Green Monster Games - Curt Schilling

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
T

Twobit_sl

shitlord
6
0
I guess you could call Speedtree an engine and then Unreal 3.0 another one, etc. Not that they are using these, just examples.
 
V

Venjenz_foh

shitlord
0
0
redjunkopera said:
Playing a bard in EQ1 was the best.
Click to expand...
It"s my current MMO project. Made a drakkin bard on Maelin (needed to raid my old toons" bank accounts), and the only thing I"ve ever played with this much interaction with the character was an AO Metaphysicist.

I hope the folks at GMG have classes like an EQ1 bard that are in that "crappy if you play vanilla, but badass if you work at it" style.
 
N

Ngruk_foh

shitlord
0
0
Havelock said:
I"m pretty ignorant, but would multiple engines suggest multiple environments (e.g., land/space or land/water)?
Click to expand...
Multiple engines means more than one potential engine solution. A combination of 2 products that are both offered as a single game engine solution. Speedtree btw, is not an engine in the sense of what I am talking about. Speedtree is a middleware solution, much like AI solutions, physics solutions. Engine discussions I am talking about are the nuts and bolts that provide the product from the client/server side.
 
M

Monsoon_foh

shitlord
0
0
Venjenz said:
I hope the folks at GMG have classes like an EQ1 bard that are in that "crappy if you play vanilla, but badass if you work at it" style.
Click to expand...
GMG (Green Monster Games) was renamed to 38 Studios some time ago I believe. So now the shorthand might just be "38." But yeah, totally agree about the bard-type skill level class. I"m pretty eager to see what the 38 team is brewing up for us in terms of class design.

Hey Curt, I have one general question about class design. Will it be the EQ2-type archetypes that branch out or the traditional 8 or so beginning classes? And I completely agree with you about holding back information and not caving in to public demand for it. Nothing whatsoever to gain from releasing information too early, only negatives. It ended up hurting Sigil/Vanguard"s team big time.

Also, if things don"t work out with the Red Sox, I personally invite you to come and join Joe Torre in Los Angeles. A-Rod may be here as well to give you some run support. The nicer areas(Palos Verdes, Newport Beach, etc.) have wonderful school systems that are highly-regarded nationwide, clean safe neighborhoods, etc. Entertainment companies, Hollywood, publishing houses, huge markets, all smack dab in Los Angeles. And just by being a marquee player on an LA sports team, your name will penetrate the entertainment market here and will give your company even more clout should you decide to use it.

I don"t know if you remember, but back when you were on the D-Backs, I logged onto Povar and offered your monk a Tranquil Staff if you would come pitch for the Dodgers. You told me you"d love to, but there were 30 million reasons why you can"t. And that pretty much shut me up because it"s hard to argue with 30 million plat. I mean, did I say plat?
 
Fadaar

Fadaar

That guy
10,934
11,956
One thing I do not want to see is people having the choice on what their class can do. I loved the EQ style classes where what you get is what you get. None of this shadow form look at me I"m a priest but I don"t heal bullshit. Stick to the cookie cutter.
 
G

Gecko_foh

shitlord
0
0
I"d guess you are in the minority. Generic classes with no options are boring.

Choices and differences are what make these games fun. If everyone is the same fighter, rogue, and cleric then it limits things, and also makes the world much more droll and dull.
 
P

Plorkyeran_foh

shitlord
0
0
Choices are good, but I"d definitely agree that classes should stick to one role, if just to avoid Makata-like idiots from whining about offspecs. Instead of just giving up and giving tanks/healers dps specs, find some way to make soloing as a healer or tank fun and efficient.

Or just steal FFXI"s job system.
 
T

Tolanin_foh

shitlord
0
0
offspecs are nice because when your spec of choice gets fucked up and becomes terrible you have the option to go to a new better one without a reroll.. happens all the time in WoW... and imo was one of the major flaws of EQ since we pretty often saw times when one or two classes just became not so viable and without any offspecs those people are pretty screwed.

I think you guys should pick the engine that looks awesome, doesnt lag and lets you easily add tons of cool scripted stuff. all ya gotta do is find it.
 
P

Plorkyeran_foh

shitlord
0
0
I can"t think of a single time in WoW where people switched en masse to a different role because the old main role became worthless. The closest thing would be druids going from resto to feral as the "default" spec, but you never really wanted more than 1-2 resto druids in the raid pre-TBC either. It"s never really even happened within the same role, either. All of the changes in the "best" spec for dps classes have been the result of buffs, not nerfs (other than warlocks pre-TBC, but all warlock specs sucked pre-TBC for raiding).

There"s a lot of problems with the mage talent trees, but they"re still pretty much what class customization should look like: three significantly different ways to achive the same thing that are all at least close to viable.
 
