What's new

ArcheAge, Don’t believe the hype...

Sorry I'm late to the party, but one thing came to mind after reading (85% of) your review:

You're reviewing a version 1.0 MMO.

And as much as people would like to compare WoW/GW2's current state to that of a new release, it's sort-of unfair. I played WoW 1.0, and let me say this: Archeage appears at the very least on-par.

Spoiler: WoW had no PVP incentive at launch, one battleground, 1 raid, and lots of faction griefing just to ENTER said raid.
----------

While I agree that dev's should have a finished product at release (blame the publishers), this has historically NEVER been the case with MMO's. FFS- SimCity peeps couldn't even PLAY for their first week, and it's not even an MMO!

To write off AA based on it's launch-day state (especially when you can't read the language) is a bit silly to me.
Everyone do yourself a favor: wait for a version in English, and allow some time for patches to balance the game's mechanics.
 
Sorry I'm late to the party, but one thing came to mind after reading (85% of) your review:

You're reviewing a version 1.0 MMO.

And as much as people would like to compare WoW/GW2's current state to that of a new release, it's sort-of unfair. I played WoW 1.0, and let me say this: Archeage appears at the very least on-par.

Spoiler: WoW had no PVP incentive at launch, one battleground, 1 raid, and lots of faction griefing just to ENTER said raid.
----------

While I agree that dev's should have a finished product at release (blame the publishers), this has historically NEVER been the case with MMO's. FFS- SimCity peeps couldn't even PLAY for their first week, and it's not even an MMO!

To write off AA based on it's launch-day state (especially when you can't read the language) is a bit silly to me.
Everyone do yourself a favor: wait for a version in English, and allow some time for patches to balance the game's mechanics.

I will say this: the fact that the game is coming to us after many patches on the Korean version is a plus as they are basically our beta testing in the world of an MMO where for some reason we have come to "accept" an unfinished product. That said though I still believe this game has some core fundamental flaws that are not a simple patch away. If we get out of the mindset that a game should be better months after its release, and take it for what it is now... You are left extremely short. Not being able to read Korean doesn't make the feel of combat or the majority of other points touched on in this article moot. Story is important but without a solid base foundation behind it, why not just read a book or watch lord of the rings.

I hope they can address a lot of these issues for a us release, unfortunately history shows this is not usually the case and what you see in the Korean version is what the us gets with translation.

Additionally WoW still had a visceral feel when playing it. Regardless of lack of endgame or incentive it had a polished feel. And that is important. Now why would we sell ourselves short when a game like WoW evolved and improved for better or worse over the years. Why must we be OK with starting at day one again of WOW's release. It has been many years and if developers don't acknowledge the advancements these mmos have done to make a better experience for their "release", they are not truly making a game I want to be a part of.

It is like saying the iPhone 1 didn't have wifi. So even though it was added to the iPhones OS later on when an Android phone is released it is ok to not have wifi because it might maybe eventually get it. The world moved forward, these games need to acknowledge the shortcomings AND the innovations to make something we can be happy with.
 
Sorry I'm late to the party, but one thing came to mind after reading (85% of) your review:

You're reviewing a version 1.0 MMO.

And as much as people would like to compare WoW/GW2's current state to that of a new release, it's sort-of unfair. I played WoW 1.0, and let me say this: Archeage appears at the very least on-par.

Spoiler: WoW had no PVP incentive at launch, one battleground, 1 raid, and lots of faction griefing just to ENTER said raid.
----------

While I agree that dev's should have a finished product at release (blame the publishers), this has historically NEVER been the case with MMO's. FFS- SimCity peeps couldn't even PLAY for their first week, and it's not even an MMO!

To write off AA based on it's launch-day state (especially when you can't read the language) is a bit silly to me.
Everyone do yourself a favor: wait for a version in English, and allow some time for patches to balance the game's mechanics.
Don't dismiss the fact that articles like this shine a light on the fact that what we are seeing is a 1.0 MMO when we expect more. The only reason we expect more is because that is the industry standard RIGHT NOW. Trion is going to give us an AA port that we can play and we expect it to be on par with the average of what is out there if we spend our money on it.

I hate to burst the bubble of all the AA fanboys and girls out there but the devs actually love this kind of review. They want to be able to see where they are falling down so they can fix it and get a larger chunk of the market share. They also love to hear the good parts about the game so they know what not to mess with.
 
....Additionally WoW still had a visceral feel when playing it. Regardless of lack of endgame or incentive it had a polished feel. And that is important. Now why would we sell ourselves short when a game like WoW evolved and improved for better or worse over the years. Why must we be OK with starting at day one again of WOW's release. It has been many years and if developers don't acknowledge the advancements these mmos have done to make a better experience for their "release", they are not truly making a game I want to be a part of.

It is like saying the iPhone 1 didn't have wifi. So even though it was added to the iPhones OS later on when an Android phone is released it is ok to not have wifi because it might maybe eventually get it. The world moved forward, these games need to acknowledge the shortcomings AND the innovations to make something we can be happy with.


Totally agree with most of what you're saying, _except_ that WoW had a visceral feel. Polished, yes, visceral no. Especially at 1.0, WoW was a grind-your-ass-of-stand-in-one-place-a-thon. And AA's combat seems to have plenty going for it from what I see. (With the big exception being the current CC-fest, which will surely be patched LONG before we get out NA port)

As for 'advancements these mmos have done' I think AA bests that standard handily...I mean, WoW is essentially the exact same game it was in 1.0, so I really don't get what you think fails about AA in comparison.

ESPECIALLY when considering:

1) Blizz has more money than any single developer ever has in human history. They choose to spend their money on other projects, and keep WoW fairly flat in terms of innovation.

2) ArcheAge was developed by a VERY small developer, with it being a total shocker that they got picked up and funded by NC. Even at that, they are offering more than Blizzard, admittedly with 1.0 balance issues, and the need for some gameplay tweaks.

