FFXI - are there demos available?

Cyburg,

While that's all nice and arrogant, it still follows the same MMORPG formula that EQ started. It's the same issue that some people have with FPSs or JRPGs, in that they really haven't changed all that much. You still get into groups and kill mobs ad nausem for phat l00t and XP. Despite all the frills, if one doesn't like that basic premise, one won't like the game.

 

Speaking of FF11.. I'm downloading the new patch now. My brother didn't want to spoil anything for me.. but said they added some neat things.


/me impatiently waits for patch to finish.

 

So you dont like the MMORPG genre, okay. I dont like sport games, i dont go in threads to say how shitty they are though.

 

comparing it to EQ isnt fare, it isnt 1/10th as vast, wont last half as long before you get sick of it.. I played EQ for 2 years and I only saw about 1/80th of what there was to see in that time.. I played FFXI for one month and I've pretty much seen it all(Play Starwars Galaxies for two weeks before I'd seen it all, so thats not too bad)

 

I agree, I was strung out on EQ for about 2 years before my acct was sold from under me (long story heh). As a MMORPG vetran, I just didn't feel FF XI had much to offer.

 

Playing EQ was just so tedius for me. Call me a n00b because I don't like to be bored, but I really enjoy the team mechanics in FFXI.

And it's not really fair to compare the content in a MMORPG with 20 expansions to a new game.

 

Who's doing that? My tenure was from EQ Classic to the beginning of SoV

 

I was comparing it to the release of ultima .

 

I'm curious though if FF whatever (sorry didn't pay attention to the name - doh!) actually creates a world/society that both Ultima and EQ did (the latter lesser than the former). Or is it just EQ with an Asian RPG facade?

In other words, what are some of the grand changes between FFXI and EQ? I'm not talking about details (in this context even combat is more of a detail for this question).

 

You mean this Horizons:

http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/horizons_121003__120903_009.jpg

SWG is Star Wars, which is to say that it looks stupid 8)

Anyways, I'm not talking about graphics really. More about the artistic direction, which NO other game in the genre touches or will approach IMO until WoW

That's a good one.

 

Some of it is in trying to make "more" of PvE. It is still very much the mainstay of the game (and going to be for well into the future, despite the addition of PvP), but they add a bit of "competitive element" to it as well. Weapons and armor are much more simple in nature, and though they are pretty much as "leaned upon" as ever, it resembles more of the console RPG nature of "when you can afford better, buy better" rather than NEEDING item X or Y to be "uber." The classes system is both rigid and very morphic--which is an odd way to state it, but hey. ^_^ The classes themselves do not change from person to person, but due to the fact that anyone can be ANY class if they feel like it, and can combine skills from each of them as "primary" and "secondary" for more unique combinations, there is no feeling of having "levelled yourself into uselessness" and abandoning your character, as one would do in games like Everquest or Dark Age of Camelot. If you get dissatisfied doing one thing, just go do something else. You can always switch back again later if you want as well, not losing any of your progress. (SWG is more highly morphic, but you do have to sell off abilities to develop others if skill-point capped, and if you want to go back later on you indeed have to re-develop them as you did before.)

On the whole, though, there are no broken boundries. No fresh and unique additions--just a new working of what we've seen already. (Same as with WoW, which is what always mystifies me to the excitement. It will likely have a much more solid and bug-free launch, but it has almost nothing that hasn't been done before. DAoC was also pretty solid, but woefully low on content and with highly unbalanced PvP [and continually in flux since then]--which was supposed to be a huge focus of the game.) FFXI to me just seems more "easy going" in general, which certainly some may find appealing.

The main problem is no one KNOWS just what the hell they want from MMORPGs. Or they "know"--but when you tally up what they want it hits highly unrealistic levels. It should be fun at all times at all levels... you should be able to do what you want, but no one should be able to abuse game mechanics on you... soloing should be capable for everyone, but it shouldn't be TOO prevalent as to make grouping worthless... you should be able to quickly go wherever you want to, but the landscapes should be enormous and detailed... players should be able to craft the best items in the game in a totally realistic economy, but all creatures should be worth going after by anyone for other than just experiencing... there should be driving story and a changing environment and purpose, but everyone shouldn't be forced to do things they don't want to... there should be different servers for every type of player environment so people can do what they want to focus on, but they shouldn't spend too much time on stupid things (whatever said individual thinks they are)...

The scope of MMO's in general is ENORMOUS, and no game will ever cover them all, or even cover many of them well. There is no "finding the balance" is impossible among the total population likely to arise in the more popular games. No game over a few hours length could ever offer what many people WANT, even from a game supposed to be totally open-ended and multi-player in ways no other games can be.

