The Video Game Thread

[D-Lyrium]

I'd love to try out the new FTL as I love the game so much, but frankly Age of Wonders 3 is too incredible to let me play anything else right now. I'm sure I'll get bored of it, eventually, but for now... it's like Crusader Kings 2 all over again.

[tjb000]

I've been playing FTL on my iPad and it just 'feels' right on that platform. I have it on my computer too, but it's nice that I can take it anywhere with me. Especially since I'll have to be taking a transit bus about 1 hour and 30 minutes twice a week (because my car is an unreliable piece o' crap) to my new job training thing.

 

As for Age of Wonders 3, I've been very tempted to get it. I've been leaning towards getting that or Diablo 3 which I've heard mix things about. I know Diablo 3 has been out for awhile, but I have heard it has gotten a bit better since release. I've never played an AOW or Diablo game before, but both seem like games I would like. I know they are two different kind of games, but which one would you guys recommend I get first? I'm sure I'll end up with both of them at some point, but I can only afford one for the time being. I can't decide! HALP!

 

[D-Lyrium]

It's a hard thing to recommend really, as they're both verrrryy different games (and I haven't played Diablo 3 yet as I'm not really a fan of RSIRPGs ¬_¬). So the best I can do is explain what AoW3 is all about.

 

If you've played Civilization 5 then it's a bit easier to explain, as the 'empire building' element is very similar to Civ5 (even down to the interface), but the actual city building is much less in-depth, because the focus is on combat. Basically imagine Civ5 if a military victory was the only option. There IS a diplomacy system but it's only real purpose is to stop everyone killing you at once. ¬_¬ An alliance victory condition does exist, but frankly you'd be doing it wrong if you went for that.

 

But the combat is so awesome. There's so much depth, even though it doesn't look like it at first glance. There's a lot of stuff I felt was 'missing' from the game, but after playing for a few hours I realised it really didn't need it.

 

It sorts out one of my main bugbears from games like Fallen Enchantress, which was the fact that no matter where you were on the strategic map, the tactical map you fought on was just random - sometimes pretty cool, don't get me wrong, but it rarely bore any relation to where your army was on the main map. In AoW they've fixed that with a vengeance. If you're fighting in a marsh, the tactical map is a marshy area. If you're fighting to defend a farm, or a gold mine, etc, then that's represented on the map with the obstacles and stuff that you'd expect (some of the farm maps take place in the shadow of a windmill, which is actually turning. I'm easily impressed ¬_¬). Plus of course if you attack a city it'll have whatever level of defences the city has on the strategic map represented on the tactical map.

 

Plus the movement effects of different types of terrain carry over onto the tactical map. So if a unit has an ability that lets it move through forest quicker than normal, it'll still move quicker than normal if you're fighting in a tactical battle in a forest, which is cool.

 

Also there's various morale effects; some units like fighting in certain terrain/climates and hate others - Goblins, for instance, like wetlands and hate volcanic climates. So they're more effective when engaging them in wetlands. Adds another level of strategy.

 

Then there are the squillions of abilities and attributes each unit can have. The level of customisation is ridiculous. Some of the "abilities" are pretty obvious: a Dwarf, for example, will have the abilities "Dwarf" (which means it's affected by things that specifically affect Dwarves, like the Dwarf Slayer ability on a weapon) and "Walk" (which means walks across the battlefield, as opposed to Mounted, Flying or Floating, for instance). It'll also have Night Vision 'as standard'. But there are loads of others, including abilities which let you tunnel through terrain, climb walls, resistances and extra damage, stuff like that, but also active abilities like spells and special attacks (like Backstab and Assassin's Strike).

 

Flanking is also important. Units face a certain way, and if you attack from the sides or behind you do extra damage. They'll also face the direction of the last thing to hit them, so you can shoot with a unit behind them, they'll turn around to defend themselves, then a unit that was previously in front of them can get a flank too as the enemy turned to face the last attacker and presented it's flank to the second unit.

 

It's all basic common sense stuff, but so many games half-ass it. AoW3 really hasn't...

 

And the AI actually works, and is reasonably challenging. It won't do ridiculous stuff like charge through 3 threatened hexes and get Attack of Opportunity'd to death before it gets to it's target, but it is usually pretty smart at going for the enemy that it's designed to beat. For instance, a unit of knights will generally try to avoid halberdiers and pikemen (because those units get bonuses vs. mounted units) and try and find a squishier target.