______________________

Secondly, I especially dig the "the world moved forward" quote. :3

But I don't think AA's core gameplay seems to be outdated in any way...though I do prefer action over tab-targetting.[DOUBLEPOST=1364430592,1364430488][/DOUBLEPOST]

________________________________________________________________


Don't dismiss the fact that articles like this shine a light on the fact that what we are seeing is a 1.0 MMO when we expect more. The only reason we expect more is because that is the industry standard RIGHT NOW. Trion is going to give us an AA port that we can play and we expect it to be on par with the average of what is out there if we spend our money on it.

I hate to burst the bubble of all the AA fanboys and girls out there but the devs actually love this kind of review. They want to be able to see where they are falling down so they can fix it and get a larger chunk of the market share. They also love to hear the good parts about the game so they know what not to mess with.


I will say this: the fact that the game is coming to us after many patches on the Korean version is a plus as they are basically our beta testing in the world of an MMO where for some reason we have come to "accept" an unfinished product..

QFT!

But guys--- SERIOUSLY, let's give them some credit. EA couldn't even launch SimCity in a playable state, and they're as rich as satan himself. trololololol
 
Totally agree with most of what you're saying, _except_ that WoW had a visceral feel. Polished, yes, visceral no. Especially at 1.0, WoW was a grind-your-ass-of-stand-in-one-place-a-thon. And AA's combat seems to have plenty going for it from what I see. (With the big exception being the current CC-fest, which will surely be patched LONG before we get out NA port)

As for 'advancements these mmos have done' I think AA bests that standard handily...I mean, WoW is essentially the exact same game it was in 1.0, so I really don't get what you think fails about AA in comparison.

ESPECIALLY when considering:

1) Blizz has more money than any single developer ever has in human history. They choose to spend their money on other projects, and keep WoW fairly flat in terms of innovation.

2) ArcheAge was developed by a VERY small developer, with it being a total shocker that they got picked up and funded by NC. Even at that, they are offering more than Blizzard, admittedly with 1.0 balance issues, and the need for some gameplay tweaks.

______________________

Secondly, I especially dig the "the world moved forward" quote. :3

But I don't think AA's core gameplay seems to be outdated in any way...though I do prefer action over tab-targetting.[DOUBLEPOST=1364430592,1364430488][/DOUBLEPOST]

QFT


NCsoft is NOT funding them, be very clear on that, they are publishing.

Such as EA does not MAKE games, the PUBLISH them.

Blizzard MAKES GAMES, and Activision publishes them.

This is why getting them as their publisher doesn't change the game.

You just said you didn't like Vanilla WoW's combat. ArcheAge is worse than WoW's initial combat was.
I too was enamoured with the game from videos and screenshots, but after getting my hands on it, it felt VERY wrong. A few people here have tried it as well and had similar reactions.

Blizzard when they released WoW didn't have a truck load of money.

The problem with offering more as a small company is that there are more things to polish. While not a bad thing it is bad in terms that they don't seem to be able to focus on any one thing individually.

WoW has done a lot to improve their game over the years, improvements that AA seems to have ignored. Even looking at GW2 and some of the stuff they did is a great place for AA to grab inspiration. Shit look at Wildstar. It offers what AA offers but it "seems" to do it better as well. I dunno. All I do know is ArcheAge, after ACTUALLY playing it, fell VERY VERY flat.

And yes sound is important ;)
 
But guys--- SERIOUSLY, let's give them some credit. EA couldn't even launch SimCity in a playable state, and they're as rich as satan himself. trololololol

Good job AA! You launched! :p There ya go credit given. Now back to games that don't suck :p
 
NCsoft is NOT funding them, be very clear on that, they are publishing.

Such as EA does not MAKE games, the PUBLISH them.

Blizzard MAKES GAMES, and Activision publishes them.

This is why getting them as their publisher doesn't change the game.

You just said you didn't like Vanilla WoW's combat. ArcheAge is worse than WoW's initial combat was.
I too was enamoured with the game from videos and screenshots, but after getting my hands on it, it felt VERY wrong. A few people here have tried it as well and had similar reactions.

Blizzard when they released WoW didn't have a truck load of money.

The problem with offering more as a small company is that there are more things to polish. While not a bad thing it is bad in terms that they don't seem to be able to focus on any one thing individually.

WoW has done a lot to improve their game over the years, improvements that AA seems to have ignored. Even looking at GW2 and some of the stuff they did is a great place for AA to grab inspiration. Shit look at Wildstar. It offers what AA offers but it "seems" to do it better as well. I dunno. All I do know is ArcheAge, after ACTUALLY playing it, fell VERY VERY flat.

And yes sound is important ;)

Don't be such an ass, I know the difference between publishers and developers.

IN-DEVELOPMENT, PICKED UP BY PUBLISHER::::::::::
Publishers pay the developers for rights to release a product. Viz- after a pub picks up a game in development, they are tacitly funding it!!!!!

And then ONCE RELEASED::::::::::::::::::
They will earn the money from their finished product via NC, and their service is provided by NC. So...in the end....NC is giving them more money.

____________________
My point wasn't Blizz having money on release, but that they have FAILED to innovate WHATSOEVER since release. Phasing (aka cheap instancing tricks)? Pet battles? None of that matters when the core gameplay is so, so flat. It is essentially the exact same game from 1.0, only with many many many class balance changes...oh, and new raids (which re-use the mechanics from previous raids).

ALSO, Blizzard _did_ have a truckload of money when they started wow, AND an IP (warcraft) that most PC gamers salivated over already. Did you play PC games prior to 1999?


PS) EA didn't MAKE SimCity, but THEY FUNDED THE DEVELOPMENT, and PROVIDE THE SERVICE UPON WHICH IT IS HOSTED, derp. And yeah, it failed.
PS) I hate Guild Wars 2, and the fewer games that pick up their mechanics, the better.
 
Don't be such an ass, I know the difference between publishers and developers.

IN-DEVELOPMENT, PICKED UP BY PUBLISHER::::::::::
Publishers pay the developers for rights to release a product. Viz- after a pub picks up a game in development, they are tacitly funding it!!!!!

And then ONCE RELEASED::::::::::::::::::
They will earn the money from their finished product via NC, and their service is provided by NC. So...in the end....NC is giving them more money.