We've seen plenty of growth over the years and plenty of "new experiements" in one idea or another, but MMORPGs are the youngest genre and from the gates the longest-to-develop, and most expensive-to-develop and maintain games out there. (At least for anything aspiring to be large-scale.) It rather fascinates me that people think there should be tremendous diversity and personal contouring to these games at this point, as well as perfect launches and bug-free play. The Q3 and UT engines ALONE are much older than all but the very first MMORPGs to hit the scene! And we're talking about games that require more effort to be a successful and involve a lot more risk. Yet we've already seen very different concepts like Uru and A Tale in the Desert come out, mainstream MMORPGs cover a wide scope of things and involve a lot more that should be "accepted norms" now, and the MMO concept itself extending out to other genres like FPSes, RTSes, and random other games.

It's all in a rather huge state of flux for something so new and slow-moving... Offhand, I'd suggest people chill out, play what they like about whichever game they feel most at home in, and stop setting the kind of expectations that just gets them down. (As I would suggest with almost any game type.)

 

Impressions from those that have actually played it say the game is very accessable, and has good flow. As opposed to camping spiders/snakes or worms/bees for hours on end in the same place, you move around. People that have quests for you have big exclamation points above thier heads.. lots of stuff to do in different places.. stuff that moves you around the world and rewards you with items.

Instancing, while maybe not liked by old skool mmorpgers, is a great idea IMO. I am so sick of competing for mobs for a chance for some lame quest item to drop. Instances create an instance of a dungeon just for your party.. you aren't pressured by any other players, you have privacy. But at the same time.. plenty of the world and dungeons AREN't instanced to still allow for meeting new people.

I also REALLY like the idea of alliance vs horde. The idea that certain areas in the game are A v H, and that huge battles could take place is so awesome to me. Not only should there be good PVP (though limited to pvp areas) there should be some good strategy on an army level.


I do have one worry (though I shouldn't, knowing blizzard).. and that is teamplay. I've been really impressed by FFXI in this regard.. the way skills and magic chain. I hope WoW and other future MMORPG's learn from this. A games MECHANICS need to be fun, the PROCESS of becomming uber.. not being uber itself. And one of the ways that is accomplished IMO is through well thought out team mechanics.

 

I'm really lovin the art aswell.. first rate IMO.

 

I know I'm kinda off topic

but just one more post about WoW

here's what an entrance to an instanced zone looks like

 

Which DAoC tried from the beginning to promote as well. (A steadily lowering "camp bonus" which makes moving around worth more XP than squatting one location.) Without utterly fundamental differences, though, (like enormous-distance respawn areas and programming to not pop near people, sprinkled with slow respawn times) there will ALWAYS be places where camping is more worthwhile. And most alternatives will carry incedental impact elsewhere as well. SWG, in fact, has much more "wandering hunts" with little being static. You can always find "stuff" and you can generally find certain creatures in certain areas, but you deplete areas and have to move on. People have their own dislikes of that as well. Just how WoW implements it in general is unknown.

Questing in almost EVERY game makes you travel long distances. The questions for them are "who can get them and when" and "is the time spent worth the reward"? Every game has various levels of success, and lots of quests get "burned out" over time--being useful when the game is fresh and new, but not worth it as the game matures. (More of the reward item is on the market, better items are available, cash rewards get out of proportion to the economy or are supplanted by better options later on...) Most of the time it's hit-or-miss. DAoC had many solid quests (and many unbalanced ones or producing useless results), but many have been utterly supplanted by spellcrafting and new drops. I think the main problem is that the games just don't take the time to update THEM as the game changes. They add more and ignore the previous.

IMHO I'd like to see a game with at least a good set of quests that are less static (not just "targets can pop in random locations" like SWG), and rewards that can take on various forms and be more personalized (not just "class geared" like DAoC's). And most importantly a system that can be adjusted over time as the game matures so that people won't feel that quests USED to be good but shrug them off in the future except for a few stand-out ones. I don't advise one system take over EVERYTHING, though--but there's plenty of room for variety in MMORPG's. Much more than other games.

Instancing can be good. It was one of the biggest new concepts AO brought to the table, and SWG has shades of it (missions that don't exist until you get close enough to them and don't have static spawns). Instancing, depending on how leaned upon, can also be BAD. I found AO to be a HORRIBLY under-socialized game, since soloing was easy and popping random missions was basically "the way to hunt" after newbieville. I would only meet and interact with people in cities when shopping, really. You know when I'd actually be able to meet others in the field, finding pick-up hunting groups... around the static dungeons when they added them. Popular hunting grounds. ^_^ (And on top of that, specific level ranges so you're meeting people you can hunt with in general.) Nearly everyone I met in DAoC and eventually guilded with I met while on the hunt in dungeons. The world is not just filled with people "competing for X drop" but also people hunting near each other for mutual support, forming larger groups to go deeper and try more, rushing to the aid of others and to defeat the enemy (Darkness Falls could be GREAT fun with that)...

