Quote:
Originally Posted by t0lkien
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
And a lot of you guys sound like inexperienced teenagers unused to the long history of anticipation/disappointment that is the games industry. Some of us have been around long enough to recognize empty rhetoric when we hear it, and to recognize the early design signs of failure. None of this is new; it's all gone down many times before. EQ Next has mediocrity written all over it from several perspectives, and with a couple of exceptions (the voxel tech is potentially fantastic, and the AI talk is exciting if completely empty at this point - I've been involved in trying to build something very similar to what they are double-rainbowing over, and I can almost guarantee what ships will be a shadow of all their grandoise panel speak). Those of us making the call would love to be wrong, but we're not. Let's refer to this discussion 6 months after the game ships and see.
By they way, you have a hundred games like that already at your disposal. You don't need to wait for a Sony version of Disney MMO in a vague, bastardized fantasy universe to start playing.
P.S. in regards to polling the player base for core design ideas, it just shows they lack a strong cohesive vision. It sounds great on paper, but produces really pretty horrid games. The absolute first sign of a potentially great game is the antithesis of this idea. Afterall, as someone once said (and as I have found to be true over and over again), a camel is a horse designed by committee. One designed by a database of PR percentages and fanbois is going to be an impressive frankenstein of fail.
|
Literally everything you have ever typed on this forum has made me want to punch you in the face IRL.
This is infinitely nicer than my original rant I had posted here.