 

It also has an annoying habit of trying to bumrush your precious high level unit that's survived numerous battles and is totally badass, too. The game definitely has that X-Com emotional attachment. "Nooo, not Unit X! I've had them since the start of the game!". More than once I've thrown away a much more expensive unit in order to save a unit of archers or something basic that I'd had for ages and were really high level. ¬_¬

 

Units level up, but you don't get to choose how. They all follow a set path I think, and gain more abilities (not just HP/Defence/Attack etc, but actual abilities. Sometimes even active ones) as they level. So keeping veteran units alive is definitely an advantage. Obviously you have full control over how your heroes level (they get 5 'points' per level, and each of the abilities you can choose has a set number of points - sometimes more than 5, so you have to 'save up' for the most awesome ones).

 

Heroes also have classes, as you'd expect (Sorcerer, Druid, Rogue, etc). You can recruit heroes during the game (they randomly approach you and you need to pay money to recruit them (or CRUSH THEM on the field of battle~! if you prefer ¬_¬). Your main character's class determines some of the class-specific units you can build in your cities (and class-specific spells and abilities etc obviously).

 

Also, there's no limit to the number of races you can incorporate into your empire. Just because your starting hero is, say, a Dwarf, there are plenty of neutral cities you can conquer (either diplomatically or by force) and incorporate into your empire. For instance if you start as a Dwarf and discover a neutral human city then you can absorb it into your empire and from that city you can build Human units, just like you build Dwarven units in your main city. There's no racial animosity in AoW's lore either, a Good-aligned Dwarf will go to war with an evil Dwarf just as readily as an evil Orc, and it's not uncommon to see armies of Orcs and Elves, or Dwarves and Goblins, etc. Which takes a bit of getting used to, admittedly, but is kinda cool.

 

Oh, almost forgot, you can go underground, too. Some maps have underground areas where you can fight/build/explore just like above-land (via predetermined entrances/exits). Currently I'm at peace with one of my neighbours, but I've got a thriving city underground (it's a Goblin city, natch) and the underground level has an exit right in the middle of his empire. So hopefully he behaves himself... or he'll be getting a nasty surprise.

 

And the game looks pretty gorgeous. Particularly on the strategic map. The only real weaknesses I can see are the animation quality on the tactical map (serviceable, sure, but hardly awesome) and the fact that some of the models are reused (for instance, most of the Fey creatures use the same model). Hopefully this'll be addressed down the line, even if it's via DLC.

 

One tip though, for the love of god turn off Simultaneous Turns (in Singleplayer anyway). The AI's definition of Simultaneous leaves a lot to be desired. ¬_¬

 

The devs seem pretty responsive to fan feedback, too. There's already a patch in the works to fix some balance issues and stuff (not too many bugs, to be honest. Mostly balance tweaks).

 

Ugh, ok, I'll stop gushing now.

[tjb000]

<p>Thanks for taking the time and effort to type that up, D-Lyrium. Needless to say, the game sounds pretty amazing. You did a great job explaining some aspects of the game.</p><p> </p><p>

Interestingly enough, I actually own Civ5 but I haven't even played it yet! It's one of those games that I'm actually savoring the moment of playing and I just haven't found the 'right' time yet... I'm weird like that. I just know once I start it, I'll be staying up late at night into the wee hours of the morning playing it (and then some). Because I'm like this with Civ5, I fear I may be the same way with AoW3.</p><p> </p><p>

Once again, I very much appreciate that type up. I HAVE to buy it now. Wondering if I should get the standard or Deluxe Edition when I get it.</p>

[bigtplaystew]

You sold me, D

[moon_lit_tears]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="tjb000" data-cite="tjb000" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="28397" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I've been playing FTL on my iPad and it just 'feels' right on that platform. I have it on my computer too, but it's nice that I can take it anywhere with me. Especially since I'll have to be taking a transit bus about 1 hour and 30 minutes twice a week (because my car is an unreliable piece o' crap) to my new job training thing.<p> </p><p> <img alt=":D" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/biggrin.png.929299b4c121f473b0026f3d6e74d189.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I'm iffy about getting it on ipad because of the visual aspect. If you're looking for a game to take time, try Knights of pen and paper.</p>