____________________
My point wasn't Blizz having money on release, but that they have FAILED to innovate WHATSOEVER since release. Phasing (aka cheap instancing tricks)? Pet battles? None of that matters when the core gameplay is so, so flat. It is essentially the exact same game from 1.0, only with many many many class balance changes...oh, and new raids (which re-use the mechanics from previous raids).

ALSO, Blizzard _did_ have a truckload of money when they started wow, AND an IP (warcraft) that most PC gamers salivated over already. Did you play PC games prior to 1999?

PS) EA didn't MAKE SimCity, but THEY FUNDED THE DEVELOPMENT, and PROVIDE THE SERVICE UPON WHICH IT IS HOSTED, derp. And yeah, it failed.
PS) I hate Guild Wars 2, and the fewer games that pick up their mechanics, the better.

Not sure where you definition of Dev and Pub comes from but here is a good breakdown in laymen terms instead of quoting a wiki or some shit:

There's only a handful of publishers, companies which actually have the capability to manufacture and distribute games. So say a smaller or voluntarily independent game development studio makes a game, like let's say BioWare. For them their focus is simply making the game, that's all they're really interested in doing. So for them to actually get their game on store shelves they take their finished product and bring it to a publisher. The publisher stamps their name on the credits, gets some marketing together, and starts moving the units for BioWare and then everybody cashes their checks.

Without publishers many game studios simply don't have the resources to actually release a game. Just like if I was to write a book I don't have the capability by myself to get it printed, marketed, and distributed. I could probably put out some copies but for it to truly get seen you need the sort of financial backing and distribution scope that only an established publisher can provide.

How WoW Promoted innovation:

Source: http://www.businessweek.com/stories...siness-news-stock-market-and-financial-advice
This video game demonstrates in its structure and scoring some fundamental principles for training employees to think creatively

We are caught in a pincer grip between intensifying competitive pressure and accelerating change in the landscape around us, creating enormous performance pressures. What we know today is becoming less valuable as we struggle with the challenge of innovating faster and learning faster to operate more effectively in these challenging times.

Mention learning to senior executives, and they tend to default immediately to training programs. Here's the problem: Training programs are effective only at transferring what we already know to others. How do we create powerful platforms jointly to innovate and develop new knowledge that no one had before?

For an answer to this question, executives would be well advised to look at World of Warcraft (WoW), a massively multiplayer online game. Few executives have heard of this game, much less participated in it, despite the fact that over 10 million players are active in it around the world. Upon hearing this, most executives are likely to respond that "that's an awful lot of pimply teenagers," falling back on a conventional stereotype about video game players. In fact, the majority of the players are in the 23-39-year-old bracket and are deeply engaged. The average player invests about 23 hours per week playing the game.

Points for Experience

In WoW, performance is measured in terms of experience points. Players accumulate these by performing a variety of tasks that become more challenging as the game progresses. As players accumulate experience points, they advance to higher levels in the game, culminating at this point in level 80 (a new add-on recently expanded the number of levels from 70 in order to keep experienced players challenged).

The degree of complexity and challenge increases dramatically as you advance across levels, and the number of experience points needed in order to advance also increases sharply with each level. Yet the number of hours required to get there actually decreases. Experienced players become adept at leveraging the resources available in and around WoW to learn faster and advance faster even as the challenges become more difficult. In contrast to the diminishing returns to learning that we often encounter in business, players in WoW appear to have joined an environment where there are increasing returns to learning.

As with many promising developments on the edge, it is often hard to discern how or why this might be relevant to those playing in core business arenas. WoW matters because it creates a powerful platform for learning, without a training program in sight. Many of the approaches used by WoW could be very helpful to business executives as they strive to improve performance more rapidly in their own organizations.

Bottom-line lessons for executives

Reduce barriers to entry and to early advancement

WoW is carefully structured so that anyone can join and quickly gain a sense of accomplishment. The early tasks are relatively simple, but novice players quickly learn to improvise and innovate in their approach to performance challenges.

Provide clear and rich metrics to assess performance

WoW provides players with an overall metric for performance in the form of experience points and levels, but it also enables players to assess in real time their own performance and the performance of teammates along a variety of dimensions. One of the key innovations in the game offers players the ability to craft personal "dashboards" to monitor their performance on certain tasks. Corporations have begun to offer senior executives dashboards to monitor key aspects of corporate performance. What if these dashboards were made available to everyone in the company? What if these dashboards could be designed and tailored by the individual employee? What if these dashboards provided real-time feedback on individual performance as well as the performance of the broader group? What if this feedback was visible to everyone and not just the individual contributor? Within WoW, this real-time performance feedback helps players to focus their innovation in game play on the areas with greatest impact.

Keep raising the bar

WoW designers have constructed an environment that continually challenges players to develop new skills. Complacency and boredom are rarely encountered, but neither is frustration, since challenges are thoughtfully calibrated to the existing capabilities of players. The next rung of achievement is just in sight, motivating players to invest the time and effort necessary to achieve that next level of performance. In the real world, companies, particularly those pursuing high growth strategies should provide a continuing set of new challenges to drive innovation by their employees.

Don't neglect intrinsic motivations

Talk about incentives in a business context, and the discussion quickly falls back to cash. With minor exceptions, cash is not an incentive to play WoW, so the designers focused on intrinsic motivations. Players get widespread recognition as they master new skills and successfully address each new challenge. As the game advances, players learn to collaborate and participate in "guilds"—teams of players who must work together to innovate in their game play and achieve the next level of performance. As relationships and trust develop within these teams, everyone is motivated to innovate by the desire not to let the team down.

Provide opportunities to develop tacit knowledge, but do not neglect broader knowledge exchange

The guilds foster the relationships and trust required to generate new tacit knowledge—the kind of knowledge that cannot be easily expressed and develops through shared practice. This is where most of the innovation in game play occurs.

At the same time, the game has generated a rich ecology of online forums where players can share experiences, post requests for help in addressing new challenges, and learn from each other. These forums provide a "pull" platform where players encountering unanticipated needs can quickly reach out and assemble helpful resources. In contrast to knowledge management initiatives in more conventional corporate environments, a significant part of a player's recognition and status accrues from participation in these forums. In fact, these forums have become a primary vehicle for identifying high performing players to be recruited into guilds.

