Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3
Reply To Thread

FFXI vs. WoWFollow

#1 May 31 2004 at 10:24 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
283 posts
I'm sure this question has been asked many times thus far.. However, I am still very curious, I've been playing FFXI for four or five months, somewhere around there... And, to tell the truth, I've grown to completely despise the game, I refuse to play it anymore, too little action, too much forced interaction etc etc. At any rate, that wasn't the point of this post. Now, if any of the current beta testers have played FFXI as well as WoW, I'd like to ask for some opinions of how the two compare and contrast/personal opinions of which may be better. Don't misunderstand, I'm not asking for people to flame becuase somebody elses opinion differs, I just want some more insight, as I am very interested in WoW and the way it seems to be shaping so far. Thanks for your time.
____________________________
Alexandr NIN 59 DRK 58 SAM 60 WAR 43
Leviathan server
NIN AF - Complete
SAM AF - Complete
DRK AF - Blows Resigned ---
#2 May 31 2004 at 10:43 AM Rating: Decent
Valhallan wrote:
I'm sure this question has been asked many times thus far.. However, I am still very curious, I've been playing FFXI for four or five months, somewhere around there... And, to tell the truth, I've grown to completely despise the game, I refuse to play it anymore, too little action, too much forced interaction etc etc. At any rate, that wasn't the point of this post. Now, if any of the current beta testers have played FFXI as well as WoW, I'd like to ask for some opinions of how the two compare and contrast/personal opinions of which may be better. Don't misunderstand, I'm not asking for people to flame becuase somebody elses opinion differs, I just want some more insight, as I am very interested in WoW and the way it seems to be shaping so far. Thanks for your time.


This is a very very good and unbiased review in my opinion, and sadly, EQ2 seems to own WoW...but anyway, a good read:

http://eq2vault.ign.com/?dir=features/editorials&content=deathstryker4



Edited, Mon May 31 11:45:12 2004 by ZelerianIA
____________________________
Currently Playing : City of Heroes

Currently awaiting : World of Warcraft ( maybe Everquest 2, but only if WoW sucks )


Name:

Server:

Job:

Level:




#3 May 31 2004 at 11:09 AM Rating: Decent
****
6,677 posts
I will be in EQ2 beta soon. I can confirm/deny the validity of Norris's write-up when I do. I can't speak for FFXI though because I've never played it.
____________________________
Only the exceptions can be exceptional.
#4 May 31 2004 at 11:37 AM Rating: Decent
7 posts
I've been researching WoW for a couple of months now and it seems as though it won't be anything like ffxi. This is a good thing though, i mean I'd prefer my mmorpgs to be different, but being a whm I'd like to see what a priest is like and once the game comes out I'll give a follow up post. Also I definately don't despise FFXI.
____________________________
Go Windurst (in Unicorn of course)
whm 52, blm 18, war 5, thf 10, mnk 2, rdm 1, brd 32, bst 10, rng 11, nin 9, smn 24
hume
#5 May 31 2004 at 1:11 PM Rating: Decent
I heard from WoW beta testers that there is no forced grouping, you can solo effectively...haven't heard anything about EQ though.....
____________________________
Currently Playing : City of Heroes

Currently awaiting : World of Warcraft ( maybe Everquest 2, but only if WoW sucks )


Name:

Server:

Job:

Level:




#6 May 31 2004 at 1:55 PM Rating: Decent
*
58 posts
Quote:
EQ2 seems to own WoW...but anyway, a good read:
with a company like SOE no it doesnt. they have a release early style and get to the bugs and glitches later. then theres the nerfing and overpowering,not to mention the lack of listening to the players. but EQ2 does look realy awsome though and maybe SOE has changed(doubt it).

Edited, Mon May 31 14:59:54 2004 by Saturos
#7 May 31 2004 at 2:35 PM Rating: Decent
Saturos wrote:
Quote:
EQ2 seems to own WoW...but anyway, a good read:
with a company like SOE no it doesnt. they have a release early style and get to the bugs and glitches later. then theres the nerfing and overpowering,not to mention the lack of listening to the players. but EQ2 does look realy awsome though and maybe SOE has changed(doubt it).

Edited, Mon May 31 14:59:54 2004 by Saturos


Yeah, you bring a good point in the fact that blizzard is three times the game company that SOE will ever be, even if the later is way richer.

Also, some of the categories ?!?!?! Tutorial!?!?!? wtf............
____________________________
Currently Playing : City of Heroes

Currently awaiting : World of Warcraft ( maybe Everquest 2, but only if WoW sucks )


Name:

Server:

Job:

Level:




#8 May 31 2004 at 4:42 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
283 posts
Quote:
I've been researching WoW for a couple of months now and it seems as though it won't be anything like ffxi. This is a good thing though, i mean I'd prefer my mmorpgs to be different, but being a whm I'd like to see what a priest is like and once the game comes out I'll give a follow up post. Also I definately don't despise FFXI.


Well, as to the the word despise... Perhaps it was a bit strong, regardless I am more than tired of FFXI. On my DRK I was using... 2 sniper rings, a valkyrie's mask, lifebelt, Bone Scythe+1, brigandine, RS breeches, chaos sollerets, 2 beetle earrings +1, and a happy egg... Yet, poorly/horribly equipped people still managed to lv faster... Why? Seriously, that's all I want to know. I stand confident in my ability to use my head and play DRK to the fullest capability, I know how to do my job and do it well. At any rate... Done complaining about that, it'll get me nowhere other than looking like a sore loser.