[tjb000]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="moon_lit_tears" data-cite="moon_lit_tears" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="28397" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I'm iffy about getting it on ipad because of the visual aspect. If you're looking for a game to take time, try Knights of pen and paper.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> The developers did an amazing job at making it a great fit for the iPad. Everything works and looks fine. I have a hard time recommending a $9.99 USD mobile game, but they really did do a fantastic job on this port. Worth every penny.</p><p> </p><p> Knights of Pen & Paper is pretty good, eh? I have it on my wish list, but always seem to forget about it. I might just go ahead and pull the trigger. I could definitely get some use out of it on those long bus rides. Thanks for the recommendation.</p>

[moon_lit_tears]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="tjb000" data-cite="tjb000" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="28397" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>The developers did an amazing job at making it a great fit for the iPad. Everything works and looks fine. I have a hard time recommending a $9.99 USD mobile game, but they really did do a fantastic job on this port. Worth every penny.<p> </p><p> Knights of Pen & Paper is pretty good, eh? I have it on my wish list, but always seem to forget about it. I might just go ahead and pull the trigger. I could definitely get some use out of it on those long bus rides. Thanks for the recommendation.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> If you are looking for a time killer and want a puzzling strategy game try Drop 7 there is a free version and a paid one. I've no idea the difference. I got the free version and there are no adds or anything. I tend to play it a lot. It's addicting.</p>

[Blackman]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="tjb000" data-cite="tjb000" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="28397" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Interestingly enough, I actually own Civ5 but I haven't even played it yet! It's one of those games that I'm actually savoring the moment of playing and I just haven't found the 'right' time yet... I'm weird like that. I just know once I start it, I'll be staying up late at night into the wee hours of the morning playing it (and then some). </div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Well, at least you realize it. <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /> I started playing Civ4 at the worst of times, with a university exam a couple of days later. God did that turn out horribly average (yeah, it wasn't on geographics or history or anything <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" />).</p><p> </p><p> Crusader Kings II is also like that (and Adam's sims). Those games have no end. Civ5 kinda does, but as I try to optimize several decisions, it takes me more than a day to finish a game. <img alt=":o" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/redface.png.900245280682ef18c5d82399a93c5827.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p>

[RayW]

Came across this website recently and thought I'd share it as it might come in handy http://steamdb.info/sales/. It lists all the sales on Steam, and you can change currency, sort orders, etc. Pretty useful if you're looking for a new game and don't want to spend too much or you just want a list of all the sales currently on Steam.

[Clarity]

Anyone played any of the PS3 MLB games. Got the new one and im just terrible

[Arrows]

Knights of Pen & Paper is pretty good, eh? I have it on my wish list, but always seem to forget about it. I might just go ahead and pull the trigger. I could definitely get some use out of it on those long bus rides. Thanks for the recommendation.

 

Knights of Pen & Paper, honestly, got boring too quickly for me to recommend spending anything on it.

[Clarity]

Knights of Pen & Paper, honestly, got boring too quickly for me to recommend spending anything on it.

 

£1.99 on android or £7.99 on PC. Gotta love the PC fleasing

[The Swanton825]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Clarity" data-cite="Clarity" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="28397" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Anyone played any of the PS3 MLB games. Got the new one and im just terrible</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Is it batting, pitching or fielding you're having trouble with? I haven't played one of them in a few years, but they probably haven't changed the core gameplay too much since.</p>

[moon_lit_tears]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Arrows" data-cite="Arrows" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="28397" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Knights of Pen & Paper, honestly, got boring too quickly for me to recommend spending anything on it.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Clarity" data-cite="Clarity" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="28397" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>£1.99 on android or £7.99 on PC. Gotta love the PC fleasing</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Or you get it from the humble bundle sale going on right now. <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p>

[Clarity]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="The Swanton825" data-cite="The Swanton825" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="28397" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Is it batting, pitching or fielding you're having trouble with? I haven't played one of them in a few years, but they probably haven't changed the core gameplay too much since.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Batting... Im really good at hitting it directly into the fielders hands</p>

[The Swanton825]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Clarity" data-cite="Clarity" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="28397" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Batting... Im really good at hitting it directly into the fielders hands</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> That's what I thought, I have the same trouble. To be honest I've always found batting in these games to be way too hard. The best advice I have is watch the ball carefully and only swing at pitches you can get the timing down on. It's best to practice either in exhibition or in Spring Training, somewhere you can eat some losses while you get used to everything.</p><p> </p><p> And if you keep having trouble, play around with the sliders, it may be a "scrub" (hate people who use this term) thing to do, but who cares if it helps you enjoy the game?</p><p> </p><p> Hope some of this helps, and sorry I can't give better advice, but I still suck pretty hard at batting.</p>