Create opportunities for teams to self-organize around challenging performance targets

Participation in guilds in WoW is not mandated from above. Players naturally coalesce into guilds as they move into more advanced levels because they realize they cannot accomplish the tasks without collaborating with others with complementary skills. Teams have become important organizational units within companies, but how many of these teams are self-organized? By giving teams the autonomy to recruit new participants and—equally importantly—expel participants who are not carrying their weight, companies can significantly increase the accountability and motivation of teams.

Encourage frequent and rigorous performance feedback

WoW designers built in detailed performance metrics specific to the individual, the role, and the guild. These provide a foundation for regular after-action reviews where all the participants come together after a major initiative to review how they performed as individuals and as a team. The key focus is on how they can do better. This is a catalyst to innovation in game play as players can see performance gaps that are holding back the progress of the team.

These 360-degree performance reviews ensure that everyone from the guild leader down to the newest member receives feedback. Unlike the 360-degree reviews that have begun to crop up in a corporate setting, the reviews are based on objective, quantified performance metrics and visible to all participants. In this environment, poor performers at all levels have a strong incentive to address performance gaps in order to avoid being sidelined in future initiatives.

Create an environment that rewards new dispositions

WoW not only encourages players to develop new skills; it fosters a new disposition. WoW has created a compelling environment that naturally attracts participants interested in gaming, but it also enhances and rewards their dedication over time.

This encourages players to seek out new challenges as an opportunity to innovate and learn faster. Rather than viewing the unanticipated as a threat, gamers learn to welcome unexpected events as an opportunity to innovate, tinker, experiment, and, in the process, learn even more.

They also learn to welcome collaboration as an opportunity to learn faster by focusing on a set of individual strengths while being exposed to the diverse perspectives and experiences of those with complementary strengths. At the end of the day, this is the most powerful contribution of WoW. This disposition creates an amplifying effect throughout the game. Players seek out other players who share this point of view, and they end up performing better than players who bring more conventional ideas to the game.

Companies seeking to thrive in a world of increasing uncertainty and accelerating change will need to foster this disposition among their own executive team and employees. They would be well advised to take a closer look at World of Warcraft, both in terms of the approach taken to foster this disposition and as a potential recruiting ground for employees who can bring this attitude and approach into the company.
TLDR WoW's greatest innovation since day 1 was polish. One might say Apple is the same way. They may not have made anything CRAZY since the iPhone, but got they polished the shit out of that thing so that the OS and phone to this DAY are still top of the line experiences for the user. And at the end of the day, the user experience is key.

WoW didn't have TRUCK TONS of money. Their claim to fame was from SC in Korea. It allowed them to expand yes, but WoW was released under staffed and with less than 100 people working on it as opposed to the 4000+ they have all over the world now. 1500+ alone in their Irvine Offices.

PS) EA didn't MAKE SimCity, but THEY FUNDED THE DEVELOPMENT, and PROVIDE THE SERVICE UPON WHICH IT IS HOSTED, derp. And yeah, it failed.

This is exactly my point. The Publisher doesn't matter. A game is as strong as its development team.

PS) I hate Guild Wars 2, and the fewer games that pick up their mechanics, the better.

I am not sure what that has to do with this, other than you telling me you would prefer we take steps back to grinding and static combat. All which AA provides quite nicely.

Anyway, INNOVATION after release or not WoW set a standard. 10 million people approved of that standard. Developers NEED to be aware of that. I don't want a WoW clone but I want the basic improvements and standards WoW set to be there on release. AA doesn't have those, so why are you so against speaking up FOR those things to be implemented?
 
Okay so I read all the posts and decided to post, for some reason as someone who is running a indie dev company.
I disagree very much with your posts tr1age and I think you are simply trolling (the fact that you did not reply to the good posts on archeagesource) and actually being something of a fanboy for the themepark games (wow and gw2), but I do agree that they are good products (or at least wow is due to it being very polished and a great success story). However a publisher often either helps out with funding or funds the whole thing (at least when it comes to games), saying anything else is incorrect. The publishers also puts huge pressure on the developers usually to get the products out "in time".

Now over to the actual review, the water in AA is very well made and saying it is not without any proper arguments is just to look for conflict. Personal opinion, well you may dislike the water but saying it is bad or anything even remotely close is terribly stupid. Also comparing a game that is 1.0 or such to a game that has been out for years and been a huge success story is simply not good unless it is for trolling purpose since one has insane funding while the other is made by a much smaller developer with much more limited funding (if you don't count the money spent on the art which usually eats the biggest chunk of money for developers these days).

Personally I do not know if I wish to play this game myself yet since the PVP seems to be too closed for me, but time will tell. The only real sandbox game that is worth playing these days imo is EVE Online which has also been developed under an long time with patches and such being released and is also a really great success story.



If there actually is a intelligent and non-troll post after this one I'll consider responding again I guess.
 
Okay so I read all the posts and decided to post, for some reason as someone who is running a indie dev company.
I disagree very much with your posts tr1age and I think you are simply trolling (the fact that you did not reply to the good posts on archeagesource) and actually being something of a fanboy for the themepark games (wow and gw2), but I do agree that they are good products (or at least wow is due to it being very polished and a great success story). However a publisher often either helps out with funding or funds the whole thing (at least when it comes to games), saying anything else is incorrect. The publishers also puts huge pressure on the developers usually to get the products out "in time".

Now over to the actual review, the water in AA is very well made and saying it is not without any proper arguments is just to look for conflict. Personal opinion, well you may dislike the water but saying it is bad or anything even remotely close is terribly stupid. Also comparing a game that is 1.0 or such to a game that has been out for years and been a huge success story is simply not good unless it is for trolling purpose since one has insane funding while the other is made by a much smaller developer with much more limited funding (if you don't count the money spent on the art which usually eats the biggest chunk of money for developers these days).