At any rate, thanks for the input everybody, I look forward to and hope for more possible input.
____________________________
Alexandr NIN 59 DRK 58 SAM 60 WAR 43
Leviathan server
NIN AF - Complete
SAM AF - Complete
DRK AF - Blows Resigned ---
#9 Jun 01 2004 at 1:17 PM Rating: Excellent
Spankatorium Administratix
ZAM Administrator
Avatar
*****
1oooo posts
I can say I have biased opinion. I love blizzard games. I hated FFXI, but I never played past beta. The other Allakhazam team tell me it's not the same game. But I also don't care for anime all that much. Most people that really like FFXI, played older FF games (I didn't, prefered RE instead) and thus love the current MMO.

I love WoW, even in it's current state. ATM I don't know if it's Blizzard fanboi love, just new game adventuring, or if it really is a kick *** game. I would venture a guess at all three. This game really seems to give you what other games haven't.

It is also VERY hard to compare a closed beta game with a game that has been out near a year. Please keep that in mind when reading anything posted anywhere. WoW could change dramatically next push, you never know...
____________________________
ZAM: Support FAQ | Forum FAQ | Forum Rules | Mobile
DF: Twitter | FB
KnotKrazy: FB | Etsy
#10 Jun 01 2004 at 2:04 PM Rating: Decent
****
6,677 posts
Alistair, my main in the beta is a priest. WoW is a little less heal intensive than other games I've played, so although the priest is the "primary" healing class, other classes can function at that aspect fine, and you can also spend time doing other things. To that effect, I suppose you could say that out of the healing classes, the priest is most magic-based. Paladins melee and tank. Shamans and druids both melee, cast, and do other weird stuff. Priests *can* melee, but they can use a wand (unlimited range attack) at least as well, so they're better off standing back from the action when they aren't soloing.

I don't want to derail the thread or ruin all the surprises for you though. Let me know if you want to hear more.
____________________________
Only the exceptions can be exceptional.
#11 Jun 01 2004 at 9:49 PM Rating: Decent
Sage
**
469 posts
Quote:
This is a very very good and unbiased review in my opinion, and sadly, EQ2 seems to own WoW...but anyway, a good read:

http://eq2vault.ign.com/?dir=features/editorials&content=deathstryker4

Not only is it absurdly biased, some of the man's "facts" and information about WoW are outdated or just plain wrong. Not only does he simply gloss over combat (what you will be doing at least 80% of the time in the game) and grouping, he only played each game for 20 hours. 20 hours. You know how much time that is in an MMORPG? Nothing.

Some MMORPGs change drastically near the end of their beta. Reviewing them before they are even released and saying "this one is better" doesn't fly.

You might want to read through this thread.

Edited, Tue Jun 1 22:47:52 2004 by JAEFo
____________________________
Jaef -- 60 Hunter -- Crushridge
Shiesty -- 60 Warrior -- Crushridge
#12 Jun 01 2004 at 10:28 PM Rating: Decent
JAEFo wrote:
Quote:
This is a very very good and unbiased review in my opinion, and sadly, EQ2 seems to own WoW...but anyway, a good read:

http://eq2vault.ign.com/?dir=features/editorials&content=deathstryker4

Not only is it absurdly biased, some of the man's "facts" and information about WoW are outdated or just plain wrong. Not only does he simply gloss over combat (what you will be doing at least 80% of the time in the game) and grouping, he only played each game for 20 hours. 20 hours. You know how much time that is in an MMORPG? Nothing.

Some MMORPGs change drastically near the end of their beta. Reviewing them before they are even released and saying "this one is better" doesn't fly.

You might want to read through this thread.

Edited, Tue Jun 1 22:47:52 2004 by JAEFo


I do not think its biased, after having read a lot about both games, WoW beta testers seems to be quite cold about what they see right now, while the EQ2 community seems to be bustling with positivism...

Although I agree with your point about not reviewing a game before its out, you need review of the game before so you can make a decision on which game you will possess at launch....
____________________________
Currently Playing : City of Heroes

Currently awaiting : World of Warcraft ( maybe Everquest 2, but only if WoW sucks )


Name:

Server:

Job:

Level:




#13 Jun 01 2004 at 11:49 PM Rating: Excellent
Spankatorium Administratix
ZAM Administrator
Avatar
*****
1oooo posts
EQ2 info is purely speculative at this point and until beta is started and more people get to play, I say tell them to kiss your ***. I can't wait for EQ2 as the graphics and things are nice. But as it stands, WoW will be out first and will get my money first. I can play more than one MMO at a time! :)
____________________________
ZAM: Support FAQ | Forum FAQ | Forum Rules | Mobile
DF: Twitter | FB
KnotKrazy: FB | Etsy
#14 Jun 02 2004 at 4:35 AM Rating: Decent
*
203 posts
I'm currently playing FFXI, you can check my profile below, but I've been reading a lot about WoW lately and seriously can't wait for it to come out. While I'm already forming strategies for this game in my mind, I think there will still be party interaction needed in certain parts of the game, like progressing on in the story and such, or defeating a final boss. I'm glad there won't be limit breaks, alliance requirements (genkai 2) or forced parties (rank 6) and such.