Agraza

Agraza

Registered Hutt
6,890
521
My issue with wow"s talent trees is that I believe a class should have a role regardless of spec and that their spec should determine the execution and flavor. Unfortunately the some of the talent trees in WoW determine the nature of your role rather than enhancing what is already present. I think all paladins should be frontline melee forces with ret being the slayer, prot being the tank, and holy being a more buff heavy aura focused close range support, not unlike a holy bard for melee. Regardless of which way they go they are in there swinging their blade at the mob.

Druids are especially bad, but really the only class with a viable excuse. Different druids trained to perform different roles - I get that. I still think the talent trees should complement the native role rather than send your character out into 2 or 3 different directions.

So if your idea of talent trees breaks a class into multiple classes (when you have to ask the shaman if they"re resto or enh to fill the spot in your group - they"re separate) then I"m against it. I simply do not appreciate that method of specialization while I recognize that many players, stupidly, want these talent trees. I"d be just as good without them.
 
Cybsled

Cybsled

Naxxramas 1.0 Raider
17,087
13,610
I liked FFXI"s job system...the only downside was that game"s HORRIBLE leveling system and the fact alot of job combos were ultra-worthless. Nothing like having to level a sub-class that no-one wants to invite to a group.

WoW"s talent system is nice...the only problem is that while you have the illusion of choice, in reality there are only a few specs that actually optimize you as a class in raiding or pvp. Straight up grouping is, thankfully, pretty forgiving. They"ve made some gains in the past few months with specs/talents, though.
 
Fadaar

Fadaar

That guy
10,934
11,956
Agraza said:
My issue with wow"s talent trees is that I believe a class should have a role regardless of spec and that their spec should determine the execution and flavor. Unfortunately the some of the talent trees in WoW determine the nature of your role rather than enhancing what is already present. I think all paladins should be frontline melee forces with ret being the slayer, prot being the tank, and holy being a more buff heavy aura focused close range support, not unlike a holy bard for melee. Regardless of which way they go they are in there swinging their blade at the mob.

Druids are especially bad, but really the only class with a viable excuse. Different druids trained to perform different roles - I get that. I still think the talent trees should complement the native role rather than send your character out into 2 or 3 different directions.

So if your idea of talent trees breaks a class into multiple classes (when you have to ask the shaman if they"re resto or enh to fill the spot in your group - they"re separate) then I"m against it. I simply do not appreciate that method of specialization while I recognize that many players, stupidly, want these talent trees. I"d be just as good without them.
Click to expand...
My thoughts exactly. What I want to see for classes is essentially what you said -- baseline classes with progression paths that enhance the abilities you already have, not grant you new ones that completely change your class (see shadow priests and pretty much every tree for the three "hybrid classes" [druid/paladin/shaman]). Pretty much what I want to see is classes with a predetermined role and progression trees similar to the pure dps classes. For classes like rogues/mages/warlocks/hunters, their job is always the same: do damage (and various cc"s for all four classes, in fact the four damage classes are also the four crowd control classes now that I think about it). Their three trees let them augment the way in which they do said damage. Arcane, fire, and frost all require vastly different gear/gem setups. Same with warlocks with affliction and destruction. My point is the job doesn"t change simply because a hunter decides to swap from beast mastery to marksmanship. Sure some encounters might favor one over the other because of various mechanics differences, but that"s just the way things work.

First thing that came to mind was Diablo II"s skill trees. In my opinion that was a great way of developing your character along with the usual leveling up and health/mana/stat boosts you get from it. It"s been a while, but if memory serves me correctly the max you could put into a skill (not counting charms) was 20. Maybe cut that down for MMO"s unless you get multiple points per level, but 5 seems like a good number. Essentially you can marginally boost certain abilities, but not changing the way your class functions. For healing classes you could have a tree devoted to marginally boosting your (weak) damage abilities to let you solo as you level up. At max level your damage output will suck terribly in group play (monsters that require a few people to take down), but you can still do enough damage when solo grinding outdoor mobs for cash, quests, or whatever. Basically it forces you into a predetermined role, but doesn"t completely remove your ability to solo if you want.

Bottom line is you"re still doing the same job you signed up for when you created the character, you just modify your abilities to which you prefer and suits your playstyle.
 
D

darksensei_foh

shitlord
0
0
Agraza said:
My issue with wow"s talent trees is that I believe a class should have a role regardless of spec and that their spec should determine the execution and flavor. Unfortunately the some of the talent trees in WoW determine the nature of your role rather than enhancing what is already present. I think all paladins should be frontline melee forces with ret being the slayer, prot being the tank, and holy being a more buff heavy aura focused close range support, not unlike a holy bard for melee. Regardless of which way they go they are in there swinging their blade at the mob.

Druids are especially bad, but really the only class with a viable excuse. Different druids trained to perform different roles - I get that. I still think the talent trees should complement the native role rather than send your character out into 2 or 3 different directions.

