Curse

azzer20 · Sep 15, 2008, 01:30 PM // 13:30

so, am i the only one that knows you can play both WAR and WoW? it seems so, iøll play WAR for PvP and WoW for PvE, it's really that easy.

and no, WoW won't be killed, WAR will get some people from WoW, some will drop WAR after 1 month, some will come from halo to WAR, and so on.

Nothing is set in stone, WAR will have a better start than AoC, as Mythic has done this before.

nekopowa · Sep 15, 2008, 01:45 PM // 13:45

I've been in WAR open beta and currently playing head start. So far the game is brilliant. Perfect game for me until GW2 comes out.

Zinger314 · Sep 15, 2008, 04:42 PM // 16:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by azzer20

so, am i the only one that knows you can play both WAR and WoW? it seems so, iøll play WAR for PvP and WoW for PvE, it's really that easy.

I refuse to pay two monthly fees though. (I did play GW and WoW at the same time, though, for that reason)

I haven't really looked at WAR info, I'll be checking that out.

Abedeus · Sep 15, 2008, 05:43 PM // 17:43

Heh. Warhammer already has 1,5 retail copies shipped to distributors, all already are pre-ordered. I'm getting my copy in two days. Meanwhile, tomorrow I finally start the game in Head Start. Too bad I'm at US servers - EU and Collector Editions play since today and yesterday respectively.

Numa Pompilius · Sep 15, 2008, 05:50 PM // 17:50

For all the hype about Warhammer online... Man, it's fugly. It's uglier than GW, and GW is a three year old game. I actually think it's even uglier than WoW, and I didn't think that was humanly possible.

It can still be a good game, but... damn!

jackie · Sep 15, 2008, 06:05 PM // 18:05

WAR's European server guys/customer support GOA is a total joke. There was Open Beta in Europe & USA last week and while in USA everything went quite smoothly without much problems in EU it was HELL. It would be ok if beta is like months before release...I'm really worried how GOA will pull this out, WAR is quite interesting game and has potential. Link about the problems, quite funny ;-)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Drnz1...eature=related

Owoc · Sep 15, 2008, 08:10 PM // 20:10

Regarding class balance, they just dumped spectral transformation. I don't play shaman and I still find this atrocious.

If blizz ever opened pre-tbc/wotlk realms, I'd return to play there in a flash. Tbc and wotlk don't appeal much to me.

Abedeus · Sep 15, 2008, 08:29 PM // 20:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Numa Pompilius

For all the hype about Warhammer online... Man, it's fugly. It's uglier than GW, and GW is a three year old game. I actually think it's even uglier than WoW, and I didn't think that was humanly possible.

It can still be a good game, but... damn!

LOOOW DEEETAAAILS

CLOOOSEEED BEEETAAA.

Try to find High Quality graphics with AA and other things.

Btw, last add-on to GW was in 2007 and last game that upped graphics/requirements in 2006. So one and a half year old game.

http://www.warhammeralliance.com/for...=macro+program

Hai better than Aion with Unreal T3 engine.

enxa · Sep 15, 2008, 09:07 PM // 21:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Numa Pompilius

For all the hype about Warhammer online... Man, it's fugly. It's uglier than GW, and GW is a three year old game. I actually think it's even uglier than WoW, and I didn't think that was humanly possible.

It can still be a good game, but... damn!

Low settings, but still better than WoW.

DarkNecrid · Sep 15, 2008, 10:00 PM // 22:00

Quote:

Also, we have seen Mythic only handle "success". There is no telling what they might pull if they get under similar stress like Funcom did. They probably will not do worse than Funcom ... that is nearly impossible, but they still could do pretty badly.

Incorrect.

I give you the ToA expansion for DAOC, one of the most hated expansions of all time. They admitted their mistake, and kept on trucking. Years later they've learned from it.

Quote:

For all the hype about Warhammer online... Man, it's fugly. It's uglier than GW, and GW is a three year old game. I actually think it's even uglier than WoW, and I didn't think that was humanly possible.

It can still be a good game, but... damn!

They look better than WoW, you're just used to WoW's bloom and fond memories. They do look better than GW too at max graphics and AA & AF on, easily, but a lot of people mistake grittiness done on purpose as ugly, when Warhammer is a very gritty world. It's supposed to look dark and ugly, but the graphics sure as hell aren't ugly.