Personally I do not know if I wish to play this game myself yet since the PVP seems to be too closed for me, but time will tell. The only real sandbox game that is worth playing these days imo is EVE Online which has also been developed under an long time with patches and such being released and is also a really great success story.



If there actually is a intelligent and non-troll post after this one I'll consider responding again I guess.


Never knew opinions were trolling these days. I really must learn to be less tro... opinionated in the future.

How dare I be a fanboy of theme park games! I also like chocolate ice cream, and sometimes I listen to Lady Gaga and dance like a nut.... I guess those will influence my opinions as well. Oh and I am for same sex marriage so my opinion probably REALLY doesn't matter now.

Anyway regardless of who puts money into what, you can throw money at a stone but it will never become a bird.

I am feeling very fortune cookie like today :p

I actually told you why the water was something I disliked. Here this is a GREAT article on Realism and why if it is just slightly OFF it is WAY off.

Let me introduce you to "uncanny valley," a term first uttered by early robotics guru Masahiro Mori in 1970. It describes the range of sophistication of animated graphics, from one side of the valley where human figures simply look unrealistic, to the middle of the valley — where they look just realistic enough to be creepy — to our side of the valley, where animation is indistinguishable from reality.


When Pixar screened a computer-animated short film calledTin Toyin 1988, test audiences hated the sight of the pseudo-realistic baby named "Billy" who terrorized the toys. Such a strong reaction persuaded Pixar to avoid making uncannily realistic human characters — it has since focused its efforts on films about living toys, curious robots and talking cars to win Academy Awards and moviegoers' hearts.
Today, the "uncanny valley" phenomenon remains almost as mysterious as when Japanese roboticist Masahiro Mori first coined the term in 1970. But scientists have begun venturing deeper into the metaphorical valley to better understand why robots or virtual characters with certain human characteristics can trigger such mental uneasiness. That understanding may prove crucial as humanlike robots or virtual companions enter homes and businesses in coming years.
"We still don't understand why it occurs or whether you can get used to it, and people don't necessarily agree it exists," said Ayse Saygin, a cognitive scientist at the University of California, San Diego. "This is one of those cases where we're at the very beginning of understanding it."
The uncanny valley metaphor suggests that a human appearance or behavior can make an artificial figure seem more familiar for viewers — but only up to a point. The sense of viewer familiarity drops sharply into the uncanny valley once the artificial figure tries but fails to mimic a realistic human.
"If you look humanlike but your motion is jerky or you can't make proper eye contact, those are the things that make them uncanny," Saygin told InnovationNewsDaily. "I think the key is that when you make appearances humanlike, you raise expectations for the brain. When those expectations are not met, then you have the problem in the brain."
All Too Human

Saygin and fellow researchers don't think the phenomenon follows the valley metaphor exactly. Instead, they suggest the uncanny valley sensation arises when an artificial figure looks or behaves real enough to trigger a mental switchover — the viewer's brain suddenly begins to consider the figure as a possible human. The artificial figure almost inevitably fails such close inspection.
"Pixar took a lesson from Tin Toy," said Thalia Wheatley, a psychologist at Dartmouth College. "We have to nail the human form or not even go there."
Wheatley's lab has found that everyone from Dartmouth college students to a remote tribe in Cambodia shows a strong sensitivity to what does or does not appear human. But such findings held up only when the researchers showed people human faces that were familiar to their ethnic group.
When shown a series of doll-like and human faces made with "morphing" software, people said a face was more human than doll only if it had at least a 65 percent mix of a human face. People could even judge an artificial figure's human appearance based on seeing a single eye.
"Evolutionary history has tuned us to detect minor distortions that indicate disease, mental or physical problems," Wheatley explained. "To go after ahuman-looking robotor avatar is to go up against millions of years of evolutionary history."

Once again someone who says comparing a 1.0 of a game to a game that has been out for years.... do you people, WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOU PEOPLE, sorry tangent, do you people understand the utter idiocracy of that statement and the word idiocracy? It is quite simple actually; 1.0 of SAID GAME came out AFTER years of tweaks and fixes and polish to game 918281.0. Game 1.0 got to see the entire process and development cycle of said giant version # game. Therefore Game 1.0 is starting at version 1.0 in the FUTURE. It is like saying an APPLE II version 1.0 is similar to a Macbook Pro version 1.0. We grow, learn, and evolve. Or you don't and you get AA. Ok that is just harsh, some of their ideas are really cool, but god it needs so much polish at this point, it NEEDS a little WoW finess.. Hmm I would totally use that shampoo, Maybe she's born with it, maybe it's WoW finess! hmmm that is maybeleen not shampoo.. DAMMIT.

So have I trolled a bit here? Perhaps, because your post was just so well laid out and introduced me so well. But did I also put some intelligent thought in here as well, I believe so. The conundrum for you my friend is DO YOU READ IT or DO YOU NOT!!!!?!?!? Because it fulfills your requirements but god is it dripping in troll blood, or as I like to say, SARCASM you internet pussies!

P.S. Do not reply to posts right after waking up, you get much more confrontational. =)
 
Never knew opinions were trolling these days. I really must learn to be less tro... opinionated in the future.

How dare I be a fanboy of theme park games! I also like chocolate ice cream, and sometimes I listen to Lady Gaga and dance like a nut.... I guess those will influence my opinions as well. Oh and I am for same sex marriage so my opinion probably REALLY doesn't matter now.

Anyway regardless of who puts money into what, you can throw money at a stone but it will never become a bird.

I am feeling very fortune cookie like today :p

I actually told you why the water was something I disliked. Here this is a GREAT article on Realism and why if it is just slightly OFF it is WAY off.

Let me introduce you to "uncanny valley," a term first uttered by early robotics guru Masahiro Mori in 1970. It describes the range of sophistication of animated graphics, from one side of the valley where human figures simply look unrealistic, to the middle of the valley — where they look just realistic enough to be creepy — to our side of the valley, where animation is indistinguishable from reality.
Well being a fanboy of themepark games are all good and well, noone said it's not okay however you need to realize there are other types of games and there are a ton of themepark games. The sandbox niche needs to be filled out a lot more and is something the sandbox community has been waiting for a long time. Enough of that, it's quite irrelevant to the topic at hand. You are obviously trolling partly, the way you react and the way you write. I do not know what you are getting out of it but I do not really care either.

