I tried playing Neverwinter. It made me laugh, and also confused me. What I found so funny, was how the game tried so hard to look and feel like an action game, yet underneath the surface it was clearly using standard MMO mechanics. What I found confusing, was that the animations seemed much worse than I'd expected. Champions Online has better animations. Both games were made by the same company: Cryptic. Aside from the animation issues (mainly the run/walk animations and the tails... and the fact that archers don't shoot like that...) Neverwinter was very pretty.
Sadly, I'm not a big fan of standard MMO gameplay, so I didn't play Neverwinter very long. It felt very much like a standard MMO, with some heavy instancing, and tons of polish. It also, really, did not feel like DnD. It felt like a standard MMO paying lip service to DnD ideas.
P.S. Not being able to move and attack at the same time was frustrating. Not being able to fire my cone attack unless an enemy was under the targeting cursor was even more annoying. I have to stop attacking if I want to dodge anything... I liked TSW better.
Showing posts with label Opinions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Opinions. Show all posts
Monday, August 18, 2014
Saturday, August 16, 2014
Defiance (the game, not the behavior)
Started playing some of the game Defiance. I'm not really sure what to think. Many of the game mechanics and design I'd wanted to see done in an MMO are there, yet the overall quality of the game is somewhat lacking. It's like there's a lot of good ideas executed poorly.
The core element that really sets Defiance apart, and makes it special, is the way everything is built with open missions, which anyone can show up and help with. If someone else is already doing a mission I've been sent to do, I can join them, and we'll both get credit when it's done. I've never had to wait for a boss to respawn because someone else beat me to it.
The core problem with the open mission structure, is how easily it leads to certain missions being swarmed by players in such numbers that the missions become trivial. Other missions are simply ignored, and I end up having to avoid them because I can't handle them solo. Thankfully, most of the plot missions I did were both soloable, and often one or two other players would help out.
Personally, I'd like to see MMOs take advantage of the ability to give each player different mission requests to try and spread players out more. Would probably require a kind of AI director (*cough-L4D-cough*).
P.S. while I have enjoyed the shotguns that shoot grenades, I don't really understand why they are in the game, when there are also grenade launchers. Wouldn't it make more sense to just have a larger variety of grenade launchers instead?
P.P.S. I'm running out of articles to link. I guess I'll have to write more stuff myself. Unfortunately, all I really have to write about, is video games. My life isn't very exciting, and I don't do anything of importance.
The core element that really sets Defiance apart, and makes it special, is the way everything is built with open missions, which anyone can show up and help with. If someone else is already doing a mission I've been sent to do, I can join them, and we'll both get credit when it's done. I've never had to wait for a boss to respawn because someone else beat me to it.
The core problem with the open mission structure, is how easily it leads to certain missions being swarmed by players in such numbers that the missions become trivial. Other missions are simply ignored, and I end up having to avoid them because I can't handle them solo. Thankfully, most of the plot missions I did were both soloable, and often one or two other players would help out.
Personally, I'd like to see MMOs take advantage of the ability to give each player different mission requests to try and spread players out more. Would probably require a kind of AI director (*cough-L4D-cough*).
P.S. while I have enjoyed the shotguns that shoot grenades, I don't really understand why they are in the game, when there are also grenade launchers. Wouldn't it make more sense to just have a larger variety of grenade launchers instead?
P.P.S. I'm running out of articles to link. I guess I'll have to write more stuff myself. Unfortunately, all I really have to write about, is video games. My life isn't very exciting, and I don't do anything of importance.
Monday, July 28, 2014
Divinity: Original Sin
I recently played Divinity: Original Sin. It proved to be a better game than I had expected.
One of the simple mechanics introduced in the game very early on, is something I've realized is missing in most games. I can spill oil on the ground, then light it on fire. The green ooze/poison stuff is explosive if burned. If I hit an enemy that is on fire with poison, it will explode causing extra fire damage. A spell available in the first town, that can be cast (theoretically) by someone at level 1, makes it rain. The rain makes characters wet. Wet characters are harder to burn. These are all really simple concepts that make a much richer game mechanically.
Objects can be moved around. I beat a boss by abusing this. Arranging the vases in the room, messed with the Boss' AI so that instead of starting the fight by blasting me with a big spell, they ran around all the vases and swung a sword. Another time I managed to place a bunch of oil barrels around a room, before starting the fight by attacking them with fire. The fight was basically over as soon as it began.