Unfortunately seems like Rogue is the exact same thing as Thief in FFXI right now... and it seems that it will definitely be the best money-making class in the game, leaving other poor people in the dust when it comes to making bank. I mean, sure you can get experience as a whm.. er pardon, a priest, but can you get money? Nah, Pick-pocket, stealth... steal/mug, sneak attack. It all looks the same to me and I'll probably play something completely different hoping that I won't get left out in the money-making scheme of things.

I already pre-ordered my copy ^^
#15 Jun 02 2004 at 8:55 AM Rating: Decent
Lady Darkflame wrote:
EQ2 info is purely speculative at this point and until beta is started and more people get to play, I say tell them to kiss your ***. I can't wait for EQ2 as the graphics and things are nice. But as it stands, WoW will be out first and will get my money first. I can play more than one MMO at a time! :)


Ok, I'll tell them...lol

sadly, I have only enough time for one, I will have to choose it seems...ummm, decision, decision....

Although, the MMORPG out right now are so weak, that I might just take the first one of the two that comes out.
____________________________
Currently Playing : City of Heroes

Currently awaiting : World of Warcraft ( maybe Everquest 2, but only if WoW sucks )


Name:

Server:

Job:

Level:




#16 Jun 02 2004 at 10:08 AM Rating: Default
*
58 posts
Quote:
Unfortunately seems like Rogue is the exact same thing as Thief in FFXI right now... and it seems that it will definitely be the best money-making class in the game, leaving other poor people in the dust when it comes to making bank
your jokeing right? the items you get from pickpocket are pretty crappy and the money isnt is much,also you can only pickpocket when your stealthed,but so many mobs can see through that. pretty much the best way of getting money now is from trade skills and farming instances,like SM. also rogues arent weak dmg dealers like the loser thf from FFXI.
#17 Jun 05 2004 at 4:11 AM Rating: Decent
*
203 posts
I hear at higher levels pick-pocket can net you expensive gems. And in FFXI you make a LOT of money after getting all your AF and JSE, when you have something like +10 Steal. I've yet to get my final JSE piece, Thief's Kote and go to Oztroja top floor and walk out with 3 stacks of gold coins.

From what I read Rogue is very _very_ similar to Thief. I mean.. Sprint .. c'mon = Flee. Stealth .. lol, Sneak + Sneak Attack. I'll probably play Rogue just because I like the wear the most expensive things in the game, as I do in FFXI.

And play Paladin as another, main class and send myself items from the Rogue.

Edited, Sat Jun 5 05:12:31 2004 by Aquafresh
#18 Jun 05 2004 at 6:25 AM Rating: Decent
*
58 posts
<i>I hear at higher levels pick-pocket can net you expensive gems</i>

you can get good gems now like jade the but chances of getting them are low.
#19 Jun 05 2004 at 8:52 AM Rating: Decent
Aquafresh wrote:
I hear at higher levels pick-pocket can net you expensive gems. And in FFXI you make a LOT of money after getting all your AF and JSE, when you have something like +10 Steal. I've yet to get my final JSE piece, Thief's Kote and go to Oztroja top floor and walk out with 3 stacks of gold coins.

From what I read Rogue is very _very_ similar to Thief. I mean.. Sprint .. c'mon = Flee. Stealth .. lol, Sneak + Sneak Attack. I'll probably play Rogue just because I like the wear the most expensive things in the game, as I do in FFXI.

And play Paladin as another, main class and send myself items from the Rogue.

Edited, Sat Jun 5 05:12:31 2004 by Aquafresh


its kind of a bummer though to have to wait for 55 levels to start being able to use efficiently a skill that you get at level 5.....
____________________________
Currently Playing : City of Heroes

Currently awaiting : World of Warcraft ( maybe Everquest 2, but only if WoW sucks )


Name:

Server:

Job:

Level:




#20 Jun 05 2004 at 9:10 AM Rating: Decent
****
6,677 posts
Isn't that what a rogue always is in games though? A thieving shadowlurker that fights dirty?
____________________________
Only the exceptions can be exceptional.
#21 Jun 05 2004 at 9:24 AM Rating: Decent
*
58 posts
yes
#22 Jun 06 2004 at 5:25 PM Rating: Decent
*
228 posts
I think the Difference between Blizzard and the rest is that they take their time to work on the game until they are 100% satisfied with it.. evne if it means to push the release date a whole year.. but the final product still hasn't disappointed me.
#23 Jun 09 2004 at 1:14 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
799 posts
Quote:
also rogues arent weak dmg dealers like the loser thf from FFXI


Actually, high end when THF gets dancing blade or whatever that WS is called, the damage output on them is intensive. Even around the time they get viper bite the damage is pretty high up there. THFs aren't there mainly for damage though, so you can't classify them simply as a damage dealer, but rather a hate controller. I think you can't really compare the two since FFXI was such a party based game whereas WoW doesn't seem to be.
____________________________
FFXI - Fairy: Lithe; Elvaan 30pld/16war, 31blm/16rdm [mule character]
FFXI - Fairy: Devul - White Mage Ninja
Rank 10 Windurst
ThoseGuys & ///Pantsu/// LS
#24 Jun 10 2004 at 3:49 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
526 posts
ok... ill give this a shot.. warning... rant.


