This whole thing reeked of a trial balloon from EA. Either that or Flagship was planning on this and are kind of shocked at the resistance it met with and are now trying to please everyone.
Error on
0
MorninglordI'm tired of being Batman,so today I'll be Owl.Registered Userregular
I think a vein in my forehead just popped from the sheer stupidity of you whiny fucks.
Mine popped a long time ago.
I think the crux of this will be how much will you get for how much. Stable servers for 15 bucks a month for this level of game is crap. Guild wars gives you that for free. But, a couple of bucks a month, not bad at all. Throw in regular content, 5 bucks a month. Or whatever.
Point is, we don't know enough to make broad statements...either way. I for one will get it for Single players, either way. But whether I pay monthly will be determined by how much it costs, and what they give me for it. Kinda like every other product or service on the planet.
Actually, the crux of the matter is ea is involved so bill roper loses all my trust for associating with fuckwads. There are other publishers.
Morninglord on
(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
I think a vein in my forehead just popped from the sheer stupidity of you whiny fucks.
Mine popped a long time ago.
I think the crux of this will be how much will you get for how much. Stable servers for 15 bucks a month for this level of game is crap. Guild wars gives you that for free. But, a couple of bucks a month, not bad at all. Throw in regular content, 5 bucks a month. Or whatever.
Point is, we don't know enough to make broad statements...either way. I for one will get it for Single players, either way. But whether I pay monthly will be determined by how much it costs, and what they give me for it. Kinda like every other product or service on the planet.
Actually, the crux of the matter is ea is involved so bill roper loses all my trust for associating with fuckwads. There are other publishers.
Ther are very few other publishers these days that can offer the cash, clout and weight that EA can. Like them or hate them, I can see why he wouldn't have a problem with their backing.
Aoi on
0
MorninglordI'm tired of being Batman,so today I'll be Owl.Registered Userregular
I think a vein in my forehead just popped from the sheer stupidity of you whiny fucks.
Mine popped a long time ago.
I think the crux of this will be how much will you get for how much. Stable servers for 15 bucks a month for this level of game is crap. Guild wars gives you that for free. But, a couple of bucks a month, not bad at all. Throw in regular content, 5 bucks a month. Or whatever.
Point is, we don't know enough to make broad statements...either way. I for one will get it for Single players, either way. But whether I pay monthly will be determined by how much it costs, and what they give me for it. Kinda like every other product or service on the planet.
Actually, the crux of the matter is ea is involved so bill roper loses all my trust for associating with fuckwads. There are other publishers.
Ther are very few other publishers these days that can offer the cash, clout and weight that EA can. Like them or hate them, I can see why he wouldn't have a problem with their backing.
They do exist though. And he obviously doesn't trust himself and his game enough to not use fucktards just because they're powerful. There is a LOT of hype about this game and it's not because they're using ea.
Morninglord on
(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
I think a vein in my forehead just popped from the sheer stupidity of you whiny fucks.
Mine popped a long time ago.
I think the crux of this will be how much will you get for how much. Stable servers for 15 bucks a month for this level of game is crap. Guild wars gives you that for free. But, a couple of bucks a month, not bad at all. Throw in regular content, 5 bucks a month. Or whatever.
Point is, we don't know enough to make broad statements...either way. I for one will get it for Single players, either way. But whether I pay monthly will be determined by how much it costs, and what they give me for it. Kinda like every other product or service on the planet.
This is a fair statement and one I'd expect from someone with an ounce of critical thinking.
I think a vein in my forehead just popped from the sheer stupidity of you whiny fucks.
Mine popped a long time ago.
I think the crux of this will be how much will you get for how much. Stable servers for 15 bucks a month for this level of game is crap. Guild wars gives you that for free. But, a couple of bucks a month, not bad at all. Throw in regular content, 5 bucks a month. Or whatever.
Point is, we don't know enough to make broad statements...either way. I for one will get it for Single players, either way. But whether I pay monthly will be determined by how much it costs, and what they give me for it. Kinda like every other product or service on the planet.