The game certainly isn't perfect (it seems to reward save-scumming rather heavily) yet it seems very much like a big forward leap for it's genre. It isn't simply more of the old stuff, like so many other indie RPGs have been. Divinity: Original Sin has raised the bar, providing new mechanics and ideas for everyone to (hopefully) raid and pillage for their new games.
One of the simple mechanics introduced in the game very early on, is something I've realized is missing in most games. I can spill oil on the ground, then light it on fire. The green ooze/poison stuff is explosive if burned. If I hit an enemy that is on fire with poison, it will explode causing extra fire damage. A spell available in the first town, that can be cast (theoretically) by someone at level 1, makes it rain. The rain makes characters wet. Wet characters are harder to burn. These are all really simple concepts that make a much richer game mechanically.
Objects can be moved around. I beat a boss by abusing this. Arranging the vases in the room, messed with the Boss' AI so that instead of starting the fight by blasting me with a big spell, they ran around all the vases and swung a sword. Another time I managed to place a bunch of oil barrels around a room, before starting the fight by attacking them with fire. The fight was basically over as soon as it began.
The game certainly isn't perfect (it seems to reward save-scumming rather heavily) yet it seems very much like a big forward leap for it's genre. It isn't simply more of the old stuff, like so many other indie RPGs have been. Divinity: Original Sin has raised the bar, providing new mechanics and ideas for everyone to (hopefully) raid and pillage for their new games.
Friday, July 25, 2014
My problem with Hearthstone
If I try to just enjoy playing ranked, I end up running into a wall I can't pass, because I don't have enough good cards. To get better cards I need gold. To get gold at a reasonable rate, I need quests. To do quests I must log in and play a short while on whatever hero it tells me to play every day or two. So, either I get annoyed by the task I'm given, or I get annoyed when the task ends. Either way, I lose interest after a short while and stop playing.
It's frustrating to not be able to make progress when I just do what I want, and frustrating to not be able to do what I want when I try to make progress.
It's frustrating to not be able to make progress when I just do what I want, and frustrating to not be able to do what I want when I try to make progress.
Tuesday, May 20, 2014
The FCC's False Net Neutrality.
ISPs, like Comcast basically control gated communities. When their customers access the internet, all traffic goes though the ISP's gates. Tom Wheeler believes the rules that are being proposed will protect net neutrality because they will not allow discrimination at the main gate. All traffic at the main gate will need to be treated equally. However, the rules allow Comcast to make a side gate for VIPs.
Since only VIPs (people that pay Comcast extra money) get access to the side gate, it will have far fewer traffic jams, and will generally offer better service. This is why Netflix is paying Comcast money for a direct connection. They are paying for access to the VIP only gate.
Comcast is notorious for having terrible traffic jams at their main gate. Allowing them to charge for access to separate VIP gates will only encourage them to never upgrade their main gate.
Since only VIPs (people that pay Comcast extra money) get access to the side gate, it will have far fewer traffic jams, and will generally offer better service. This is why Netflix is paying Comcast money for a direct connection. They are paying for access to the VIP only gate.
Comcast is notorious for having terrible traffic jams at their main gate. Allowing them to charge for access to separate VIP gates will only encourage them to never upgrade their main gate.
Friday, April 25, 2014
A Rigged Game
The more I study the stock market and finance, the more I'm convince the entire system is deeply unfair. I've learned I can make money on the stock market fairly easily. Some will say the money is earned because I must be smart, or skilled or something. Slight problem: The amount of money I can make is entirely dependent upon how much money I have.
I started trading on margin. What's the interest rate on that? Well, depends on how much money is in the account. People with lots of money, only pay 5.75%. Not so wealthy people, pay as much as 9.75%. That means, if they were getting 10% annual return on the money before, using margin trading could increase the wealthy person's profit to 14.25%. Meanwhile the not so rich would only be getting 10.25%. I actually have an uncle who's super rich, and can borrow below 2% interest. For him, that 10% would become 18%. I've heard that hedge funds frequently operate on 10x leverage. Meaning for every dollar they have, they borrow 10. That could easily multiply their profits 5x or more (probably more, depends on how much they pay to borrow the money).
The stock market is a rigged game. The rich can make off like bandits with tons of money, while providing very little to the economy. Numbers just inflate. Even if I do eventually make enough money to support myself, I don't think I could claim to be providing society with a useful service. I'm just exploiting a rigged game.