Uncanny valley applies to humans, not water. You can't say the water makes it feel like uncanny valley because that is not how it works and is wrong use of the term. I think either way that this was discussed enough, dead horse is dead already no need for more of a beating.

Once again someone who says comparing a 1.0 of a game to a game that has been out for years.... do you people, WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOU PEOPLE, sorry tangent, do you people understand the utter idiocracy of that statement and the word idiocracy? It is quite simple actually; 1.0 of SAID GAME came out AFTER years of tweaks and fixes and polish to game 918281.0. Game 1.0 got to see the entire process and development cycle of said giant version # game. Therefore Game 1.0 is starting at version 1.0 in the FUTURE. It is like saying an APPLE II version 1.0 is similar to a Macbook Pro version 1.0. We grow, learn, and evolve. Or you don't and you get AA. Ok that is just harsh, some of their ideas are really cool, but god it needs so much polish at this point, it NEEDS a little WoW finess.. Hmm I would totally use that shampoo, Maybe she's born with it, maybe it's WoW finess! hmmm that is maybeleen not shampoo.. DAMMIT.

So have I trolled a bit here? Perhaps, because your post was just so well laid out and introduced me so well. But did I also put some intelligent thought in here as well, I believe so. The conundrum for you my friend is DO YOU READ IT or DO YOU NOT!!!!?!?!? Because it fulfills your requirements but god is it dripping in troll blood, or as I like to say, SARCASM you internet pussies!

P.S. Do not reply to posts right after waking up, you get much more confrontational. =)
From this post it does really seem you do not understand how game development works, just because something was made 15 years ago in the industry doesn't mean you don't have to redo it today when you make a game.
When WoW was made they had to make the camera, movements, raid features, pvp crap. etc etc. Same goes today, you still make the same things just that you add more to the game, perhaps it is slightly faster in some regards but most likely not much. What you can't compare however is the graphics and some other features which is much more advanced these days, like features for making the lighting better and such. But otherwise it's quite fair to compare to WoWs 1.0.

Also make no mistake in believing I think AA is polished enough because really, I do not. On the other hand I do not think it's the most important part of the release and it's something I can live with if I get a decent amount of tools and a good sandbox for PVP (well the CCs are quite terrible atm but hopefully that will get fixed). Also while WoW set a standard it is a standard you can't really compare all MMOs with due to the size of the dev team and the funding.

I concur, just woke up and was slightly stingy. But writing it in a way to troll is a good way to get a decent response I guess if it is to someone like me, just if you wish to get anything good out of other more rabid fans than me you should probably keep the trolling to the minimum. :p

Peace, now I need some damn breakfast. ;)
 
You are obviously trolling partly, the way you react and the way you write.
He has poor grammar skills and exaggerates (primarily to get the point across). He's not really a troll, that's just his communication skills. His 4,000 other posts on the site will back this up lol

But no matter how many come in to rabble against the article, it still stands as is. AA has issues. It's not perfect. No one expects it to be perfect from day 1, but everyone wants more from it. To argue anything other than that is silly at the end of the day.
 
He has poor grammar skills and exaggerates (primarily to get the point across). He's not really a troll, that's just his communication skills. His 4,000 other posts on the site will back this up lol

But no matter how many come in to rabble against the article, it still stands as is. AA has issues. It's not perfect. No one expects it to be perfect from day 1, but everyone wants more from it. To argue anything other than that is silly at the end of the day.
Well I used to write a lot more aggressive trollposts earlier and learned as I was moderating Lineage 2's EU board to keep it to a minimum, it takes some effort and you constantly gotta watch yourself so you don't slip back but it's quite good I'd say.

Well ofc it has issues, it is impossible to make a perfect product, question is how much issues it has. Sadly the problem here is the hypetrain, people were overhyping RIFT, Darkfall, SWTOR, GW2, TSW etc as well. The hype actually hurts the products in the end (well not gw2 that much since its b2p), by getting players in, they see the product doesn't live up to their expectations and there is a lot of negative press generated. The game I am currently working on we are trying to keep the hype to a minimum and hope to slowly build a userbase.
 
Well being a fanboy of themepark games are all good and well, noone said it's not okay however you need to realize there are other types of games and there are a ton of themepark games. The sandbox niche needs to be filled out a lot more and is something the sandbox community has been waiting for a long time. Enough of that, it's quite irrelevant to the topic at hand. You are obviously trolling partly, the way you react and the way you write. I do not know what you are getting out of it but I do not really care either.

Uncanny valley applies to humans, not water. You can't say the water makes it feel like uncanny valley because that is not how it works and is wrong use of the term. I think either way that this was discussed enough, dead horse is dead already no need for more of a beating.


From this post it does really seem you do not understand how game development works, just because something was made 15 years ago in the industry doesn't mean you don't have to redo it today when you make a game.
When WoW was made they had to make the camera, movements, raid features, pvp crap. etc etc. Same goes today, you still make the same things just that you add more to the game, perhaps it is slightly faster in some regards but most likely not much. What you can't compare however is the graphics and some other features which is much more advanced these days, like features for making the lighting better and such. But otherwise it's quite fair to compare to WoWs 1.0.

Also make no mistake in believing I think AA is polished enough because really, I do not. On the other hand I do not think it's the most important part of the release and it's something I can live with if I get a decent amount of tools and a good sandbox for PVP (well the CCs are quite terrible atm but hopefully that will get fixed). Also while WoW set a standard it is a standard you can't really compare all MMOs with due to the size of the dev team and the funding.

I concur, just woke up and was slightly stingy. But writing it in a way to troll is a good way to get a decent response I guess if it is to someone like me, just if you wish to get anything good out of other more rabid fans than me you should probably keep the trolling to the minimum. :p

Peace, now I need some damn breakfast. ;)


I feel like you still are not understanding my point here... I am not a themepark fanboy, it is one genre of games I like. UO is also one of my all time favorites. Sandbox to the max! Felucca or die! :)

Uncanny Valley while not directly related to water makes my point pretty clear. Realism is a hard to balance. Your brain will either love or hate something if it isn't done right.