Bryant Again · Sep 15, 2008, 11:52 PM // 23:52

When I see WAR's graphics, it's much less "wow, how fugly" and more "hey, I could run that!"

That said: DAMMIT NECRID I WANNA BE A CHOPPAH WAAAAH

imnotyourmother · Sep 16, 2008, 05:16 PM // 17:16

It seems to all be a money game. Take a poll and give the players what they want. GW could learn something from this. Where is the community rep? who knows. Since Grey left there is nothing. Can not even get a responce from the new one when they actually are in an outpost. GIAR - give it a rest

DarkNecrid · Sep 16, 2008, 11:32 PM // 23:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by imnotyourmother

It seems to all be a money game. Take a poll and give the players what they want. GW could learn something from this. Where is the community rep? who knows. Since Grey left there is nothing. Can not even get a responce from the new one when they actually are in an outpost. GIAR - give it a rest

Gaile still pops in-game, and they did give the players wanted, which was title grind and stuff to do in PvE because the *hardcore* PvErs who were so illiterate to look up what the game was for (HELLO they said multiple times in interviews it was a PvP game and they wanted it to be the ultimate competitive game, PvE to PvP gogogo) wanted something to do because ArenaNet didn't make a substantial PvE game because PvE was supposed to be one big tutorial.

Hell, you could say that ArenaNet gave too much what the players wanted. It killed the game and they betrayed their original design.

At least PvP is still vaguely in touch with this original design. Still got titles that ruin a few modes, but at least there's no skills that scale in power with those titles or anything.

wetsparks · Sep 17, 2008, 01:49 AM // 01:49

Same thing going on here that always happens. The next game is always better, the current game got ruined. The bullshit is staggering. War WILL NOT kill WoW. Nothing will kill WoW except for Blizzard when they shut the servers down in 2020 (they could lose 10% of their player base a year for 10 years and still be a force).

What you should know is that Vivindi released their financial report not to long ago and said that WoW's player base grew with the release of AoC to 10.9 million. WotLK will bring players back and bring in new players and expect there to be an announcement saying that there are 11 or maybe even 12 million subscribers.

fenix · Sep 17, 2008, 01:54 AM // 01:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by wetsparks

Same thing going on here that always happens. The next game is always better, the current game got ruined. The bullshit is staggering. War WILL NOT kill WoW. Nothing will kill WoW except for Blizzard when they shut the servers down in 2020 (they could lose 10% of their player base a year for 10 years and still be a force).

What you should know is that Vivindi released their financial report not to long ago and said that WoW's player base grew with the release of AoC to 10.9 million. WotLK will bring players back and bring in new players and expect there to be an announcement saying that there are 11 or maybe even 12 million subscribers.

You're underestimating WAR. A LARGE number of players will migrate over to it. WoW isn't that good a game that nothing can 'beat' it. Just a lot of small companies have tried and failed.

DarkNecrid · Sep 17, 2008, 01:56 AM // 01:56

That's good because WAR isn't trying to kill WoW anyways and no one really cares if it does or not. Mythic doesn't give a shit about trying to beat WoW, because trying to compete with it directly is dumb. They're doing their own thing and trying to do something WoW failed at, real World PvP with actual rewards.

But it is pretty foolish to say nothing will kill WoW until they shut down the servers. They said that about Everquest and Ultima Online too, eventually an MMORPG grows too old and changes get made because the newer competition scares the company behind the older game, and since the changes are so hastily made and the game is so old that people are starting to care less and less, the game crumbles. C'est la vie dans le genre MMORPG.

In all seriousness, WoW will probably fail from a big game from a big giant company as well, from it's own doing out of fear, or from Blizzard's newer nex-gen MMORPG not related to Diablo/SC/WC that all Blizzard fans will go to because hey, new universe from Blizzard! But to say it won't die until they decide to shut down their servers randomly, is quite preposterous indeed.

wetsparks · Sep 17, 2008, 02:25 AM // 02:25

Everquest's servers are still running, despite the release of EQ2 and WoWs dominance. The same thing will happen with WoW. The servers will stay up for seemingly forever. That isn't to say that another MMO wont come out and do to WoW what WoW did to EQ, but with WoW still growing and only being four years old, it isn't going to be WAR. If it came off as me saying that WoW will be dominant until 2020, that wasn't what I meant. But for an MMO to come out and all of a sudden WoWs population is going to drop from just under eleven million to say a hundred thousand (which would "kill it") which I have seen a lot of people seem to think is crazy talk.