Actually, the crux of the matter is ea is involved so bill roper loses all my trust for associating with fuckwads. There are other publishers.
Ther are very few other publishers these days that can offer the cash, clout and weight that EA can. Like them or hate them, I can see why he wouldn't have a problem with their backing.
They do exist though. And he obviously doesn't trust himself and his game enough to not use fucktards just because they're powerful. There is a LOT of hype about this game and it's not because they're using ea.
Who are these other publishers?
Atari? HAHAHAHA
Ubisoft? It'd already be pushed out the door, buggy as hell and nobody would play it.
In the game of publishers, I think everyone loses. You only "win" by losing the least.
Derrick on
Steam and CFN: Enexemander
0
MorninglordI'm tired of being Batman,so today I'll be Owl.Registered Userregular
I think a vein in my forehead just popped from the sheer stupidity of you whiny fucks.
Mine popped a long time ago.
I think the crux of this will be how much will you get for how much. Stable servers for 15 bucks a month for this level of game is crap. Guild wars gives you that for free. But, a couple of bucks a month, not bad at all. Throw in regular content, 5 bucks a month. Or whatever.
Point is, we don't know enough to make broad statements...either way. I for one will get it for Single players, either way. But whether I pay monthly will be determined by how much it costs, and what they give me for it. Kinda like every other product or service on the planet.
Actually, the crux of the matter is ea is involved so bill roper loses all my trust for associating with fuckwads. There are other publishers.
Ther are very few other publishers these days that can offer the cash, clout and weight that EA can. Like them or hate them, I can see why he wouldn't have a problem with their backing.
They do exist though. And he obviously doesn't trust himself and his game enough to not use fucktards just because they're powerful. There is a LOT of hype about this game and it's not because they're using ea.
Who are these other publishers?
Atari? HAHAHAHA
Ubisoft? It'd already be pushed out the door, buggy as hell and nobody would play it.
In the game of publishers, I think everyone loses. You only "win" by losing the least.
I recind my arguments. I'm too angry to think properly and I've said nothing useful in this thread. I just went for a walk and realised how stupid I'm being.
Sorry guys. You don't deserve this.
Morninglord on
(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
Actually, right when you buy the game, when it launches there will already be content available that you can't get in the single-player--additional monsters, areas, all the community and economy things, you'll be able to form guilds, auction houses, all those things you expect from MMOs.
So basically, he's saying that from the start you'll be able to pay for content that could have been included on the disk. Or better yet, is probably on the disk already but requires an unlock from their server.
This is a far cry from Gran Turismo.
Personally I have no problems paying a fee if they're going to take initiative and provide an exceptional medium to make online play as enjoyable as possible.
I don't see what people are whining about either. Having servers up so people can play games costs money. This is a first endeavor into making something new and fresh after breaking off a known company and that takes balls in this day and age. Especially since most games these days don't turn a profit. So what if they want to prolong the longevity of this franchise and quite possibly the whole company?
I think a vein in my forehead just popped from the sheer stupidity of you whiny fucks.
How is saying "I am not going to play this game if I have to pay" whining in any way? Flagship describes a system which, with the exception of several awesome features, seems to closely mirror that of Guild Wars, a game also developed by a freshly formed company (Guild Wars was ArenaNet's first game, yes?). Why should people be expected to support a system, which has been shown to be doable for free, beyond what they consider reasonable means? Because the developer has balls? Give me a break.
Actually, right when you buy the game, when it launches there will already be content available that you can't get in the single-player--additional monsters, areas, all the community and economy things, you'll be able to form guilds, auction houses, all those things you expect from MMOs.
So basically, he's saying that from the start you'll be able to pay for content that could have been included on the disk. Or better yet, is probably on the disk already but requires an unlock from their server.
This is a far cry from Gran Turismo.
Personally I have no problems paying a fee if they're going to take initiative and provide an exceptional medium to make online play as enjoyable as possible.