I understand game development quite well. after working for Blizzard years it kinda has that effect on you. Redoing a game from the ground up or not, there is something called quality control. Cry Engine 3 is not a new engine so they didn't build this game from the ground up. They need to add that quality control into what they did build on top of it though IMO.

So once again I disagree with comparing it to WoW 1.0 or vanilla WoW.

I think polish is important when it comes to the FEEL of a game. AA feels off. I don't know if you have been able to try it yet, but when you do please tell me what you think of combat then. Because I too was hyped off my arse for this game and then I played and wanted to cry. That niche in my heart for Sandbox was not going to be filled by AA. A sad day.

Funding and Dev size doesn't determine skill and prioritizing of features. Instead of adding 500000000 features maybe they should have focused on a few less and really got them to a good place.

I think my trolling is pretty minimal, my points are concise and reasoned. My sarcasm is dripping however. I enjoy watching people argue points only to argue against themselves. A lot of the responses so far have been just that.

You are also unhappy with the level of polish but for some reason OK to accept it(your comment about CCs) and play the PATCH GAME before the game is even released for NA. That is unacceptable in my eyes. We are getting too complacent with the idea that a game can be rushed out to meet deadlines just so we can hurry up and wait.

I don't want to be HOPEFUL for games that are released. I want to play games that are ready for us. I want to fill that sandbox itch, but I refuse to do it with a sub-par game. Sandbox mmos take more time than normal mmos, and I'm gonna be dead soon so time is precious...

I get it, an MMO needs more time after production for polish, but it doesn't have to be so extreme. GW2 fell into that one hard. The polish is so good with the patches that you literally get kind of upset that you didn't start the game now to enjoy what feels like a new game.

Also total sidenote, what game are you working on, would love to check it out. Never against seeing indie developers works!
 
I feel like you still are not understanding my point here... I am not a themepark fanboy, it is one genre of games I like. UO is also one of my all time favorites. Sandbox to the max! Felucca or die! :)

Uncanny Valley while not directly related to water makes my point pretty clear. Realism is a hard to balance. Your brain will either love or hate something if it isn't done right.

I understand game development quite well. after working for Blizzard years it kinda has that effect on you. Redoing a game from the ground up or not, there is something called quality control. Cry Engine 3 is not a new engine so they didn't build this game from the ground up. They need to add that quality control into what they did build on top of it though IMO.

So once again I disagree with comparing it to WoW 1.0 or vanilla WoW.

I think polish is important when it comes to the FEEL of a game. AA feels off. I don't know if you have been able to try it yet, but when you do please tell me what you think of combat then. Because I too was hyped off my arse for this game and then I played and wanted to cry. That niche in my heart for Sandbox was not going to be filled by AA. A sad day.

Funding and Dev size doesn't determine skill and prioritizing of features. Instead of adding 500000000 features maybe they should have focused on a few less and really got them to a good place.

I think my trolling is pretty minimal, my points are concise and reasoned. My sarcasm is dripping however. I enjoy watching people argue points only to argue against themselves. A lot of the responses so far have been just that.

You are also unhappy with the level of polish but for some reason OK to accept it(your comment about CCs) and play the PATCH GAME before the game is even released for NA. That is unacceptable in my eyes. We are getting too complacent with the idea that a game can be rushed out to meet deadlines just so we can hurry up and wait.

I don't want to be HOPEFUL for games that are released. I want to play games that are ready for us. I want to fill that sandbox itch, but I refuse to do it with a sub-par game. Sandbox mmos take more time than normal mmos, and I'm gonna be dead soon so time is precious...

I get it, an MMO needs more time after production for polish, but it doesn't have to be so extreme. GW2 fell into that one hard. The polish is so good with the patches that you literally get kind of upset that you didn't start the game now to enjoy what feels like a new game.

Also total sidenote, what game are you working on, would love to check it out. Never against seeing indie developers works!
Well personally I do not think we will ever get the perfect sandbox people are hoping for, AA was said to be a sandpark by Jake who is the designer of L2 essentially so it's no wonder people have high hopes. Sadly it doesn't seem he wishes to actually create a sandpark but rather a themepark with some few sandbox elements. Can't really say for sure until we actually get a release and maybe a few patches. The combat is something that is dated in AA but that is also not why I seek the game, if I could pick combat from a game and the type I would wish to see as the future direction it would be Tera.

About the realism, you just have to accept that some games try to go for a more realistic approach. You can't just say that it's not realistic enough and thus bad because then we might as well stop striving toward a somewhat realistic style (which some people enjoy). Most people love AAs water but I guess there will always someone on the other side of the bridge.

So you think everything that is about to be released as 1.0 should be compared to the latest expansion of WoW or EVE? Games that have been out for ~9 years and in development even longer, in the case of WoW since 1999? In that case we might as well give up because it is impossible to create that depth and that amount of content for a 1.0 release with art of todays standard.

On the case of polish I've got to say I agree with you, lesser better features would be enjoyed at least by me over a ton of half-assed features. That said I think they've done a good job with most of their features and things, I just disagree partly with the direction they have sometimes went.

No offence meant but (well here comes the offensive part :p); sarcasm is very hard to detect over text and I'd say your 'sarcasm' is actually trolling since you have no wish to actually discuss the topic but just annoy people and make them take swings. Maybe you see my point maybe you don't, I guess trolling is a very loose term by todays standards but should be seen as something posted to create an emotional response which most of your posts does for many users (who probably needs to get off Internet and count to 10).

About my project I can't tell you, we have agreed in our team that nothing will get out until we feel we can deliver. I'll make a note to post something and maybe a few keys once we get further. :)
 
Well personally I do not think we will ever get the perfect sandbox people are hoping for, AA was said to be a sandpark by Jake who is the designer of L2 essentially so it's no wonder people have high hopes. Sadly it doesn't seem he wishes to actually create a sandpark but rather a themepark with some few sandbox elements. Can't really say for sure until we actually get a release and maybe a few patches. The combat is something that is dated in AA but that is also not why I seek the game, if I could pick combat from a game and the type I would wish to see as the future direction it would be Tera.