[Imarevenant]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Clarity" data-cite="Clarity" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="28397" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Batting... Im really good at hitting it directly into the fielders hands</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> If it's The Show; you really have to work the count. You can't just go up hacking because the pitcher isn't going to give you much unless you get him down in the count.</p><p> </p><p> If you're free swinging your going to end up hitting a pitch that's just out of the sweet spot that you really can't do much with.</p><p> </p><p> So be patient work the count and force the pitcher to throw something into the strike zone that you can drive somewhere.</p>

[The Swanton825]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Imarevenant" data-cite="Imarevenant" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="28397" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>If it's The Show; you really have to work the count. You can't just go up hacking because the pitcher isn't going to give you much unless you get him down in the count.<p> </p><p> If you're free swinging your going to end up hitting a pitch that's just out of the sweet spot that you really can't do much with.</p><p> </p><p> So be patient work the count and force the pitcher to throw something into the strike zone that you can drive somewhere.</p></div></blockquote><p> Thank you, much better advice than mine.</p>

[mjdgoldeneye]

<p>I skimmed, like, the last 2 pages and I want to buy a bunch of games now. You guys suck. <img alt="" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p><p> </p><p>

Also, I'd quickly like to recommend Banished. If you've heard about it, it's not as brutal as people say it is. If you haven't heard of it, it's a game where you start with a handful of villagers and have to keep them alive by building the necessary infrastructure. You need to build homes, manipulate food sources, assign woodcutters to create firewood, educate young people so they aren't bad workers, build taverns and churches so they don't get depressed, and so on. If you mess up, it'll usually cascade to the point of the village being wiped out, but that's part of the fun! <img alt="" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /> ($20 on Steam)</p><p> </p><p>

I can also recommend and second the recommendations for all of these games:</p><p> </p><p>

</p><ul><li>Crusader Kings II (Game of Thrones and Elder Scrolls mods are good too!)<br /></li><li>Shadowrun Returns (Great tabletop-style RPG with very good workshop content to extend the game's lifespan.)<br /></li><li>Hearthstone (Free to play and not in an annoying way. It's a virtual card game by Blizzard.)<br /></li><li>FTL<br /></li><li>Europa Universalis IV (Similar to Crusader Kings II.)<br /></li></ul><p></p>

[Clarity]

If it's The Show; you really have to work the count. You can't just go up hacking because the pitcher isn't going to give you much unless you get him down in the count.

 

If you're free swinging your going to end up hitting a pitch that's just out of the sweet spot that you really can't do much with.

 

So be patient work the count and force the pitcher to throw something into the strike zone that you can drive somewhere.

 

Maybe that's where I'm going wrong. No decent tutorials for new players doesn't help

[RayW]

Is anyone else playing Elder Scrolls Online? If so, what are your thoughts?

 

I'm really enjoying it, with the only real complaint being that I didn't like the default key mapping, and lack of controller support (this wouldn't usually be an issue for MMO's as I've always felt keyboard and mouse are best used for MMO's, but this game just... feels better with a controller), but I've mapped my controller to it using xPadder. Visually it's very pleasing, and the environment interactions are great - if someone else has already searched a crate or a sack, tough, you can't search it now. Plus I haven't come across a single building that isn't able to be entered. Little things, but I love them.

 

Plus, a huge bonus for me, as I hated it in World of Warcraft, no server wide Auction House. Instead you get an Auction House within your guild (which I believe you can be in upto five guilds at once) and your bank is shared across your account, and you can store gold on it. It's pretty cool.

 

So, those that have played it, what are your thoughts?

[D-Lyrium]

Is anyone else playing Elder Scrolls Online? If so, what are your thoughts?

 

I'm really enjoying it, with the only real complaint being that I didn't like the default key mapping, and lack of controller support (this wouldn't usually be an issue for MMO's as I've always felt keyboard and mouse are best used for MMO's, but this game just... feels better with a controller), but I've mapped my controller to it using xPadder. Visually it's very pleasing, and the environment interactions are great - if someone else has already searched a crate or a sack, tough, you can't search it now. Plus I haven't come across a single building that isn't able to be entered. Little things, but I love them.

 

Plus, a huge bonus for me, as I hated it in World of Warcraft, no server wide Auction House. Instead you get an Auction House within your guild (which I believe you can be in upto five guilds at once) and your bank is shared across your account, and you can store gold on it. It's pretty cool.