I started trading on margin. What's the interest rate on that? Well, depends on how much money is in the account. People with lots of money, only pay 5.75%. Not so wealthy people, pay as much as 9.75%. That means, if they were getting 10% annual return on the money before, using margin trading could increase the wealthy person's profit to 14.25%. Meanwhile the not so rich would only be getting 10.25%. I actually have an uncle who's super rich, and can borrow below 2% interest. For him, that 10% would become 18%. I've heard that hedge funds frequently operate on 10x leverage. Meaning for every dollar they have, they borrow 10. That could easily multiply their profits 5x or more (probably more, depends on how much they pay to borrow the money).
The stock market is a rigged game. The rich can make off like bandits with tons of money, while providing very little to the economy. Numbers just inflate. Even if I do eventually make enough money to support myself, I don't think I could claim to be providing society with a useful service. I'm just exploiting a rigged game.
Saturday, December 07, 2013
The problem with wages:
The wages a person is paid, are determined not by the value of their work, but by how easily they can be replaced.
Sunday, December 01, 2013
Economists
I've been listening to some economics lectures recently, and have come to a somewhat worrying conclusion: The field of Economics appears to have a problem. In trying to understand markets, they developed a model so beautiful, that they've been trying to make reality look like the model ever since.
Thursday, August 29, 2013
Xbox One's most impressive upcoming title: Project Spark
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDymQVgUrPk
Personally, I think this needs more attention than it's gotten. It's a very powerful tool, and is probably the strongest argument in favor of getting an Xbox One.
Personally, I think this needs more attention than it's gotten. It's a very powerful tool, and is probably the strongest argument in favor of getting an Xbox One.
Sunday, August 11, 2013
The reason I believe EverQuest Next will succeed.
http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/08/04/soe-live-2013-delving-deeper-into-eqns-landmark/
EverQuest Next Landmark is going to build a community and fan base for EQN before the main game even launches. With contests to create content for the game, it will also result in people becoming emotionally invested in the world of EQN before launch.
P.S. I expect the EverQuest Next launch to be great fun to read about, as having a large number of players descend upon a destructible environment is likely to produce an entertaining disaster for a short while.
EverQuest Next Landmark is going to build a community and fan base for EQN before the main game even launches. With contests to create content for the game, it will also result in people becoming emotionally invested in the world of EQN before launch.
P.S. I expect the EverQuest Next launch to be great fun to read about, as having a large number of players descend upon a destructible environment is likely to produce an entertaining disaster for a short while.
Thursday, December 06, 2012
I am a lazy gamer.
I've observed that I am a very lazy gamer. The characters I enjoyed most in City of Heroes were ones designed to require minimal effort to play, often sticking to abilities that required no attention (Toggles mostly, PBAoEs were also nice). EVE Online and City of Heroes are the only MMOs I've played for long periods of time.
In EVE Online, my preferred combat style was to deploy drones and then just wait for everything to die. Defenders were my preferred class in City of Heroes, and I loved to grab the skills from the tertiary leadership set. With a bit of math, it wasn't hard to figure out how to pull my weight on a team with minimal effort.
With some effort I was able to figure out how to make a character in Champions Online I could play in a fairly easy manner, but whenever I go back to it, I find that the gameplay gets bogged down by inventory management. In fact, I find almost every MMO I play, inventory management becomes a major turnoff for me, and a hassle that I hate.
I'm beginning to believe that the main reason I so rarely enjoy MMOs is because so much time is wasted on inventory management, running around towns, or other tedium, instead of actually playing the game. CoH and almost no inventory management, and traveling around town with travel powers was a breeze (though travel before said powers were obtained was rather dull and bothersome). Why can't I find more games like that? Where there's thought put into character building, without the tedium of item bags and constant trashing of random loot.
In EVE Online, my preferred combat style was to deploy drones and then just wait for everything to die. Defenders were my preferred class in City of Heroes, and I loved to grab the skills from the tertiary leadership set. With a bit of math, it wasn't hard to figure out how to pull my weight on a team with minimal effort.
With some effort I was able to figure out how to make a character in Champions Online I could play in a fairly easy manner, but whenever I go back to it, I find that the gameplay gets bogged down by inventory management. In fact, I find almost every MMO I play, inventory management becomes a major turnoff for me, and a hassle that I hate.