FFXI:
After a time, mostly forced grouping.
Quests are rewarding, but, not really needed to advance the game unless you wish to be a summoner.
Monsters at level 10 and level 50 have a Deja Vu appeal to them. maby size being the only difference.
Certain Jobs seem to get groups more often then others.
Death is auto EXP loss with chance of getting some back.
Auction house system is a pleaseure to work with.
NPCs sell cheaper then the Auction House, and people use this to advantage.
Party Dynamics: RDM, WHM, BLM, WAR or PLD, the last 2 depend on where your going.
Crafting skills are long, tedious, and dont pay off till later in the skill. You can innately craft anything you wish, but have a high chance of failure with things higher then your skill.


WoW:
Able to solo quite often except for certain quests.
Quests are extreamly rewarding, netting not only cash but experience points as well as items you just cant find anywhere else.
Monsters in each main area although may look the same, usually have a different color skin, and may be a different size as well.
Due to the medium amount of jobs, each jobs has same chance to get in a party.
Death only loses exp if you ressurect in the graveyard that your spirit goes to giving you the chance to run back to your body and bringing yourself back to life with half health and mana.
No auction house in Effect YET. one is being worked on according to rumors.
NPC vendors are vital for tradeskills and usually have some OK Equipment, however it is possible to find better.
Party Dynamics: Tank, Healer, the other 3 can be just about anything.
Crafting: only real grief comes from getting the materials. Your recipies are either bought or found, and you must have a certain skill level before even attempting to make the item (the recipie cannot be learned untill you get to XX skill after that, you can craft as many as you like). The only way to fail a craft is if you have your character walk over a bit, and no materials are lost.



More comparisons can be made if you give me a topic to compare.
____________________________
Lightbringer:
Ksetrat - Warlock 70

Azshara:
Xantcha - Warlock 60
#25 Jun 14 2004 at 5:02 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,332 posts
Tartesk: Thanks for the comparisons. Still a little vauge but at least I have something to work with. Still waaaayyyy too many rumors though. WAiting for somethinc concrete. At least Blizzard likes to give the patiently-waiting-soon-to-be players something (movies, screenshots, info, etc), where-as S-E stuff was hard to come by.

I haven't really been paying attention to WoW lately. And now it looks like it warrants at least some play.
____________________________
..............
#26 Jun 15 2004 at 7:04 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
283 posts
Well, one thing's for certain... WoW did a better job of the dance emotes. Granted FFXI didn't even put them in... Aside from taru emotes. The Night Elf Male is friggin hilarious.
____________________________
Alexandr NIN 59 DRK 58 SAM 60 WAR 43
Leviathan server
NIN AF - Complete
SAM AF - Complete
DRK AF - Blows Resigned ---
#27 Jun 20 2004 at 12:17 AM Rating: Decent
****
4,520 posts
look down at the sig, the big red thing, this is how i feal toward articles like that at this moment

|
|
|
|
\/

Edited, Sun Jun 20 01:17:50 2004 by VampyreKnight
____________________________
Bah, signatures
#28 Jul 29 2004 at 4:17 PM Rating: Decent
5 posts
Quote:
Yeah, you bring a good point in the fact that blizzard is three times the game company that SOE will ever be, even if the later is way richer.


hahaha you obviously dont remember the broken release dates of many of their games including, but not limited to, Diablo II. SOE the child company of a little company called Sony...which has another little something called a Playstation 2, only the most popular and successfull gaming console EVER. What does Blizzard have other than it's Diablo's and its Warcraft's. Honestly i dont think any of you can have an opinion one way or the other till you've played it

#29 Jul 29 2004 at 7:08 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
469 posts
tharnorn wrote:
hahaha you obviously dont remember the broken release dates of many of their games including, but not limited to, Diablo II. SOE the child company of a little company called Sony...which has another little something called a Playstation 2, only the most popular and successfull gaming console EVER. What does Blizzard have other than it's Diablo's and its Warcraft's. Honestly i dont think any of you can have an opinion one way or the other till you've played it

Heh, do I even have to say anything? Oh yeah, pssst... Starcraft.
____________________________
Jaef -- 60 Hunter -- Crushridge
Shiesty -- 60 Warrior -- Crushridge
#30 Jul 29 2004 at 9:49 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,430 posts
Quote:
hahaha you obviously dont remember the broken release dates of many of their games including, but not limited to, Diablo II. SOE the child company of a little company called Sony...which has another little something called a Playstation 2, only the most popular and successfull gaming console EVER. What does Blizzard have other than it's Diablo's and its Warcraft's. Honestly i dont think any of you can have an opinion one way or the other till you've played it


Oh boy, as a gamer, I HAVE to reply to this. Now before I begin, I wanna say hello again to everybody here and ask why in the world is this topic back up again? Look, FFXI has their own set content and WoW has theirs. Same goes with EQ 2. What will attract people to those respected games will be what they offer. You want hardcore, party focused role playing? Pick FFXI. You want a MMO that focuses on yet not limited to the casual gamer while offering faction vs faction action? Pick WoW. You want old school roleplaying with a classic, familiar setting and realistic graphics? Pick EQ2. There, that sums it up. Please, for the love of god, no more comparing. It seriously gets old.

Now on to the quote that I have provided above. Let me just say this one little thing: TALENTS WITH CONSOLES AND TALENTS WITH GAMES ARE 2 VERY DIFFERENT THINGS!