I don't see what people are whining about either. Having servers up so people can play games costs money. This is a first endeavor into making something new and fresh after breaking off a known company and that takes balls in this day and age. Especially since most games these days don't turn a profit. So what if they want to prolong the longevity of this franchise and quite possibly the whole company?
I think a vein in my forehead just popped from the sheer stupidity of you whiny fucks.
How is saying "I am not going to play this game if I have to pay" whining in any way? Flagship describes a system which, with the exception of several awesome features, seems to closely mirror that of Guild Wars, a game also developed by a freshly formed company (Guild Wars was ArenaNet's first game, yes?). Why should people be expected to support a system, which has been shown to be doable for free, beyond what they consider reasonable means? Because the developer has balls? Give me a break.
Because this is not really anything like GW.
EDIT: I'm not going to try and explain it to you guys because you don't seem to really know anything about the game, nor do you want to.
Actually, right when you buy the game, when it launches there will already be content available that you can't get in the single-player--additional monsters, areas, all the community and economy things, you'll be able to form guilds, auction houses, all those things you expect from MMOs.
So basically, he's saying that from the start you'll be able to pay for content that could have been included on the disk. Or better yet, is probably on the disk already but requires an unlock from their server.
This is a far cry from Gran Turismo.
Personally I have no problems paying a fee if they're going to take initiative and provide an exceptional medium to make online play as enjoyable as possible.
I don't see what people are whining about either. Having servers up so people can play games costs money. This is a first endeavor into making something new and fresh after breaking off a known company and that takes balls in this day and age. Especially since most games these days don't turn a profit. So what if they want to prolong the longevity of this franchise and quite possibly the whole company?
I think a vein in my forehead just popped from the sheer stupidity of you whiny fucks.
How is saying "I am not going to play this game if I have to pay" whining in any way? Flagship describes a system which, with the exception of several awesome features, seems to closely mirror that of Guild Wars, a game also developed by a freshly formed company (Guild Wars was ArenaNet's first game, yes?). Why should people be expected to support a system, which has been shown to be doable for free, beyond what they consider reasonable means? Because the developer has balls? Give me a break.
Because this is not really anything like GW.
EDIT: I'm not going to try and explain it to you guys because you don't seem to really know anything about the game, nor do you want to.
I think Cuckoo is referring more to the features and less to the gameplay. We realize that the two games don't play similarly, but the multiplayer features are fairly similar.
Actually, right when you buy the game, when it launches there will already be content available that you can't get in the single-player--additional monsters, areas, all the community and economy things, you'll be able to form guilds, auction houses, all those things you expect from MMOs.
So basically, he's saying that from the start you'll be able to pay for content that could have been included on the disk. Or better yet, is probably on the disk already but requires an unlock from their server.
This is a far cry from Gran Turismo.
Personally I have no problems paying a fee if they're going to take initiative and provide an exceptional medium to make online play as enjoyable as possible.
I don't see what people are whining about either. Having servers up so people can play games costs money. This is a first endeavor into making something new and fresh after breaking off a known company and that takes balls in this day and age. Especially since most games these days don't turn a profit. So what if they want to prolong the longevity of this franchise and quite possibly the whole company?
I think a vein in my forehead just popped from the sheer stupidity of you whiny fucks.
How is saying "I am not going to play this game if I have to pay" whining in any way? Flagship describes a system which, with the exception of several awesome features, seems to closely mirror that of Guild Wars, a game also developed by a freshly formed company (Guild Wars was ArenaNet's first game, yes?). Why should people be expected to support a system, which has been shown to be doable for free, beyond what they consider reasonable means? Because the developer has balls? Give me a break.
Guild Wars is the only card you have. In my opinion the company was over ambitious, regardless of their success.
The ones making Hellgate London are people that are already seasoned in the business of making games.