I'm beginning to believe that the main reason I so rarely enjoy MMOs is because so much time is wasted on inventory management, running around towns, or other tedium, instead of actually playing the game. CoH and almost no inventory management, and traveling around town with travel powers was a breeze (though travel before said powers were obtained was rather dull and bothersome). Why can't I find more games like that? Where there's thought put into character building, without the tedium of item bags and constant trashing of random loot.
Thursday, September 13, 2012
Guild Wars 2 (opinion: First impressions)
My first impression of Guild Wars 2, is that it's an excellent game for explorers who want a world full of sights to see, places to discover, and events to stumble upon. It doesn't grab me as well as other games do, nor hold me in it as strongly. However, it has possibly the best immersion I've encountered in an MMO, with a very beautiful world and some of the best rewards I've encountered for exploring it.
PvP lovers will love the fact that it's possible to dive right into PvP without needing to gear up or level up first. Levels help, by unlocking utility skills and talents, but they aren't required.
The area where Guild Wars 2 seems weakest, is story. What story I see seems nice and pleasing. Unfortunately, it's rather spread out. I'll do a story mission or two, then have to run around doing random things to gain xp before I can continue the story. Exploring is great, PvP is great, but the story feels like it's in pieces, with large gaps in between where I'm forced to do something else before I'm allowed to continue. I think this is the main reason I find it so easy to put GW2 down and switch to something else.
If you want a big open world to explore and discover, Guild Wars 2 is excellent. If you want massive armies of players colliding in world vs world vs world PvP, Guild Wars 2 is excellent. If you want a story that grabs you and doesn't let go... The Secret World is excellent.
Okay, that's a total change in topic, but I think it is rather amazing how different The Secret World and Guild Wars 2 are. Pretty much everything The Secret World got wrong, Guild Wars 2 got right, and everything Guild Wars 2 got wrong, The Secret World got right. It's weird, and amazing. I hope both do well.
Things other games would do well to copy:
Guild Wars 2 has effective level adjustments to ensure people never outlevel content. It also uses this to help players be effective in PvP regardless of character level.
Having escort quests, defend area quests, and kill target monster/boss quests all be open missions is great. Makes a lot more sense, and helps keep everything immersive.
PvP lovers will love the fact that it's possible to dive right into PvP without needing to gear up or level up first. Levels help, by unlocking utility skills and talents, but they aren't required.
The area where Guild Wars 2 seems weakest, is story. What story I see seems nice and pleasing. Unfortunately, it's rather spread out. I'll do a story mission or two, then have to run around doing random things to gain xp before I can continue the story. Exploring is great, PvP is great, but the story feels like it's in pieces, with large gaps in between where I'm forced to do something else before I'm allowed to continue. I think this is the main reason I find it so easy to put GW2 down and switch to something else.
If you want a big open world to explore and discover, Guild Wars 2 is excellent. If you want massive armies of players colliding in world vs world vs world PvP, Guild Wars 2 is excellent. If you want a story that grabs you and doesn't let go... The Secret World is excellent.
Okay, that's a total change in topic, but I think it is rather amazing how different The Secret World and Guild Wars 2 are. Pretty much everything The Secret World got wrong, Guild Wars 2 got right, and everything Guild Wars 2 got wrong, The Secret World got right. It's weird, and amazing. I hope both do well.
Things other games would do well to copy:
Guild Wars 2 has effective level adjustments to ensure people never outlevel content. It also uses this to help players be effective in PvP regardless of character level.
Having escort quests, defend area quests, and kill target monster/boss quests all be open missions is great. Makes a lot more sense, and helps keep everything immersive.
Monday, September 10, 2012
The Secret World (opinion)
My first impressions of The Secret World, was that it was a WoW (World of Warcraft) clone, mainly due to the fairly standard system of going to the quest giver, taking on quest, doing quest, going back, getting new quest, etc... that so many MMOs have used every since WoW got so famous. However, it's the best darn WoW clone I've played (I don't like WoW, I do like TSW).
The voice acting is overall, very good. General immersion is excellent. The skill system is amusingly complex, yet simple enough to get started quickly. Overall, I've been quite impressed with The Secret World.
A few key things I think more games should copy:
The Secret World has group dungeons available very early. Each zone has one, even the beginner zone people start in after the tutorial. After the game's main story is finished, and the world is explored, what keeps people playing are the dungeons. So I think it's really valuable that they let people get a taste of them early. It always seems dumb to me when a game's key selling point is kept away from new players. When older players have to tell newer ones that it gets better later. Players shouldn't have to play a game for two days, to get to the good stuff. It should be good right from the beginning, all the way to the end.