Numa Pompilius · Sep 17, 2008, 10:15 AM // 10:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abedeus

Try to find High Quality graphics with AA and other things.

I looked at the official screenshot from 2008 on the warhammer site. They suck. Mightily. I'd say the game has weaker graphics than WoW, and WoW had retro graphics the day it was released.

Quote:

Btw, last add-on to GW was in 2007 and last game that upped graphics/requirements in 2006. So one and a half year old game.

Updated engine to support DirectX 9, didn't update existing graphics. GW has looked like this since the start, if you go to Pre-Searing today you'll see exactly what the first players on the first day of release saw. GW has decent graphics considering it's three years old.

Quote:

Hai better than Aion with Unreal T3 engine.

The screenshots of Warhammer at the official site are nowhere near as good as those of Aion. The polygon detail, lighting, and textures are years ahead of Warhammer.

The warhammer screenshots look like they're using the Quake3 engine.
Which is 9 years old.

Abedeus · Sep 17, 2008, 11:06 AM // 11:06

I'm sure you played the game and you believe that someone is updating the screenshots on official site all the time. I mean, they are updating them on Guild Wars, right?

...Btw, if they didn't update graphics, why the requirements jumped in NF/EotN? Because they wanted it so?

Quote:

I looked at the official screenshot from 2008 on the warhammer site. They suck. Mightily. I'd say the game has weaker graphics than WoW, and WoW had retro graphics the day it was released.

Hard to compare a comic-like graphics to something trying to look realistic.

Quote:

GW has decent graphics considering it's three years old.

Maybe because we (or at least I) have 4 times faster and better PC's than back then. If I could set 4x AA and best quality and force some effects on my graphics card, I would probably get better looks than in Aion.

But, in a year or two, I will be able to. That being said, I could run GW in 1280x1024, but I think it was around Low to Medium.

Oh, and if game looks TOO good (AoC), not many people will be able to enjoy it. And in Warhammer, game focused on RvR (massive Realm vs Realm fights), where there will be 30 vs 30 people in Scenarios or even more in siege fights, graphics are the least important thing. Would you rather want a 60 FPS and being able to see who you are fighting with, or 10FPS with nice graphics you will enjoy while dead? ;p

Numa Pompilius · Sep 17, 2008, 06:56 PM // 18:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abedeus

I'm sure you played the game and you believe that someone is updating the screenshots on official site all the time. I mean, they are updating them on Guild Wars, right?

And the old GW screenshots look like crap, right?

No, wait, they look exactly like the game does today. Weird.

Not to mention that WAR is close to release and being relentlessly hyped right now, so they really SHOULD make sure their screenshots don't look like Quake3.

Quote:

...Btw, if they didn't update graphics, why the requirements jumped in NF/EotN? Because they wanted it so?

Because NF/EotN uses new lighting modes (bloom, flare and better texture filtering) which does not exist in Prophecies. Prophecies looks exactly the same now as it did at release.

Quote:

Hard to compare a comic-like graphics to something trying to look realistic.

I sure hope WAR isn't trying to look realistic, because it sure doesn't. Also I'm comparing polygon count, lighting, and textures, not look.

Quote:

Maybe because we (or at least I) have 4 times faster and better PC's than back then. If I could set 4x AA and best quality and force some effects on my graphics card, I would probably get better looks than in Aion.

Nothing you do on your computer can do anything about low polygon models, simple lighting modes, and low-res textures.

Quote:

siege fights, graphics are the least important thing. Would you rather want a 60 FPS and being able to see who you are fighting with, or 10FPS with nice graphics you will enjoy while dead? ;p

I'd want the game to look like it was released in 2008. I refuse to believe one has to put the bar that low just to get the game to run acceptably on average rigs.