I'd say personnel and funding. However it seems like it's getting a strong backing, and I'm sure after a year or so they'll actually consider it.
Sean:
--- Quote from: Randy on January 22, 2014, 11:45:08 pm ---
--- Quote from: Colinwarrior on January 22, 2014, 11:33:45 pm ---Looks pretty neat. Kind of irrelevant if it's single-player. But as you said, it's still in early stages of development.
--- End quote ---
It seems like a complete wasted opportunity to a potentially perfect multiplayer game.
30v30 castle sieges? Horseback combat?
If this game doesn't have multi maybe it will be successful enough to spark other developers' interest in this sort of thing.
PLZ WARHORSE PLS
--- End quote ---
If you want large castle sieges with hundreds of players, you can get that now to an extent in Guild Wars 2. Even more so in Elder Scrolls Online, when it's released in April.
Mojo:
Interesting o.O
Randy:
--- Quote from: Colinwarrior on January 23, 2014, 03:07:59 am ---
--- Quote from: Randy on January 22, 2014, 11:45:08 pm ---
--- Quote from: Colinwarrior on January 22, 2014, 11:33:45 pm ---Looks pretty neat. Kind of irrelevant if it's single-player. But as you said, it's still in early stages of development.
--- End quote ---
It seems like a complete wasted opportunity to a potentially perfect multiplayer game.
30v30 castle sieges? Horseback combat?
If this game doesn't have multi maybe it will be successful enough to spark other developers' interest in this sort of thing.
PLZ WARHORSE PLS
--- End quote ---
Yeah we can only hope. Although I don't know why this developer wouldn't implement MP technology to this game. It's like...the perfect game for it.
Maybe they lack the personnel to develop and maintain it? Lack the funding? Don't have the servers to run it on?
--- End quote ---
I played GW2 for a month. Was boring. They hyped it up as no grind but the game was 100% grind. Story was super uninteresting as well.
Sean:
--- Quote from: Randy on January 23, 2014, 08:32:45 pm ---
--- Quote from: Colinwarrior on January 23, 2014, 03:07:59 am ---
--- Quote from: Randy on January 22, 2014, 11:45:08 pm ---
--- Quote from: Colinwarrior on January 22, 2014, 11:33:45 pm ---Looks pretty neat. Kind of irrelevant if it's single-player. But as you said, it's still in early stages of development.
--- End quote ---
It seems like a complete wasted opportunity to a potentially perfect multiplayer game.
30v30 castle sieges? Horseback combat?
If this game doesn't have multi maybe it will be successful enough to spark other developers' interest in this sort of thing.
PLZ WARHORSE PLS
--- End quote ---
Yeah we can only hope. Although I don't know why this developer wouldn't implement MP technology to this game. It's like...the perfect game for it.
Maybe they lack the personnel to develop and maintain it? Lack the funding? Don't have the servers to run it on?
--- End quote ---
I played GW2 for a month. Was boring. They hyped it up as no grind but the game was 100% grind. Story was super uninteresting as well.
--- End quote ---
There's very little grind if you play dungeons at the appropriate levels (i.e. Ascalonian Catacombs the second you hit 30/35), although admittedly that's hard with elitist speed runners everywhere demanding gear checks. It is indeed very grindy if you do the hearts, but if you explore and just do random events, it's actually pretty decent. Takes 3-4 days of moderate play to max out at level 80. The big issue imo with GW2 is a complete lack of PvE endgame - unless you just want to run Fractals over and over. And the guild support is pretty shocking, still no guild halls, still no way for guild vs guild PvP. :/
I agree though, the personal story was quite lacklustre.
(I've not played GW2 in months btw, due to the aforementioned lack of endgame)