Now let me offer some history when it comes to Sony's console success. You see, back in the Super Nintendo days, Nintendo and Sony were *gasp* business partners that discussed plans of a upgrade to the Super Nintendo which was a cd rom add on codenamed "Playstation". Sounds familiar? Anyways, after Sony caught Nintendo having discussions with Panasonic and decided to break away from the deal they had with Nintendo. Scrapping the project, Sony took what was supposed to a add on and made it into a stand alone system to compete with Nintendo's upcoming "Ultra 64" which was the Nintendo 64.

During the years of 94 to 95 (forgot the year) Sony released the Playstation, aiming it towards the older walkmen carrying crowd. This is where sony began their dominance. You see, during this time, Nintendo tried extending the life of the Super Nintendo by offering new ways to use its hardware in order to work more on the Ultra 64, which games like Killer Instinct displayed in the arcades. Using this to their advantage, Sony slowly took developers away from Nintendo's roster one by one, who were frustrated with the amount of time Nintendo was taking on their Ultra 64. Well, to keep a long story short, Nintendo actually helped Sony succeed by taking too much time on what they called their greatest system. By the time Nintendo was done, all of their developers were singing the tone of Sony. If Nintendo wasn't driven by blind faith, Nintendo would be ahead by now.

What does this have to do with Sony as a game company? I'll explain. You see, everything that was offered on a competing system, Sony took that idea. Remember the rumble pack Nintendo introduced? Sony took that idea and put it into their duel shock controller. Remember the N64 Anaolog stick? Sony now uses them on their controllers. How about gaming? Remember Mario 64? Sony answered with Crash Bandicoot. I still remember the old Sony commercials that had a guy dressed as the Bandicoot, bashing Nintendo from the company's parking lot. Online play? Sony took that idea from Sega, who introduced this with their ill-fated Dreamcast. The only reason they are stepping up their online plans is basically because Microsoft's X-Box live is becoming insanely popular. Eyetoy is nothing more then a rip off of the old Gameboy camera. It's a wonder why I'm not going to flock to Sony, eh? If anything, only 3 games actually make Sony stand out at all: Everquest, Ico, and Grand Turismo. The only game that wasn't successful was Ico, which I thought was a game of pure genius.

But, if anything, Sony made their success by copying and marketing. The greatest way Sony had their console succeed was basically the mentality of the general public. "Sony, maker of the **** Walkman making a game console? Where can I sign up?" was what most people said to themselves when they tried to break away from the "kiddish" Nintendo and Sega in favor of a company that most "cool" kids wouldn't be caught dead without their CD players. Simple as that.

Now on to Blizzard. They KNOW how to make games. They were not founded on any hardware company, they were founded as a game company. As of currently, Blizzard has been responsible for 7 #1 selling games, some closing in at the 7 million copy mark. The only game even near this success in Sony's side was Grand Turismo. Not even Everquest reached those numbers. People flock to Blizzard Games not because it's from a "hip" and "cool" company that makes games which has you smacking hoes and killing in classic mafia style like so many games are doing now. The reason is because their games are simply fun. They are simple games to learn, yet complex games to master. Their games are just as enjoyable now as they were years ago. People around the world still compete in Starcraft tournies and that game was released in 1998! This is why people are excited with World of Warcraft. They expect a game similiar to Blizzard's old games, whic are still being enjoyed today.

By the way, Tharnorn, you are wrong about the Playstation 2 being the best selling game console ever. As of so far, Playstation 2 sold over 60 million units world wide. Nintendo Gameboy has sold over 150 million units worldwide. Also, the Super Nintendo has sold over 65 million units with the NES selling as much as the Playstation 2. Just wanted to show you facts ^^. Well, thats my hellishly off topic rant. Time to get lost... *jumps through a window*

One more thing, Blizzard also has Blackthrone and Lost Vikings as finely represented examples of their game designs. I can only pray for sequels in the near future ^^

Edited, Thu Jul 29 23:13:46 2004 by Redmoonxl

Edited, Thu Jul 29 23:23:36 2004 by Redmoonxl
____________________________
Makurar ~ Lv 60 Orc Warrior (Illidan)

"And Fangtooth.......Make it on a PvP server."
#31 Jul 30 2004 at 9:25 AM Rating: Good
**
367 posts
The ability to solo in WoW is a welcome relief and a hindrance to the game. there are positive and negatives to being able to do this. At least you have the option but the reality is noone has seen how soloing really plays out in WoW yet because the game has not been released. I cannot imagine soloing for the amount of time I have partied in FFXI. I absolutely enjoy getting an uber party going, when everything is in sync, skillchains, massive XP chains and such. If I had to do even a fraction of that solo I would lose my mind guys. Basically what I am saying is I hope the party system takes off in WoW. It needs to be there and people should be urged to party, believe that is where the magic is in MMORPG. Having people there, group dynamics, arguments, victories, all as a team, it is wonderful. FFXI does this very very well. LFP does suck, but eventually you get to know people and you will find groups. I hear beastmasters complain about not being part of the party scene and they solo, although they still enjoy beastmaster as a job. We all want what we cant have, its kinda how human beings work.
____________________________
Ranger 74 Ninja 37
Just beat Kirin Wooot^^
Need Seiryu Kote
#32 Jul 30 2004 at 5:08 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
151 posts
Viniferis, I'm tying to figure out how the ability to solo could be a "hindrance" to or negatively impact the game. Alot of the quests are soloed because they can be. However, if you want to party, and some quests you have to party for, you can. Thankfully, WoW at this point in the beta does not require you to sit in town for 3 hours looking for a party to gain experience. If forced partying is what you are looking for, FFXI is the perfect game for you.
____________________________
"Ahh, and it begins, promises not met to rush the game out...." -Stabbed