 

So, those that have played it, what are your thoughts?

 

I played a bit during the beta, was impressed by the graphics quality (for an MMO) and, as you say, the fact you can still enter all the buildings and stuff. Didn't like the combat at all though, I found the gameplay a bit boring. Combat basically involves vaguely waving a weapon in the air and the enemy falling over (and not even in cool ragdolly ways). I know certain compromises have to be made in an MMO, but it just feels... bad. Also hate the way that other players seem like ghosts... you can walk straight through them, and your weapons go straight through them too. Also don't like how people in cities just stand around. Feels like a step backwards.

 

John Cleese as Cadwell was awesome though.

 

And the fact that it's both a £50 release and subscription-based put me off checking out the full version. C'mon, Bethesda, it's 2014. You can't charge £50 for a game (which is more than basically any 'normal' non-EA game at launch) and then also charge £9 a month (seriously, who charges subscription fees these days?!), and expect me to play it. I don't care how good the game is.

 

I'll wait until it inevitably goes free-to-play.

 

 

I can also recommend and second the recommendations for all of these games:

 

• Crusader Kings II (Game of Thrones and Elder Scrolls mods are good too!)
  
• Shadowrun Returns (Great tabletop-style RPG with very good workshop content to extend the game's lifespan.)
  
• Hearthstone (Free to play and not in an annoying way. It's a virtual card game by Blizzard.)
  
• FTL
  
• Europa Universalis IV (Similar to Crusader Kings II.)
  

 

[RayW]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="D-Lyrium" data-cite="D-Lyrium" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="28397" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I played a bit during the beta, was impressed by the graphics quality (for an MMO) and, as you say, the fact you can still enter all the buildings and stuff. Didn't like the combat at all though, I found the gameplay a bit boring. Combat basically involves vaguely waving a weapon in the air and the enemy falling over (and not even in cool ragdolly ways). I know certain compromises have to be made in an MMO, but it just feels... bad. Also hate the way that other players seem like ghosts... you can walk straight through them, and your weapons go straight through them too. Also don't like how people in cities just stand around. Feels like a step backwards.<p> </p><p> John Cleese as Cadwell was awesome though.</p><p> </p><p> And the fact that it's both a £50 release and subscription-based put me off checking out the full version. C'mon, Bethesda, it's 2014. You can't charge £50 for a game (which is more than basically any 'normal' non-EA game at launch) and then also charge £9 a month (seriously, who charges subscription fees these days?!), and expect me to play it. I don't care how good the game is.</p><p> </p><p> I'll wait until it inevitably goes free-to-play.</p></div></blockquote><p> I know what you mean about the £50 price (although I got it for £40 of another website - can't remember which right now), plus a subscription. I personally have no issue with paying a subscription as I'm a long time World of Warcraft player, so I'll just quit that and continue my payments with ESO.</p><p> </p><p> As for your other points I think you have to take into consideration that the whole 'walking through people' thing is sometimes a necessity. Unlike a normal single player game, when interacting with objects, the AI can make sure that nothing is in your way to getting there. With an MMO it's far different. If I get to an object that I have to interact with to further a quest, and there's already five or more people there, I don't want to have wait several minutes while they interact, read what they have to do, open their map to see where they have to go next, and then plod along out of my way. If I can "get through them" and interact with the object myself, it makes for a more enjoyable experience. Imagine having to wait to get through doors, etc. It could become extremely annoying.</p><p> </p><p> The battle is something that I feel could be improved upon, but to be perfectly honest, I don't have a clue how. It just feels likes something is wrong with it, or missing. I wouldn't have minded it being like WoW, to be honest, but then... I don't know.</p>

[D-Lyrium]

Yeah, I get why players are ghosts, but it's still irritating. I think it's just because Skyrim was so great, and making it into an MMO while also keeping the general style of the game in tact was always going to lead to loads of compromises. My mind automatically judges it as another Elder Scrolls game, and finds it worse than Skyrim in that regard, without taking into account the fact that it's an MMO.

 

The combat is another thing that I don't think is really fixable. Let's be honest, melee combat was never a strength of the Elder Scrolls series in general, and without ragdolls and the cool effects you can put into a singleplayer game it was always going to be lackluster.

 

It's just more of a traditional 'oldschool' MMO than I was hoping for, I guess.