Instancing can also be detrimental. Just how much focus and importance it has can be harmful to a MMORPG as it was in AO. It'll take more experimentation to determine how to balance them well can gain the advantages of it without severe disadvantages. Both WoW and EQ2 are going to be experimenting with it (EQ2 mentioning wanting to try "scripting" and dramatic events that can reshape where you are, which couldn't be done except by instancing--which at least sounds interesting in concept), so we'll see how their attempts go. Not a new development though, and not something to be "excited" about by itself.

Been very little said about it so far. And I have no idea how this would be fundamentally different or better than DAoC Realm combat. (Or even Shadowbane's, since it pushes large-scale city sieges.) Considering what we've seen so far, the important thing is not "that it's there," but "that it doesn't get trivialized" in one form or another. (Not being worthwhile after the newness wears off, affected by hideous bugs [like Shadowbane's "stacking"]...)

Indeed, chaining, and "new abilities/experiences/XP itself" for merit of skillfully hunting with others is something I hope catches on, instead of "more people = kill more/bigger stuff, get more/better XP/loot." Certainly effective class combinations have existed over time, but nothing that a character doesn't do ALL the time by themselves--just better in conjunction with others. But unique abilities gained only WHEN hunting with others... Certainly lends more appeal and more options when hunting in general.

Basically, though, it's the same as always. I look forward to WoW the same way I do every other MMO to come along, pretty much. There's just an utter fervor surrounding it from SO many people that I can't attribute to any of its proposals. (Sea combat...? Ooook. I mean it's good that games since EQ are finally doing something in water aside from swimming, but...) Proof comes through implementation--and full proof pretty much ONLY comes after launch, as no beta can fully read what hundreds of thousands of frenzied gamers can pull off.

 

Well, lots of the excitement I've seen for the game (if you can stomache bnet forums) is from people that have never played a MMO before. RTS fans are a huge part.. warcraft fans that know more about WoW's story than I've ever seen anyone understand (or care) for a game before. Also other diablo/blizzard fans that have never done this before.

It could end up being a really negative crowd, time will tell.. but Blizzard seems to be attracting lots of new people to the genre. I bet FF has managed to aswell now that I think about it.

 

Yeah, that's good at least. MMORPG's tend to feed off the same pool, but SWG brought in SW fans, and WoW will drag in plenty of Blizzard fans from other games... Of course knowing the folks who play on Battle.net obsessively, this could be a VERY bad thing! Hehe...

 

Heh ultima x odessy online .





Btw Its cool talking about mmorpgs considering there are really no other mmorpgs on the consoles to compare ff with. I don't think anyone minds

 

Well, there's Nobunaga's Ambition Online which looks interesting enough in its own way, but there's just not enough known about it out here, and it doesn't have the broad userbase and commentary that FFXI did. (Nor is it extending past the PS2 yet, and most MMORPG-types are PC users.)

I forgot to mention EQ's own instanced zones when talking about them before. LDoN, of course, is all about that, and they're adding more with their next expansion. Another take in another way, and it certainly makes the "form-up zones" more crowded with people looking for pick-up groups to go adventuring, but if course it also drains other areas of population and makes it so people in older zones are seldom looking to group normally, but only there for a particular drop or quest item. It's spiced things up and added interest, certainly, but as always it has broad-ranging side-effects.

Art direction is always improving over time, and it's hard to judge overall quality. (We ARE shows premium screenshots of games as a staple beforehand.) Even EQ has thrown a lot of cool and interesting out, despite an old and ragged engine. AO's Shadowlands shows some great stuff and cool new designs. (Offhand I'd say DAoC has less "better" but at least a lot MORE for a long-running MMORPG.) Meanwhile you can run around and pluck great shots from WoW, EQ2, AC2, SWG, UX:O, Lineage 2, FFXI... There will be different comparisons for scenery, structures, dungeons, character models, NPC's, monsters... In quality, in variation, in style, in textures, in technical effects, in just how much total landscape gets real attention... (Heck, even in "hor well it can run") Yet another thing that you can grin at in screenshots, but not really know until you've played a lot of the game.

 

Another think I like about WoW (may be another MMORPG that does it, but again, Im not that experienced in the genre) is the whole world is supposed to be streamed. No zones could be dangerous, but more realistic (ie. no 'omg, IT mob incomming.. zone, zone!!).

I'm not sure how that works with instancing though.. there may be a zone load when you go into one of those.. though it would be even cooler if that too was seemless somehow.