"It's the standard Blizzard operating procedure; make something suck, then make a talent to make it suck less." -Gigashadow
#33 Jul 31 2004 at 12:29 PM Rating: Decent
****
6,677 posts
The Lost Vikings was made...well, published anyway...by Interplay. Blackthorne was the first game I ever remember seeing the name Blizzard on, with Warcraft 1 shortly thereafter.

Having grown up in the glory days of the NES and SNES, I have no particular love for Sony. I have a PS2 nowadays, but my one console system for years was the N64. I could say all kinds of good and bad for the PS2. But that's hardware.

Where it comes to software, Sony doesn't have a whole lot in their back pocket worth mentioning. They didn't even make Everquest, only bought the rights to it and took over, at which point the game took on a completely different face.

Blizzard has a much better track record in my opinion. If I knew nothing of the individual MMORPGs, the only major company I would really consider to be in league with them at the ability to make a game with RPG elements is Square. (Yes, there are smaller developers with dedicated fanbases.) However, based on what I've heard alone, I have very little interest in playing FFXI, despite respecting Square a lot.

The most important thing about Sony here though is that while they have a huge fanbase of "Everquest" alone, which counts for a lot, they have also estranged a lot of their players that have vowed never to touch EQ2 with a 10 foot pole. I'm not going to compare them; I'm not going to say which I think is better until I try EQ2; I'm only going to say that Blizzard definitely has the advantage if they both have the respect of their players and have also been in beta for 6 months rather than 3 weeks.
____________________________
Only the exceptions can be exceptional.
#34 Jul 31 2004 at 1:28 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
469 posts
Blizzard developed Lost Vikings for PC and The Lost Vikings II for the SNES. Interplay developed Norse by Norsewest: The Return of the Lost Vikings. All three titles were published by Interplay.

And #!&@ SoE.
____________________________
Jaef -- 60 Hunter -- Crushridge
Shiesty -- 60 Warrior -- Crushridge
#35 Jul 31 2004 at 2:28 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
231 posts
I am still tossing and turning between them both. A friend is saying that WoW is getting much beter reviews than FF11 But I have had sooo much time into FF11 :( But if they give a free trial of it then I will be trying it out and make my personal decision from there.

We will see, hope for the best.. I keep hoping that FF11 will get thier **** together and make the game a little more than going out and xp bashing for hours on end.... eventually it looses its fun and becomes to repetative for it all.

Ahh well.... we will see :)
Laters CX
____________________________
Playing Everquest II.
41 Paladin
#36 Aug 01 2004 at 10:19 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
341 posts
Having just broken into WoW this weekend, here's my take:

While I still love FFXI, a single day of playing Warcraft has taken away an enormous chunk of my ambition and desire to load up FFXI. It's obviously too early to say "WoW IS THE BEST GAME EVER, I'M QUITTING FFXI RIGHT NOW!" but I must say, I really love how this game is coming along so far in my experience. Nothing has smacked of irritation right out of the gate. By the time I had achieved the same level in FFXI, I already had a mild list of complaints and concerns.

I'm a huge Final Fantasy geek, so I don't want to give up on FFXI, but playing it is becoming something like a job. It's a major time investment each time you want to progress in anything. Granted, duh, it's an MMO, that's what these things are all about, but I think FFXI may be taking it a bit too far for my tastes. It's borderline obsessive. Reaching that plateu you've been striving for for god know's how long (be it hitting a new level, achieving a new Rank, unlocking a new job, completing a huge quest) really gives you a sense of satisfaction. Unfortunately, this satisfaction is something I've come to equate with the satisfaction of removing a metal shaving from my eye, or smiling in misty-eyed glee as the in-laws drive down the street after a week long visit. I've come to enjoy these moments simply because I've worked so hard at achieving them, more so than the actual payoff for what I've accomplished. This may just be my own personal view, but I know I'm not alone in this ideal. I will likely continue playing FFXI until I just have absolutely no desire to load it up anymore. And I do hope that isn't for a while. Maybe something will change for me and I'll get back into it full swing, but remain pessemistic at best.

Warcraft, completely on the other hand, has done nothing short of throwing rose petals at my feet thus far. The level advancement system is a pleasure to partake in. Completing quests gives you huge ammounts of experience, often up to 10 times the ammount you would receive from killing a same-level monster. Insofar, I've reached a level 10 Night-Elf Priest, and compelted all but three quests available for me all on my own. This isn't to say "thank god I don't have to party" but it is refreshing to feel that a good portion of the quests are welcome for solo playing if so desired. The skill system is actually useful, where the FFXI crafting system is pretty much reserved for the masochistic player. Money issues are not debilitating in WoW, and ways to accrue funds are not coveted like government secrets. I am also very pleased over the freedom of customization present thus far. I don't feel restricted to the ladder mentality of items and equipment that FFXI is rife with. Granted, this may change as I go further on, but by this point in FFXI, you are either double checking to make sure all your gear is the best it can be, or you suffer eternal LFG for being "gimped" and continuously getting murdered.