The skill wheel (it's really a skill tree that's organized in a pretty way) is very well done. They have synergies built into it that makes for enjoyable theory crafting and rewarding optimization. It's fairly easy to understand (Blood Sport applies afflict when you hit an enemy, Salt in the Wounds deals damage when you apply afflict) and gives a lot of freedom in options (though a few severe imbalances do exist). I would very much like to see deliberate synergies and free-form build creation in games. Being able to pick 7 active skills and 7 passive skills from a large variety of options is great, especially when there's so many tricks, and synergies to find.
Last but not least: the dungeons follow a philosophy I think games should look into using more. They are essentially a series of boss fights, but seek to make the fights interesting enough to be worth doing over and over, and remain fun. Many of the fights offer challenges to player skill, requiring focus and attention. A few good fights, is better than lots of crappy ones.
The voice acting is overall, very good. General immersion is excellent. The skill system is amusingly complex, yet simple enough to get started quickly. Overall, I've been quite impressed with The Secret World.
A few key things I think more games should copy:
The Secret World has group dungeons available very early. Each zone has one, even the beginner zone people start in after the tutorial. After the game's main story is finished, and the world is explored, what keeps people playing are the dungeons. So I think it's really valuable that they let people get a taste of them early. It always seems dumb to me when a game's key selling point is kept away from new players. When older players have to tell newer ones that it gets better later. Players shouldn't have to play a game for two days, to get to the good stuff. It should be good right from the beginning, all the way to the end.
The skill wheel (it's really a skill tree that's organized in a pretty way) is very well done. They have synergies built into it that makes for enjoyable theory crafting and rewarding optimization. It's fairly easy to understand (Blood Sport applies afflict when you hit an enemy, Salt in the Wounds deals damage when you apply afflict) and gives a lot of freedom in options (though a few severe imbalances do exist). I would very much like to see deliberate synergies and free-form build creation in games. Being able to pick 7 active skills and 7 passive skills from a large variety of options is great, especially when there's so many tricks, and synergies to find.
Last but not least: the dungeons follow a philosophy I think games should look into using more. They are essentially a series of boss fights, but seek to make the fights interesting enough to be worth doing over and over, and remain fun. Many of the fights offer challenges to player skill, requiring focus and attention. A few good fights, is better than lots of crappy ones.
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
Diablo III is doing partial free play wrong.
Diablo III has a Starter Edition (currently requires guest pass) that makes it possible to play a limited amount of the game for free: http://www.geek.com/articles/games/how-to-play-diablo-iii-for-free-20120515/
D3 already has a real money auction house, so it seems silly to me to not allow free players to obtain real money in the auction house by selling goods, and then use that real money to buy the game. Locking them out of the real money auction house just makes it harder for fans to buy Diablo III.
"As for what the Starter Edition includes: you get to play through Act I of the game up to the Skeleton King. You can’t take a character past Level 13, there’s no access to the Real Money Auction House, and matchmaking is limited to fellow Starter Edition players. Even so, this is just a (free) taster of the gameplay by the end of which you should know for sure if you want to buy the full version."I call this doing it wrong. That's nothing more than a demo. Doing it right, is what Hellgate: Global does. They claim to be free-to-play, but that's only for the first half of the game. Halfway through, there's a paywall. However, it's possible to buy the needed pass with in game currency from other players. This is very similar to EVE Online's PLEX system, and makes it possible for people with more time than money to get access to the game for free, while also undermining the black-market gold sellers. It also can bring in lots of money.
D3 already has a real money auction house, so it seems silly to me to not allow free players to obtain real money in the auction house by selling goods, and then use that real money to buy the game. Locking them out of the real money auction house just makes it harder for fans to buy Diablo III.
Monday, May 14, 2012
The Secret World's Buisness Model
http://forums.thesecretworld.com/showthread.php?t=20339
"At the presentation we revealed that The Secret World will feature a traditional paid subscription model combined with micro-transactions through an in-game store."This sounds like a really bad idea to me. Two other MMOs I'm looking forward to are Guild Wars 2, and Firefall. Guild Wars 2 is asking for initial box fee, and micro-transactions, but no subscription. Firefall is going with no box fee, no sub, only a micro-transaction store. The Secret World is competing with those two games for my attention and money, yet they are asking for box fee, subscription fee, and a micro-transaction store that is likely to have things I want (if it doesn't, then it's a crappy store). That's a lot of money to spend on one game, when there's other games I'm interested in that ask for a lot less. At that kind of price, The Secret World will have to somehow convince me that it's totally amazing, or I'm not gonna spend any money on it. It will have a hard time doing that if I never play it.