Whether or not they manage to keep to that schedule we'll have to see I suppose. If the Flagship developers maintain the same track record as they did in Blizzard, I wouldn't be surprised if it gets pushed back to ensure that the game is in good shape before it's shipped. Mind you, if it did get pushed back to 2008 it'd nearly coincide with the 10th year anniversary of Diablo 2's release.
I think a vein in my forehead just popped from the sheer stupidity of you whiny fucks.
Mine popped a long time ago.
I think the crux of this will be how much will you get for how much. Stable servers for 15 bucks a month for this level of game is crap. Guild wars gives you that for free. But, a couple of bucks a month, not bad at all. Throw in regular content, 5 bucks a month. Or whatever.
Point is, we don't know enough to make broad statements...either way. I for one will get it for Single players, either way. But whether I pay monthly will be determined by how much it costs, and what they give me for it. Kinda like every other product or service on the planet.
Actually, the crux of the matter is ea is involved so bill roper loses all my trust for associating with fuckwads. There are other publishers.
Ther are very few other publishers these days that can offer the cash, clout and weight that EA can. Like them or hate them, I can see why he wouldn't have a problem with their backing.
They do exist though. And he obviously doesn't trust himself and his game enough to not use fucktards just because they're powerful. There is a LOT of hype about this game and it's not because they're using ea.
Who are these other publishers?
Atari? HAHAHAHA
Ubisoft? It'd already be pushed out the door, buggy as hell and nobody would play it.
In the game of publishers, I think everyone loses. You only "win" by losing the least.
I recind my arguments. I'm too angry to think properly and I've said nothing useful in this thread. I just went for a walk and realised how stupid I'm being.
Sorry guys. You don't deserve this.
When I went to Digital Life in NYC back in October, I asked Roper a bunch of questions about HG:L. One thing he said is that they were unsure of the multiplayer stuff. He was unsure of pricing, pay to play, MMORPG ishness of it. So they have been considering the pay portion for the multiplayer for a while.
He was also unsure of other stuff, how big the party size would be, what will the max level of a character be. If they were going to have an auction house. He kept saying that stuff was open to tweaking to make sure that it felt right.
So am I the only person who wasn't really that impressed with Hellgate even before this whole "maybe pay to play" thing was introduced? An FPS where you don't actually aim, and in which all the levels are pre-generated, and which appears to follow a generic DOOM-ish EVIL DEMONS AND BADASS GUNMEN artstyle excite me does not.
So am I the only person who wasn't really that impressed with Hellgate even before this whole "maybe pay to play" thing was introduced? An FPS where you don't actually aim, and in which all the levels are pre-generated, and which appears to follow a generic DOOM-ish EVIL DEMONS AND BADASS GUNMEN artstyle excite me does not.
It's as much an FPS as Oblivion is. The levels aren't pre-generated, which is one of its greatest features as far as I'm concerned. I dunno, maybe it's just not for you. :V
I think a vein in my forehead just popped from the sheer stupidity of you whiny fucks.
Mine popped a long time ago.
I think the crux of this will be how much will you get for how much. Stable servers for 15 bucks a month for this level of game is crap. Guild wars gives you that for free. But, a couple of bucks a month, not bad at all. Throw in regular content, 5 bucks a month. Or whatever.
Point is, we don't know enough to make broad statements...either way. I for one will get it for Single players, either way. But whether I pay monthly will be determined by how much it costs, and what they give me for it. Kinda like every other product or service on the planet.
Actually, the crux of the matter is ea is involved so bill roper loses all my trust for associating with fuckwads. There are other publishers.
Ther are very few other publishers these days that can offer the cash, clout and weight that EA can. Like them or hate them, I can see why he wouldn't have a problem with their backing.
They do exist though. And he obviously doesn't trust himself and his game enough to not use fucktards just because they're powerful. There is a LOT of hype about this game and it's not because they're using ea.
Who are these other publishers?
Atari? HAHAHAHA
Ubisoft? It'd already be pushed out the door, buggy as hell and nobody would play it.
In the game of publishers, I think everyone loses. You only "win" by losing the least.
