| Author |
Topic:
EA to blame for no Golden Age of Camelot??????? [Locked] |
Sosee Title: DAoC Knight
Generalist
Posts: 5
Registered: 2007-11-20 12:11:59
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
EA to blame for no Golden Age of Camelot??????? |
b0xy posted:
DAoC2 is the perfect answer to the ever-expanding PvP market's problem of... Not having any good, modern PvP games to play. The companies with the money are just too shortsighted to understand that no WoW clone is going to net them a significant share of the MMO market. WoW does WoW better than anyone else ever will.
(Sosee pulls out Sosee' crystal ball and gets down to bizz)
But Sosee not tellin what Sosee see. See Sosee See.
-----signature-----
DAoC Knight Generalist
DAoC, Many servers, many toons, all realms.
Currently slinking around somewhere.
http://www.camelotherald.com/feedback.php Use this often.
The artist previously known as DingleberrieMcOwnage
|
W0rdna Posts: 10
Registered: 2008-3-10 06:32:39
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
EA to blame for no Golden Age of Camelot??????? |
|
|
Gwartham Posts: 8
Registered: 2002-2-3 05:28:50
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
EA to blame for no Golden Age of Camelot??????? |
Notsoserious posted:
Gwartham posted:
josh21193 posted:
I know there was at some point maybe 300k daoc players in its prime.....
Does that not constitute a sequel????
Oh wait its EA Mythic now.... sports MMO Hybrid inc!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well aint it tecnically Bioware/Mythic EA?
And isnt Bioware doing the new SW game?
Yah...good luck at ever seeing Daoc2.
Why you still lurking around these forums?
Still playing RiFt?
/Dyne
Nah done with rift for now. Actually playing Pside for my MMO'ish fix.
Sorry just cant bring myself to resub Daoc. Too much effort to get back to the better half of the curve.
If I did it would be like Molvik toons, and the last time I did that there just wasnt enough population doing the same thing.
|
Burkuagh Posts: 66
Registered: 2004-8-24 14:49:11
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
EA to blame for no Golden Age of Camelot??????? |
Sosee posted:
b0xy posted:
DAoC2 is the perfect answer to the ever-expanding PvP market's problem of... Not having any good, modern PvP games to play. The companies with the money are just too shortsighted to understand that no WoW clone is going to net them a significant share of the MMO market. WoW does WoW better than anyone else ever will.
(Sosee pulls out Sosee' crystal ball and gets down to bizz)
But Sosee not tellin what Sosee see. See Sosee See. 
A lot of people, and probably rival companies too, are holding their breath and waiting to see what happens with GuildWars2. Its most people's best hope for a new fantasy-genre pvp game but from the sounds of things it won't quite resemble what people want it to be. Hopefully it won't crash and burn regardless of the particulars. The last thing we need is more "proof" that PvP games are financial failures.
-----signature-----
Revenant ~ Nimue
I don't play MMOs to make friends...
I play MMOs to make enemies!
|
Semi4 Posts: 566
Registered: 2003-8-8 13:58:29
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
EA to blame for no Golden Age of Camelot??????? |
Burkuagh posted:
The last thing we need is more "proof" that PvP games are financial failures.
PvP centric MMO games will always have trouble. The typical MMO player is not PvP centric. Only a small minority of MMO players are PvP centric.
There are very few game makers out there that seem to have any handle on the psychology of their customers. Most game makers seem to just throw stuff against a wall and then they ponder the interesting smear on the wall.
Some game makers start with a great concept but because the game makers do not comprehend the psychology of their customers the game makers eventually ruin things. Other games hit the ground in a ruined state.
Games that have extensive and complex PvP can be successful but not if they are PvP centric.
-----signature-----
The art of war is simple enough. Find out where your enemy is.