A post on the problem of mixing subscriptions and micro-transactions as well as some other random related things:
P.S. I find it kinda weird how hard it was to find info on the business model they are using. Most MMO web sites have an F.A.Q. that's easy to find and answers the question of how they will be funding themselves. The Secret World didn't. I had to visit the forums to find out if they would have subs or not.
Friday, May 04, 2012
Move Over Diablo III, ArenaNet Unleashes Guild Wars 2 Beta
http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngaudiosi/2012/04/26/move-over-diablo-iii-arenanet-unleashes-guild-wars-2-beta/
Another GW2 preview:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/reviews/previews/9593-Guild-Wars-2-Preview
[update: adding more links]
"Guild Wars 2's map exploration is my new addiction":
http://www.gamezone.com/products/guild-wars-2/previews/guild-wars-2-s-map-exploration-is-my-new-addiction
"Exploring the beta and beyond in Guild Wars 2"
http://www.joystiq.com/2012/05/05/exploring-the-beta-and-beyond-in-guild-wars-2/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/carolpinchefsky/2012/05/01/guild-wars-2-beta/
“If you and I attack a creature, we both get loot and experience, which completely eliminates that feeling in a traditional MMO when you’re playing and someone steals your kills,” said Jeff Grubb, lore and continuity designer, Guild Wars 2. “We don’t think that’s what MMOs are about. You should be playing with other players, not alongside them. We reward players for playing together. You gain experience for resurrecting other players. We’ve seen with beta tests that players form groups where people work together and build a sense of community. We’ve seen these people who don’t know each other and might be annoyed if other players were around in other MMOs, actually like being around others and exploring this world together.”This is what MMOs need to do more of. What makes MMOs differ from other games, is playing with other people. Devs need to do everything they can to encourage, enable, and assist teamwork and cooperation in MMOs. Otherwise, the players may as well just go play a single player game that doesn't need internet.
Another GW2 preview:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/reviews/previews/9593-Guild-Wars-2-Preview
[update: adding more links]
"Guild Wars 2's map exploration is my new addiction":
http://www.gamezone.com/products/guild-wars-2/previews/guild-wars-2-s-map-exploration-is-my-new-addiction
"Exploring the beta and beyond in Guild Wars 2"
http://www.joystiq.com/2012/05/05/exploring-the-beta-and-beyond-in-guild-wars-2/
As I began to go through the typical RPG character creation process in Guild Wars 2, choosing my race, class, gender, hair color, etc., I reached a set of questions asking me about my parents, whether I was raised rich or poor, how I react to certain situations, and more.Woah.
For those who have had an opportunity to take part in the game's first pre-release beta weekend, these questions may still linger in your mind.
In making these decisions, it didnt really strike me that this was anything other than a way to work my answers into a shoehorned moment later in the game, but as I explored Guild Wars 2, I realized that the person playing the game next to me during a recent ArenaNet studio tour event was in a completely different area, despite us choosing the same race and class.
"When you create a character, you fill out this biography and your answers on that determine which set of the first ten hours you get," Colin Johanson, game designer on Guild Wars 2, explained. This ten hour figure seemed pretty hefty to me, so after a few hours, I restarted and chose different answers. I didn't see any of the same areas with my new selections. "Individualization is the one thing that players want the most. Two players shouldn't have the same story, both choices and instances should change the experience," Continuity and Lore designer Jeff Grubb said. It's an interesting experiment at providing players with a different experience every time.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/carolpinchefsky/2012/05/01/guild-wars-2-beta/
I’ll be honest up front: I’m not an MMO player. Yeah, I dabbled in Champions Online, and I spent more than a few sessions puzzle-solving in Uru Live (a.k.a. Myst Online). But when an MMO-obsessed friend sent me a Guild Wars 2 (GW2) beta key, I gave in to curiosity and fired up the game. The first thing that went through my mind was, “These graphics are pretty decent.” The second was, “Ah-hah, I’m playing Dragon Age: The MMO.” The third was, “I wish I had more than an afternoon to power through this.”