I recind my arguments. I'm too angry to think properly and I've said nothing useful in this thread. I just went for a walk and realised how stupid I'm being.
Sorry guys. You don't deserve this.
should of gone with steam.
THQ allowed Relic to launch Company of Heroes with no cd-check. They get my vote for 'only publisher worth a damn'.
So am I the only person who wasn't really that impressed with Hellgate even before this whole "maybe pay to play" thing was introduced? An FPS where you don't actually aim, and in which all the levels are pre-generated, and which appears to follow a generic DOOM-ish EVIL DEMONS AND BADASS GUNMEN artstyle excite me does not.
It's 3rd Person and First. It has soft-aiming like Halo. Everything in the levels is randomized, including rare chances to have a random world with a different tileset.
An FPS where you don't actually aim, and in which all the levels are pre-generated, and which appears to follow a generic DOOM-ish EVIL DEMONS AND BADASS GUNMEN artstyle excite me does not.
If it was just an FPS I wouldn't be terribly impressed either. Arguably however, its selling point is the fact that it's an RPG. When it comes down to it, there really aren't all that many RPG's on the market at the moment that aren't set in a medival fantasy style setting.
An FPS where you don't actually aim, and in which all the levels are pre-generated, and which appears to follow a generic DOOM-ish EVIL DEMONS AND BADASS GUNMEN artstyle excite me does not.
If it was just an FPS I wouldn't be terribly impressed either. Arguably however, its selling point is the fact that it's an RPG. When it comes down to it, there really aren't all that many RPG's on the market at the moment that aren't set in a medival fantasy style setting.
So instead we've got medieval fantasy style knights and mages doing battle with medieval fantasy style demons and monsters, most of which will be taking place overground amongst decaying and destroyed gothic architecture and in dark underground dungeons (AKA the London transit system)... but it's set in "Future London" and has guns as well so that's makes it different enough doesn't it? :P
And yeah, I have to agree with Operative and say this doesn't really excite me much. Looking at the footage it just looks like a 3D Diablo II. Unless they get some decent pacing in there and make it so it's not just another grindfest, I doubt I'll be interested in it.
i theorise a phenomenon called the diablo clone curse
it's something i once tried to explain to vent, badly
no matter how awesome a diablo clone seems, they will always fuck up and the end result will not be as good as diablo
the mistake of this game is paid servers
I'd argue, that depending on what this fee gets you, their flaw was greed. While I can't claim to say what they're aiming for, the only justifiable reason to put a fee on a game like this game was if it had dynamically generated content, which appears to be what they're at least partially aiming for. Depending on how well they pull it off, how often content updates are, how large they are, and what the price is I might pick it up for the multi-player. If not maybe i'll just go for a LAN match instead with it, provided it has it.
This is the first I've heard of this game being an MMO... I expected to be able to play the single player game with a few friends, like in the Diablo games. Can you still do that?
And yeah, I have to agree with Operative and say this doesn't really excite me much. Looking at the footage it just looks like a 3D Diablo II. Unless they get some decent pacing in there and make it so it's not just another grindfest, I doubt I'll be interested in it.
Actually, it does excite me. The thing is, it excites me as an RPG rather than as an FPS. I mean, if you judge it by the standards of what you expect from an FPS then it's really not all that impressive. On the other hand, if you judge it by the criteria of what you'd expect from an RPG then it's a much more reasonable product.
I mean, as far as good RPG selling points go, you've got customizable characters (stat-wise that is, not sure how much control you have over appearance), modifiable weaponry and equipment (both in terms of stats, and appearance), full 3D environment (rather than an isometric view), and a setting that's unusual for RPG's (not for FPS's obviously, but RPG's haven't had too many DOOM settings just yet I don't think).
Granted the game might be a grindfest, but then again there are people that like grindfest (as demonstrated with the success of Diablo's hack and slash style gameplay).
For everyone's sake, I hope that Hellgate provides all the gameplay and enjoyment that everbody here feels entitled to.