I'm sure my opinions will evolve and change with time, just as they have with FFXI. I hope that in a year, I'm not as disappointed with my gaming experience.
____________________________
Vlishgnath on Quetzalcoatl
#37 Aug 03 2004 at 2:34 AM Rating: Decent
*
64 posts
Ive been playing FFXI almost since the NA release. It's a fun game, and I enjoy it, but it is most definitely not for everyone, least of all the casual gamer. What I plan on doing when WoW comes out is pretty simple: I will keep my FFXI subscription but start going into WoW too. If I find myself playing one much more than the other I will drop the one I dont play and continue on with the other. Its looking right now like WoW will win out, but I'm also going to be factoring in how long it looks like the game will keep my interest. FFXI could keep me going long after I'm dead, but from what Ive heard of WoW I could be done with it inside a year.

As for Blizzards track record, they did indeed make The Lost Vikings along with Blackthorne and Rock & Roll Racing, although at the time they were under the Silicone Synapse title. I havent played R&R R or Blackthorne, but I can attest that TLV is a classic game, as is it's sequel. As for their later games, they have yet to make anything approaching a failure. You can still go out to stores and buy Warcraft II, a game released in 1996!

As for Sony, well, both Planetside and Galaxies bombed, and most of their other games are forgetable. I must admit that I dont know much about EQ 1 or 2, and while nothing about EQ2 has really caught my eye (their earlier screenshots were horrible), the recent movie they released was somewhat interesting.

That supposedly "unbiased" review: I read that a few months back, and in my opionion it is so biased its not even funny. He starts out right away with "EQ is better than WoW." He says that, basically, more = better. I think most people will agree with me that this is far from the truth. If you have hundreds of choices but there is little difference between most it ends up being worse off. EQ wins in classes and races simply because it has more, but the writer doesnt go into how much your choice will affect gameplay. He also pulls the hero classes out of thin air. Tutorial ... this will be making how much of a difference after the first 30 minutes? And evidently WoW's intuitive design counts for nothing in this area. Perhaps it has less tutorial because it simply doesnt need as much. Graphics: I guess ripples and swaying of plants counts for more than the horrendous plastic look of every character. Last he goes into Overall Immersiveness (something I consider to be one of the most important parts of any game) and somehow he ends up just comparing mounts in WoW to guilds in EQ2. These have little to do with immersiveness at all. What about a living world? Believable plots, characters, and quests? I want to feel like a hero, not guild member #135.
____________________________
Chahi
#38 Aug 03 2004 at 11:40 AM Rating: Default
*
158 posts
ff11 owns and WoW sucks to me i will still play ff11 even when it comes out cuz where else can you play with ps2 and have fun getting maried while doing it???????????
____________________________
Help a brotha out
#39 Aug 03 2004 at 2:51 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
149 posts
As for FFXI THF class: 1-15 they are gimp (better if you level as your second job, with WAR as subjob) 15-30 they do kick *** damage.

30-60 they don't only do damage (although in your 40s other classes catch up, although ranger has always been there) they also help control hate. During this time they are not the best damage dealers, but my parsing in my 50s has shown me I don't suck either.

60+ people have differing opinions whether or not someone with a subjob of thief can do a better job than a thief.

As for WoW vs. FFXI. One of my LS mates in FFXI has played WoW. He didn't like it. Its too easy to level. But then again he is a high 60s low 70s WHM intending on doing Dynamis.

So I really think FFXI is for people who like the grouping more, and not really into games where everyone can solo.
#40 Aug 07 2004 at 11:57 PM Rating: Default
*
199 posts
well if u play ff wow will prolly seem much easier, i personally am looking forward to it so i wont have to be a beastmaster like on ff if i want to solo. cause in ff u spend weeks leveling then hrs farming gil for new equip since its nearly impossible to get the good nms due to botting programs becoming more and more available on japanese sites and some american sites, eventually more as more of us get them and create them. so im lookin forward to wow.
____________________________
Treat 1 as 1000 and 1000 as 1.
#41 Aug 09 2004 at 1:06 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
151 posts
Blizzard has stated they know leveling is too easy in the beta and it will be addressed. The majority of the people I have talked to and played with in the beta assume Bliz did this to test the higher level content. Since play time in any beta is limited, toons must be able to level faster or "upper level" content couldn't be thoroughly tested.

As it has been stated before, trying to compare a game in phase three of beta to a game that is over two years old is impossible to do. WoW has been a joy to play in the beta, but there are major and minor problems Bliz is still fixing.
____________________________
"Ahh, and it begins, promises not met to rush the game out...." -Stabbed

"It's the standard Blizzard operating procedure; make something suck, then make a talent to make it suck less." -Gigashadow
#42 Aug 09 2004 at 8:33 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
130 posts
Okay here is my 2 cents/plat/gil/blah.....

Varent > all http://www.vanguardsoh.com

This will undoubtidly be the greatest online RPG ever as these people started the whole mmorpg genre (i dont care what games were before, varent revolutionized). Oh and yay for dragonlance and the D&D team who inspired varent.
#43 Aug 09 2004 at 10:38 PM Rating: Decent
****
6,677 posts
Not to nitpick, but it's Verant.
____________________________
Only the exceptions can be exceptional.
#44 Aug 11 2004 at 12:19 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
469 posts
Azuarc wrote:
Not to nitpick, but it's Garbage.