Monday, March 12, 2012
Ahri (League of Legends)
Started playing League of Legends again, and had the luck to enjoy an Ahri free week. She's a lot of fun to play. Unfortunately, she seems unfocused and difficult to play. Her main strength is probably in the short term mobility granted by her ultimate (three short range dashes) and her Charm skill which is a weak pull and decent stun combined.
Ahri feels like she has a scattered and unfocused skill set, with a passive that provides sustain, an AoE that has true damage (true damage ignores defenses), an uncontrolled homing attack, a single target pull, and a mobility granting ult. Each of these abilities is pretty awesome on their own, but together, they seem somewhat awkward, as each specializes in something different. The AoE skillshot is good at harassment and whittling enemies down. The Fox-Fires seem like a hybrid of single target nuke, and team fight sustained damage. The charm is pretty awesome, but as the only CC in the skill set, it doesn't work well to design a build around it. The Ultimate, can hit three targets three times, and/or be used to move around quickly. It is extremely versatile which also makes it hard to figure out what the best way to use it is.
In my efforts to make use of Ahri, my greatest success has been in staying at the edges of fights, harassing without committing fully. Ultimately, it feels like anything she can do, another mage can do better. She doesn't seem to have enough damage to be a proper mage, and not enough CC to be a tank/support. I've had the most success when I focus on CDR, to make the most of her true damage and Charm, as well as keep her ult available whenever I need it. I just don't feel like it works any better than it could on other champions.
One thing to note: I've mostly been playing Dominion, so I don't know how well she does in Laning. She may have some strength in the laning phase of SR that makes her good. However, she appears to have a weak team fight presence and lacks the burst power of other mages.
Update(2012-07-22): Based on what I've seen of her in tournaments, Ahri's greatest strength may be her ability to punish an opponent's mistakes. Her ultimate's mobility, and her short charm help her to capitalize on any opening an enemy gives her.
Ahri feels like she has a scattered and unfocused skill set, with a passive that provides sustain, an AoE that has true damage (true damage ignores defenses), an uncontrolled homing attack, a single target pull, and a mobility granting ult. Each of these abilities is pretty awesome on their own, but together, they seem somewhat awkward, as each specializes in something different. The AoE skillshot is good at harassment and whittling enemies down. The Fox-Fires seem like a hybrid of single target nuke, and team fight sustained damage. The charm is pretty awesome, but as the only CC in the skill set, it doesn't work well to design a build around it. The Ultimate, can hit three targets three times, and/or be used to move around quickly. It is extremely versatile which also makes it hard to figure out what the best way to use it is.
In my efforts to make use of Ahri, my greatest success has been in staying at the edges of fights, harassing without committing fully. Ultimately, it feels like anything she can do, another mage can do better. She doesn't seem to have enough damage to be a proper mage, and not enough CC to be a tank/support. I've had the most success when I focus on CDR, to make the most of her true damage and Charm, as well as keep her ult available whenever I need it. I just don't feel like it works any better than it could on other champions.
One thing to note: I've mostly been playing Dominion, so I don't know how well she does in Laning. She may have some strength in the laning phase of SR that makes her good. However, she appears to have a weak team fight presence and lacks the burst power of other mages.
Update(2012-07-22): Based on what I've seen of her in tournaments, Ahri's greatest strength may be her ability to punish an opponent's mistakes. Her ultimate's mobility, and her short charm help her to capitalize on any opening an enemy gives her.
Sunday, January 29, 2012
The hidden problem of SOPA
“It is clear that we need to revisit the approach on how best to address the problem of foreign thieves that steal and sell American inventions and products.” - Lamar Smith, the chief sponsor of SOPA (http://mashable.com/2012/01/20/sopa-is-dead-smith-pulls-bill/)
That quote is where the real problem lies: Why does the American Government think it should have jurisdiction over what foreign companies do in other countries? If it has no presence within the US, it should lie outside our government's rule. America does not rule the world, and should not act like it does.
Many are acting like SOPA was a good idea done badly. It was a bad idea done badly.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120113/09184917400/us-to-extradite-uk-student-copyright-infringement-despite-site-being-legal-uk.shtml
Residents of other countries should not need to worry about US law when they aren't doing business with the US. The idea that America can impose it's laws upon other countries is absurd. Yet that is exactly what SOPA was intended to do: Force other countries to obey American laws.
Additional reading: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/01/if-the-feds-can-shut-down-megaupload-why-do-they-need-sopa.ars
That quote is where the real problem lies: Why does the American Government think it should have jurisdiction over what foreign companies do in other countries? If it has no presence within the US, it should lie outside our government's rule. America does not rule the world, and should not act like it does.