Get at him as soon as you can. Strike him as hard as you can,
and keep moving. - Ulysses S. Grant
Only the dead have seen the end of war - Plato
|
|
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
EA to blame for no Golden Age of Camelot??????? |
|
The original Guild Wars was financially successful, and last I checked that was pretty PvP focused.
|
|
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
EA to blame for no Golden Age of Camelot??????? |
SharpAnubis462 posted:
The original Guild Wars was financially successful, and last I checked that was pretty PvP focused.
it was free... relied on box sales alone...
guild wars wasnt a true MMO... most of the world was instanced... so you didnt have the same community feel...
and still had a lot of pve along with the pvp side of things...
the pvp wasnt open world pvp, but again instanced matches against other "teams" ...
it catored more to FPS players then it did RPG players.
-----signature-----
-=no pity for the majority=-
|
|
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
EA to blame for no Golden Age of Camelot??????? |
|
The fact that the game lacked a subscription fee and was still a financial success for Anet/NCsoft should say something. Heck, the payment model is probably a reason for its success. The form of PvP also doesn't matter, because the post I was replying to was about PvP centric MMOs (which it absolutely is. It's a highly instanced MMO, like Dungeons and Dragons Online, but it is a MMO at heart). How the "community feels" also has no affect on it.
Your last comment also doesn't make much sense sense to me. I mean, yeah, GW1 would appeal to FPS players more than DAoC because it cut out so much of the grinding that use to be inherent in MMOs, but the game is still a RPG and really doesn't have anything to do with FPSs outside of that "jump onto a server and play" quality the PvP has. It didn't have DAoC type RvR (although GW2 is looking to give a shot at it), but it was still a highly successful PvP focused MMO.
I don't really see what any of that has to do with the point I was making in reply to the point I was replying to.
|
|
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
EA to blame for no Golden Age of Camelot??????? |
|
DAOC was pretty damn successful for a while under Mythic, but it just fell under what most older MMOs fall into and thats newer flashier MMOs that pull more and more playerbase away from older. All the while the older MMO has to get bigger and bigger (expansions) to further dilute the population. Classic servers partially remedied this but where implemented too late imo. Same with EQ pvp.
MMOs recently are all cookie cutter BS fest. I am so sick of horde vs alliance, light vs dark (whatever warhammer was) , guardians vs defiant, elyos vs demonic. DAOC is literally the only game that has something different with 3 factions. It even blends pve and pvp pretty damn well. WTF is up with gear specifically for pvp these days? Let us figure that shit out on our own.
DAOC 2 would literally make me shit my pants if they could keep the classic feel to the game before it got bloated with 10 expansions.
|
|
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:00am
Subject:
EA to blame for no Golden Age of Camelot??????? |
SharpAnubis462 posted:
The fact that the game lacked a subscription fee and was still a financial success for Anet/NCsoft should say something. Heck, the payment model is probably a reason for its success. The form of PvP also doesn't matter, because the post I was replying to was about PvP centric MMOs (which it absolutely is. It's a highly instanced MMO, like Dungeons and Dragons Online, but it is a MMO at heart). How the "community feels" also has no affect on it.
Your last comment also doesn't make much sense sense to me. I mean, yeah, GW1 would appeal to FPS players more than DAoC because it cut out so much of the grinding that use to be inherent in MMOs, but the game is still a RPG and really doesn't have anything to do with FPSs outside of that "jump onto a server and play" quality the PvP has. It didn't have DAoC type RvR (although GW2 is looking to give a shot at it), but it was still a highly successful PvP focused MMO.
I don't really see what any of that has to do with the point I was making in reply to the point I was replying to.
its not realy a MMO though... its no more of a MMO then Diablo was a MMO
DnD online i've also never considered a MMO.. because its all instanced... there is no true MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER ... in either GW or DDO
so its not a MMO at heart.. especialy sense arena net usualy refered to GW as a CORPG (both, as Competetive, online RPG, or Co-operative Online RPG)
so even though alot of people reference guildwars as a MMO, even the makers of it dont realy recongize it as a MMO.
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Guild_Wars
from guildwars own website... look at what they say there game is.... CORPG ...
-----signature-----
-=no pity for the majority=-
|
|