About the realism, you just have to accept that some games try to go for a more realistic approach. You can't just say that it's not realistic enough and thus bad because then we might as well stop striving toward a somewhat realistic style (which some people enjoy). Most people love AAs water but I guess there will always someone on the other side of the bridge.

So you think everything that is about to be released as 1.0 should be compared to the latest expansion of WoW or EVE? Games that have been out for ~9 years and in development even longer, in the case of WoW since 1999? In that case we might as well give up because it is impossible to create that depth and that amount of content for a 1.0 release with art of todays standard.

On the case of polish I've got to say I agree with you, lesser better features would be enjoyed at least by me over a ton of half-assed features. That said I think they've done a good job with most of their features and things, I just disagree partly with the direction they have sometimes went.

No offence meant but (well here comes the offensive part :p); sarcasm is very hard to detect over text and I'd say your 'sarcasm' is actually trolling since you have no wish to actually discuss the topic but just annoy people and make them take swings. Maybe you see my point maybe you don't, I guess trolling is a very loose term by todays standards but should be seen as something posted to create an emotional response which most of your posts does for many users (who probably needs to get off Internet and count to 10).

About my project I can't tell you, we have agreed in our team that nothing will get out until we feel we can deliver. I'll make a note to post something and maybe a few keys once we get further. :)

This conversation got civilized :) Welcome to ALTTABME!

I do think games should be keeping up with standards set by others for 1.0, for example which is a bad example considering it had a 1 and 2 but still it was a new story and new idea, Bioshock Infinite. MY GOD that game was polished on DAY 1. That is an example of a beautiful user experience taking into account prior releases and things that worked and needed to be iterated on.

And yes of course Sarcasm is not always detected over text. I am famous for being lost in txtlation. But posting opinions, strong opinions for that matter is not trolling it is me expressing myself. I feel often people are more comfortable riding the fence when I prefer to pick one side or another and wait for someone to persuade me to the other side with logic. If there is none then I can rest easy with my decision either way. I also feel as though the emotional responses generated from that are indeed often a case of count to 10 and also important to take note of to gauge the legitimacy of said concerns. You can tell a lot about something by HOW someone screams and shouts about it. And in the case of AA it seems to be a hyped up screaming with not much to back it up.

Anywhoooo I appreciate your input and have enjoyed this conversation.
 
This conversation got civilized :) Welcome to ALTTABME!

I do think games should be keeping up with standards set by others for 1.0, for example which is a bad example considering it had a 1 and 2 but still it was a new story and new idea, Bioshock Infinite. MY GOD that game was polished on DAY 1. That is an example of a beautiful user experience taking into account prior releases and things that worked and needed to be iterated on.

And yes of course Sarcasm is not always detected over text. I am famous for being lost in txtlation. But posting opinions, strong opinions for that matter is not trolling it is me expressing myself. I feel often people are more comfortable riding the fence when I prefer to pick one side or another and wait for someone to persuade me to the other side with logic. If there is none then I can rest easy with my decision either way. I also feel as though the emotional responses generated from that are indeed often a case of count to 10 and also important to take note of to gauge the legitimacy of said concerns. You can tell a lot about something by HOW someone screams and shouts about it. And in the case of AA it seems to be a hyped up screaming with not much to back it up.

Anywhoooo I appreciate your input and have enjoyed this conversation.
Thank you. :)

I can't really relate to Infinite as I haven't had the pleasure of trying it out and most likely won't in quite some time (too much on my plate already). But even if I see what your point is, to have a standard and to strive for improvement. It is very hard as everyone will have a different idea in the case where opinions matter as to which is the standard, some might see WoW as the standard since it is a big success another might see EVE as the standard for AA since the game supposedly is sandbox inspired (according to Jake at least) and EVE being the probably biggest success in that 'niche' (as people usually refer to it as). Striving to get to the standard is one thing but actually reaching it and providing it is another, the development can after all only run until the money are running out (or the publishers puts too much pressure). Getting everyone happy is an impossibility due to opinions among other issues.

Well as I stated before about the hypetrain, it affects most releases (especially in the MMO market) these days. Most games get overhyped and that is a shame, although I think Jake has delivered most of what he has said will be in the game, it is still too early to say how the game will turn out in the long run.

About trolling, well it is after all just up to you and nothing I will say makes it wrong or right however I think it's healthy to let the post rest a few minutes, rereading it before posting it. Good way of trying to keep a discussion right on it's track. :)
 
Thank you. :)

I can't really relate to Infinite as I haven't had the pleasure of trying it out and most likely won't in quite some time (too much on my plate already). But even if I see what your point is, to have a standard and to strive for improvement. It is very hard as everyone will have a different idea in the case where opinions matter as to which is the standard, some might see WoW as the standard since it is a big success another might see EVE as the standard for AA since the game supposedly is sandbox inspired (according to Jake at least) and EVE being the probably biggest success in that 'niche' (as people usually refer to it as). Striving to get to the standard is one thing but actually reaching it and providing it is another, the development can after all only run until the money are running out (or the publishers puts too much pressure). Getting everyone happy is an impossibility due to opinions among other issues.

Well as I stated before about the hypetrain, it affects most releases (especially in the MMO market) these days. Most games get overhyped and that is a shame, although I think Jake has delivered most of what he has said will be in the game, it is still too early to say how the game will turn out in the long run.

About trolling, well it is after all just up to you and nothing I will say makes it wrong or right however I think it's healthy to let the post rest a few minutes, rereading it before posting it. Good way of trying to keep a discussion right on it's track. :)

I must say I think we are crossing wires here where they don't need to be. I am not saying AA needs to hold up to a standard that falls into the genre of WoW or EvE. I am saying it needs to do things that have been improved, such as combat. The combat in AA is god aweful, it feels like something out of a 90's EQ game. That is what I mean by standards. Looking at the things that don't hurt the integrity of your IP and building them to work properly. WoW is an example because of the polish but I am not saying it has to PLAY like WOW. Hope that makes sense.
 
Top Bottom