So if your idea of talent trees breaks a class into multiple classes (when you have to ask the shaman if they"re resto or enh to fill the spot in your group - they"re separate) then I"m against it. I simply do not appreciate that method of specialization while I recognize that many players, stupidly, want these talent trees. I"d be just as good without them.
Click to expand...
Indeed.
 
Azrayne

Azrayne

Irenicus did nothing wrong
2,161
786
Fadaar said:
My thoughts exactly. What I want to see for classes is essentially what you said -- baseline classes with progression paths that enhance the abilities you already have, not grant you new ones that completely change your class (see shadow priests and pretty much every tree for the three "hybrid classes" [druid/paladin/shaman]). Pretty much what I want to see is classes with a predetermined role and progression trees similar to the pure dps classes. For classes like rogues/mages/warlocks/hunters, their job is always the same: do damage (and various cc"s for all four classes, in fact the four damage classes are also the four crowd control classes now that I think about it). Their three trees let them augment the way in which they do said damage. Arcane, fire, and frost all require vastly different gear/gem setups. Same with warlocks with affliction and destruction. My point is the job doesn"t change simply because a hunter decides to swap from beast mastery to marksmanship. Sure some encounters might favor one over the other because of various mechanics differences, but that"s just the way things work.

First thing that came to mind was Diablo II"s skill trees. In my opinion that was a great way of developing your character along with the usual leveling up and health/mana/stat boosts you get from it. It"s been a while, but if memory serves me correctly the max you could put into a skill (not counting charms) was 20. Maybe cut that down for MMO"s unless you get multiple points per level, but 5 seems like a good number. Essentially you can marginally boost certain abilities, but not changing the way your class functions. For healing classes you could have a tree devoted to marginally boosting your (weak) damage abilities to let you solo as you level up. At max level your damage output will suck terribly in group play (monsters that require a few people to take down), but you can still do enough damage when solo grinding outdoor mobs for cash, quests, or whatever. Basically it forces you into a predetermined role, but doesn"t completely remove your ability to solo if you want.

Bottom line is you"re still doing the same job you signed up for when you created the character, you just modify your abilities to which you prefer and suits your playstyle.
Click to expand...
This.
 
tyen

tyen

EQ in a browser wait time: ____
<Banned>
4,638
5,164
Nino said:
I predicted a WS sweep and was not disappointed. Congratulations on a stellar season.
Click to expand...
Cleveland will come back and win it all next year!!
 
Q

Quince_foh

shitlord
0
0
Hey Ngruk, grats on your new deal even if it does come with a weights clause

Did the studio have any effect in taking the lesser money from the socks instead of from Philly etc?
 
Deathwing

Deathwing

<Bronze Donator>
16,741
7,767
Fadaar said:
My thoughts exactly. What I want to see for classes is essentially what you said -- baseline classes with progression paths that enhance the abilities you already have, not grant you new ones that completely change your class (see shadow priests and pretty much every tree for the three "hybrid classes" [druid/paladin/shaman]). Pretty much what I want to see is classes with a predetermined role and progression trees similar to the pure dps classes. For classes like rogues/mages/warlocks/hunters, their job is always the same: do damage (and various cc"s for all four classes, in fact the four damage classes are also the four crowd control classes now that I think about it). Their three trees let them augment the way in which they do said damage. Arcane, fire, and frost all require vastly different gear/gem setups. Same with warlocks with affliction and destruction. My point is the job doesn"t change simply because a hunter decides to swap from beast mastery to marksmanship. Sure some encounters might favor one over the other because of various mechanics differences, but that"s just the way things work.

First thing that came to mind was Diablo II"s skill trees. In my opinion that was a great way of developing your character along with the usual leveling up and health/mana/stat boosts you get from it. It"s been a while, but if memory serves me correctly the max you could put into a skill (not counting charms) was 20. Maybe cut that down for MMO"s unless you get multiple points per level, but 5 seems like a good number. Essentially you can marginally boost certain abilities, but not changing the way your class functions. For healing classes you could have a tree devoted to marginally boosting your (weak) damage abilities to let you solo as you level up. At max level your damage output will suck terribly in group play (monsters that require a few people to take down), but you can still do enough damage when solo grinding outdoor mobs for cash, quests, or whatever. Basically it forces you into a predetermined role, but doesn"t completely remove your ability to solo if you want.

Bottom line is you"re still doing the same job you signed up for when you created the character, you just modify your abilities to which you prefer and suits your playstyle.
Click to expand...
I get your point, but I think you"re really grasping at straws. I"m considering resubbing just to do 5-mans and maybe 10-mans, and some PvP. I"ll most likely play a druid because the feral tree is ridiculous and the amount of flexibility the class provides. I can be a healer, tank or dps in one class, providing I have the proper gear.

Sounds to me like you"ve been burnt a few times few times by a feral or enhancement healer. Otherwise, I really can"t find a good reason for what your suggesting(watering down the talent trees). What problem is that going to solve while making players jaded when they eventually get bored with whatever role they"ve been forced into and have to reroll?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.