However, with this game's history, it is my opinion that Flagship cannot be trusted. I have doubts that they will be able to ship Hellgate this summer, but if they do, I predict that it will be neutered and this 'new' online delivery concept will mean that Hellgate will become 'serialised'. Basically, periodic 'episodes' Sam and Max style.
fyi, I interviewed Bill Roper today on Hellgate and its CES presence, and that interview will go up on eToychest's Monday update. Pretty interesting stuff. We touch on the multiplayer stuffs, the confusion over his quotes at the event, and also the recent Hunter class as well.
Also, so this is not totally whorish, how about some pie for my friends at the bar?!?!
fyi, I interviewed Bill Roper today on Hellgate and its CES presence, and that interview will go up on eToychest's Monday update. Pretty interesting stuff. We touch on the multiplayer stuffs, the confusion over his quotes at the event, and also the recent Hunter class as well.
Also, so this is not totally whorish, how about some pie for my friends at the bar?!?!
I dunno I don't have a good feeling with the way they are taking this.
It seems like all these interviews that ask about multiplayer dance around the pay to play aspects going "It's free! not.. minor fees apply (fees may not actually be minor)". Every interview since the one that spilled the initial announcement has been all the stereotypical "yeah we it's bullshit" developer spcheel.
For everyone's sake, I hope that Hellgate provides all the gameplay and enjoyment that everbody here feels entitled to.
However, with this game's history, it is my opinion that Flagship cannot be trusted. I have doubts that they will be able to ship Hellgate this summer, but if they do, I predict that it will be neutered and this 'new' online delivery concept will mean that Hellgate will become 'serialised'. Basically, periodic 'episodes' Sam and Max style.
Posts
Actually, the crux of the matter is ea is involved so bill roper loses all my trust for associating with fuckwads. There are other publishers.
That's actually what I figured.
What are you going to do for raids with a rogue, a mage, and a warrior class? Just require more of them? yaaaaawn.
Ther are very few other publishers these days that can offer the cash, clout and weight that EA can. Like them or hate them, I can see why he wouldn't have a problem with their backing.
They do exist though. And he obviously doesn't trust himself and his game enough to not use fucktards just because they're powerful. There is a LOT of hype about this game and it's not because they're using ea.
This is a fair statement and one I'd expect from someone with an ounce of critical thinking.
Who are these other publishers?
Atari? HAHAHAHA
Ubisoft? It'd already be pushed out the door, buggy as hell and nobody would play it.
In the game of publishers, I think everyone loses. You only "win" by losing the least.
I recind my arguments. I'm too angry to think properly and I've said nothing useful in this thread. I just went for a walk and realised how stupid I'm being.
Sorry guys. You don't deserve this.
How is saying "I am not going to play this game if I have to pay" whining in any way? Flagship describes a system which, with the exception of several awesome features, seems to closely mirror that of Guild Wars, a game also developed by a freshly formed company (Guild Wars was ArenaNet's first game, yes?). Why should people be expected to support a system, which has been shown to be doable for free, beyond what they consider reasonable means? Because the developer has balls? Give me a break.
Because this is not really anything like GW.
EDIT: I'm not going to try and explain it to you guys because you don't seem to really know anything about the game, nor do you want to.
Guild Wars is the only card you have. In my opinion the company was over ambitious, regardless of their success.
The ones making Hellgate London are people that are already seasoned in the business of making games.
Here's a great article explaining the financial aspects behind the industry:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/issue/8/12
http://www.hellgatelondon.com/news/view/67/#fancy_panel
Whether or not they manage to keep to that schedule we'll have to see I suppose. If the Flagship developers maintain the same track record as they did in Blizzard, I wouldn't be surprised if it gets pushed back to ensure that the game is in good shape before it's shipped. Mind you, if it did get pushed back to 2008 it'd nearly coincide with the 10th year anniversary of Diablo 2's release.
should of gone with steam.