Many are acting like SOPA was a good idea done badly. It was a bad idea done badly.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120113/09184917400/us-to-extradite-uk-student-copyright-infringement-despite-site-being-legal-uk.shtml
Residents of other countries should not need to worry about US law when they aren't doing business with the US. The idea that America can impose it's laws upon other countries is absurd. Yet that is exactly what SOPA was intended to do: Force other countries to obey American laws.
Additional reading: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/01/if-the-feds-can-shut-down-megaupload-why-do-they-need-sopa.ars
Sunday, October 16, 2011
E.Y.E: Divine Cybermancy
I recently played a game called E.Y.E.: Divine Cybermancy. It was a first person shooter, with RPG elements. Unfortunately, I'm not a fan of shooters. The plot however, was awesome enough to keep me going until I had played through the whole thing.
The gameplay made it feel like an old game, both in good and bad ways. Enemies were fairly numerous, largely due to frequent reinforcements. The maps were somewhat maze-like as well. Not the standard on-rails setup of modern shooters. It's quite possible to get lost. Both of these traits were common in older games, and helped me benefit a bit from nostalgia. Unfortunately, the hacking minigame was terrible, and stealth didn't really seem to be an option as enemies had very long sight range (the energy cost of invisibility also limited it's usefulness). Plan on doing lots of fighting.
The story was full of cyberpunk, with a bit of mysticism thrown in. It felt almost like I was playing in a video game version of Shadowrun. The main character has memory problems, and very quickly the game grants the impression that no one can really be trusted as the two people you trust most are working against one another, with you stuck in the middle. The plot totally tries to screw with your mind, and doesn't fully explain anything (which is exactly the way I like it!)
One area where plot and gameplay meshed in a nice way, was the decisions made during a mission. Some of the speech options would let you decide how a mission would be carried out, or might reveal additional paths that may be taken.
P.S. Expect to die a lot. I know I did. E.Y.E. kicked my butt.
The gameplay made it feel like an old game, both in good and bad ways. Enemies were fairly numerous, largely due to frequent reinforcements. The maps were somewhat maze-like as well. Not the standard on-rails setup of modern shooters. It's quite possible to get lost. Both of these traits were common in older games, and helped me benefit a bit from nostalgia. Unfortunately, the hacking minigame was terrible, and stealth didn't really seem to be an option as enemies had very long sight range (the energy cost of invisibility also limited it's usefulness). Plan on doing lots of fighting.
The story was full of cyberpunk, with a bit of mysticism thrown in. It felt almost like I was playing in a video game version of Shadowrun. The main character has memory problems, and very quickly the game grants the impression that no one can really be trusted as the two people you trust most are working against one another, with you stuck in the middle. The plot totally tries to screw with your mind, and doesn't fully explain anything (which is exactly the way I like it!)
One area where plot and gameplay meshed in a nice way, was the decisions made during a mission. Some of the speech options would let you decide how a mission would be carried out, or might reveal additional paths that may be taken.
P.S. Expect to die a lot. I know I did. E.Y.E. kicked my butt.
Saturday, October 08, 2011
S.P.A.Z.
After playing SPAZ (Space Pirates And Zombies), I feel compelled to shout to the world, "This game is fun!" I'm not really sure how to describe it, as it's not a game type that is at all common. Taking command of a space ship, with AI pilots as allies, your pirate group shall run rampant through the galaxy in search of fortune. There's a decent variety of weapon types, though at the start, only a couple are available. The biggest flaw is probably in the balance of the game, as some weapons and tactics are vastly superior to others.
The death penalty in SPAZ is fairly soft, and I think it works out well. Complete defeat is rare, more common is for a fight to simply cost too much to be worth it, as every time one of your ships is destroyed, resources must be spent to rebuild it.
Randomness is employed in the game's map generation, helping keep each playthrough from being exactly alike. However, it can also make the early game difficulty vary greatly depending on how lucky one is with tech availability in the beginning of the game.
The death penalty in SPAZ is fairly soft, and I think it works out well. Complete defeat is rare, more common is for a fight to simply cost too much to be worth it, as every time one of your ships is destroyed, resources must be spent to rebuild it.
Randomness is employed in the game's map generation, helping keep each playthrough from being exactly alike. However, it can also make the early game difficulty vary greatly depending on how lucky one is with tech availability in the beginning of the game.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)