Fixed.

Oh no, some mysterious game that won't be out for a long long time will crush all other MMORPGs! Run for the hills!
____________________________
Jaef -- 60 Hunter -- Crushridge
Shiesty -- 60 Warrior -- Crushridge
#45 Aug 11 2004 at 1:08 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
428 posts
JAEFo wrote:
Azuarc wrote:
Not to nitpick, but it's Garbage.
Fixed.

couldn't have fixed it better myself. Verant is complete garbage. even though i liked some of the games they helped support, they are the worst. They are by far the most money grubbing mmo makers in the market. something just feels wrong anytime you have to interact with Verant, ask those that played EQ. imo, Verant < all. like i said, i liked some of the games they were a part of, but seriously, if there was an mmo maker out there that i trusted the least, it would be Verant.
#46 Aug 11 2004 at 6:15 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
130 posts
Varent is anything but money-grubbing. Yes they made the origional everquest, ruins of kunark, and scars of velous (spelling is prolly wrong). If any of you ever played EQ then you know those are the BEST expansions that were ever released. After that Sony bought the licensing and without the help of varent released all the crappy expansions after that. Varent = good , sony = bad
#47 Aug 11 2004 at 7:03 PM Rating: Decent
**
300 posts
Indeed, Sony=Bad
#48 Aug 12 2004 at 12:37 AM Rating: Good
Sage
**
469 posts
Ixthontus wrote:
Stuff and things
Just nod and smile, folks. Nod and smile.
____________________________
Jaef -- 60 Hunter -- Crushridge
Shiesty -- 60 Warrior -- Crushridge
#49 Aug 12 2004 at 11:15 AM Rating: Decent
*
158 posts
ugh. You have it backwards. Maybe it was pressure from sony, but Verant sucked. I'm guessing you never had to deal with them directly?
____________________________
Pointless FFXI data goes here.
#50 Aug 15 2004 at 12:18 AM Rating: Decent
**
337 posts
Quote:
|Originally posted by: Chahi Scholar
That supposedly "unbiased" review: I read that a few months back, and in my opionion it is so biased its not even funny. He starts out right away with "EQ is better than WoW." He says that, basically, more = better. I think most people will agree with me that this is far from the truth. If you have hundreds of choices but there is little difference between most it ends up being worse off. EQ wins in classes and races simply because it has more, but the writer doesnt go into how much your choice will affect gameplay. He also pulls the hero classes out of thin air. Tutorial ... this will be making how much of a difference after the first 30 minutes? And evidently WoW's intuitive design counts for nothing in this area. Perhaps it has less tutorial because it simply doesnt need as much. Graphics: I guess ripples and swaying of plants counts for more than the horrendous plastic look of every character. Last he goes into Overall Immersiveness (something I consider to be one of the most important parts of any game) and somehow he ends up just comparing mounts in WoW to guilds in EQ2. These have little to do with immersiveness at all. What about a living world? Believable plots, characters, and quests? I want to feel like a hero, not guild member #135.


Bravo.
That was truly.. amazing. I sent that "dethstryker" kid an email, and, strangely enough, added about half of this post, without even reading it. Then, when I read it.. I was blown away. I could not have done better myself. You rock.

As for the how WoW could be done inside a year, ack, I must disagree, even though I have not tested, even Diablo II: LoD kept me going for a good 2-3 years. And, Starcraft, around 5-6 years. With an MMORPG.. Ouch.. I am gonna be 60 before I finish it o.O, aw well, ::rolleyes::!

P.S. Look at the title, and the entire theme of the site for the supposedly "unbiased" review. All EQ2 themed.

Edited, Sun Aug 15 01:26:25 2004 by Creamed
____________________________
Quote:
|Originally posted by: JAEFo
Creamed, there's an /ignore command for a reason. Not all problems have to be solved with a blade.


Reggad - (Test 4); Clan Contamination
#51 Aug 29 2004 at 6:04 PM Rating: Decent
**
356 posts
SoE is really destroying EQ.

LoY expansion is horrible. A new race, a new and totally worthless item slot, and 5 or so new zones that are mostly empty...

LDoN expansion, while not horrible, but totally lacking in content. 5 "themes" marketed as "48 zones" tells me that company is just horrible.

And just when you think SoE can't make worse expansion, here comes the dreadful GoD. marketed as 20 zones expansion. 4 instanced super tiny single purpose "sewers" that counted as 4. Plus 2 equally tiny and "almost" pointless "mountain trails". And even with such almost non existant amount of content they feel the need block player progression for months, directly or indirectly forcing many uber guild to quit.

Without great and meaningful expansions like SoV and RoK and to a much lesser extend Luclin, I may suck up those SoE made expansion as the standard, but I have seen great zones that is designed with -=EFFORT=-, like the home town of the giants/dwarf/dragons, Seb/Howling Stone/etc... Compare those real zones to the ultra crap in SoE expansions... And how can anyone says Verant is worse?


Edited, Sun Aug 29 22:40:39 2004 by Gobio

Edited, Sun Aug 29 22:43:58 2004 by Gobio
« Previous 1 2 3
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 72 All times are in CST
Kastigir, TherealLogros, Anonymous Guests (70)