PSN: super_emu
Xbox360 Gamertag: Emuchop
He was also unsure of other stuff, how big the party size would be, what will the max level of a character be. If they were going to have an auction house. He kept saying that stuff was open to tweaking to make sure that it felt right.
THQ allowed Relic to launch Company of Heroes with no cd-check. They get my vote for 'only publisher worth a damn'.
It's 3rd Person and First. It has soft-aiming like Halo. Everything in the levels is randomized, including rare chances to have a random world with a different tileset.
If it was just an FPS I wouldn't be terribly impressed either. Arguably however, its selling point is the fact that it's an RPG. When it comes down to it, there really aren't all that many RPG's on the market at the moment that aren't set in a medival fantasy style setting.
So instead we've got medieval fantasy style knights and mages doing battle with medieval fantasy style demons and monsters, most of which will be taking place overground amongst decaying and destroyed gothic architecture and in dark underground dungeons (AKA the London transit system)... but it's set in "Future London" and has guns as well so that's makes it different enough doesn't it? :P
And yeah, I have to agree with Operative and say this doesn't really excite me much. Looking at the footage it just looks like a 3D Diablo II. Unless they get some decent pacing in there and make it so it's not just another grindfest, I doubt I'll be interested in it.
...That's exactly why I want the game. As long as it has hardcore mode too.
Animal Crossing WW: 2878-2531-4553
it's something i once tried to explain to vent, badly
no matter how awesome a diablo clone seems, they will always fuck up and the end result will not be as good as diablo
the mistake of this game is paid servers
I'd argue, that depending on what this fee gets you, their flaw was greed. While I can't claim to say what they're aiming for, the only justifiable reason to put a fee on a game like this game was if it had dynamically generated content, which appears to be what they're at least partially aiming for. Depending on how well they pull it off, how often content updates are, how large they are, and what the price is I might pick it up for the multi-player. If not maybe i'll just go for a LAN match instead with it, provided it has it.
But then they fucked it up by making it pay to play. I guess you're right.
This isn't a Diablo clone like Titans Quest.
Actually, it does excite me. The thing is, it excites me as an RPG rather than as an FPS. I mean, if you judge it by the standards of what you expect from an FPS then it's really not all that impressive. On the other hand, if you judge it by the criteria of what you'd expect from an RPG then it's a much more reasonable product.
I mean, as far as good RPG selling points go, you've got customizable characters (stat-wise that is, not sure how much control you have over appearance), modifiable weaponry and equipment (both in terms of stats, and appearance), full 3D environment (rather than an isometric view), and a setting that's unusual for RPG's (not for FPS's obviously, but RPG's haven't had too many DOOM settings just yet I don't think).
Granted the game might be a grindfest, but then again there are people that like grindfest (as demonstrated with the success of Diablo's hack and slash style gameplay).
For everyone's sake, I hope that Hellgate provides all the gameplay and enjoyment that everbody here feels entitled to.
However, with this game's history, it is my opinion that Flagship cannot be trusted. I have doubts that they will be able to ship Hellgate this summer, but if they do, I predict that it will be neutered and this 'new' online delivery concept will mean that Hellgate will become 'serialised'. Basically, periodic 'episodes' Sam and Max style.
Also, so this is not totally whorish, how about some pie for my friends at the bar?!?!
Mondaaayyyyyyyy?
Aw man, I want that shit toute suite.
Alright, I'll wait.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6164306.html
I dunno I don't have a good feeling with the way they are taking this.
It seems like all these interviews that ask about multiplayer dance around the pay to play aspects going "It's free! not.. minor fees apply (fees may not actually be minor)". Every interview since the one that spilled the initial announcement has been all the stereotypical "yeah we it's bullshit" developer spcheel.
I never asked for this!
Dungeon Siege 1 was a good Diablo clone. Just sayin'.
SS13 Rules Post
Until it stopped being a Diablo clone and became a Baldur's Gate + Diablo clone where you only had to hit a couple buttons every now and then.
So you've played it already?