Recommended Posts

I'd agree with an NDA for in-house testing, but I don't even know why they bother trying to enforce an NDA when they've opened the beta to any Tom, Dick and Harry who applies.

Well clearly it isn't open to other names who apply :D

 

I haven't gotten the go ahead yet.  Admittedly I did just sign up within the last couple days...but heh.

I think more people need to see how bad this game is, before committing to buy it to try it for a month.

Agreed. I just tried it on my beta account and wow... This needs a LOT of work done on it, I won't go into specifics but from a 'I`ve never played this before' perspective it is god awful, slow and crashy on simple functions, nothing is explained and I'm still at a loss of why things are the way they are.

I think more people need to see how bad this game is, before committing to buy it to try it for a month.

 

This is true but they should not base that information off of a beta version of the game. If anyone here can remember the World of Warcraft beta it had all sorts of problems and the official version was fantastic.

Well clearly it isn't open to other names who apply :D

 

I haven't gotten the go ahead yet.  Admittedly I did just sign up within the last couple days...but heh.

 

You haven't? Dang unlucky. I'd been applying repeatedly for months and finally got one, but so did 4 of my friends who applied last week. I was basically assuming they were giving it out to anyone after the ease they got it.

So, now that the game is visible to anyone does that mean those of us who haven't agreed to any NDA can freely talk/post images/videos while the rest have to keep quiet? :laugh:

 

so far as i know there was something in the EULA for this weekends test about the NDA on it as well. i have not installed the new version yet.

So, now that the game is visible to anyone does that mean those of us who haven't agreed to any NDA can freely talk/post images/videos while the rest have to keep quiet? :laugh:

Everyone in all of the betas has agreed to the NDA three times, once when creating an account, another when redeeming the code and the third time when logging in on the client.

Everyone in all of the betas has agreed to the NDA three times, once when creating an account, another when redeeming the code and the third time when logging in on the client.

 

I haven't agreed to any but I know how it looks and plays :p 

So after a couple of hours playing I'm still not really sure what to make of it. To me it does just feel kinda like Skyrim with a multiplayer mod, I've enjoyed what I've played so far but I'm not that excited about going back on to play, I'm just not really getting that sucked into it, in all honesty though I think I might buy it when it's released because I do feel like it has a lot of potential but I'm really skeptical about whether I'll pay for a month of game time after the "free" 30 days. 

That's a bold statement to make, when there are thousands of bugs that get reported. I haven't worked on a dev team, but I'm willing to bet that list gets sorted based upon how many repeat submissions the have, severity, and so forth. Thus, major bugs that can cause crashes even if only on the client side can get addressed, along with anything that breaks the game balance whether vendors aren't working right, item duplication, exploits, etc.

 

Yes, they do want to stress test the servers, but it's certainly more than that. If you can't get past the first portion of the game, who cares what players will see at the endgame if there are still too many bugs to allow for a playable environment to even make it that far?

 

The bugs they check and fix, are the bugs reported by their paid bug hunting and QnA team, that will perform use case scenarios for repeatability and test thousands of scenarios over and over again. these betas are pure demo PR.

 

Now I did try the game a bit earlier today. and I'm not quite convinced, on one hand i like it when games don't hold your hand, but on the other hand, this game does barely tells you what to do. and everything seems to be done very awkwardly. not a fan of the control scheme which is all set up to be primarily first person either. it doesn't work very well for me, though I figure it would work great on a pad, which I have and could hook up. 

 

it also suffers the same problem most realistic graphics games do. looks great in character creation, but like rift and others before it, they tend to get really bland and flat and plain boring once you get into the actual game for some reason. It's as if they're afraid to use colours and brightness and variety when in combination with realistic graphics.  

 

Also... Watermarks... seriously....

 

I'll give it some more testing tomorrow, but so far it's not looking like a buy for me :/ 

This is true but they should not base that information off of a beta version of the game. If anyone here can remember the World of Warcraft beta it had all sorts of problems and the official version was fantastic.

 

By official version I suppose you mean the one after the second or so expansion ? ;)

Played tonight for an hour or so. Somehow the combat in the game feels slower than GW2 and we're back to the old mmo mechanic of first come first served. I thought GW2 taught the world that sort of thing wasn't needed anymore. That's a pretty huge mark against the game.

Well I've just played for nearly 4 hours solid, and I'm not particularly grabbed by the game. This is my first MMO, so I didn't know what to expect, but this isn't it. As has been said, it feels a lot like Skyrim with a multi player mod, but so much of the interaction just doesn't make much sense. I never really felt like I knew what was happening, or how to decide what I'm going to do. Lock picking is just a joke for example, with no explanation on what to do until *after* your first lock.

 

It looks very nice, but it doesn't play well yet. Hard to see how this can be ready in 3 months, and without huge changes I doubt they'll be getting any money from me.

Well I've just played for nearly 4 hours solid, and I'm not particularly grabbed by the game. This is my first MMO, so I didn't know what to expect, but this isn't it. As has been said, it feels a lot like Skyrim with a multi player mod, but so much of the interaction just doesn't make much sense. I never really felt like I knew what was happening, or how to decide what I'm going to do. Lock picking is just a joke for example, with no explanation on what to do until *after* your first lock.

 

It looks very nice, but it doesn't play well yet. Hard to see how this can be ready in 3 months, and without huge changes I doubt they'll be getting any money from me.

 

It doesn't even look that nice. The armor designs are very bland and the animations are terrible nor do the environments look all that great either. And I'm playing on max or near max settings.

It doesn't even look that nice. The armor designs are very bland and the animations are terrible nor do the environments look all that great either. And I'm playing on max or near max settings.

 

Maybe too spoilt by all the modding for Skyrim?  Try playing Skyrim as 'vanilla' without any mods (graphical or otherwise), compare, report.

That's great and all except for the game is supposed to be a modern mmo. Skyrim is over 2 years old.

 

Fair enough, but 'looks' don't make a great game.  It can look fantastic, but if the 'core' (the actual gameplay) ain't there, well?

 

Take a look at the 'Starflight' videos on the tube, as an example.  A game from the 80's on the Amiga (if you were around then lol) with dire looks and slow processing, but still today, has one of the best 'core' gameplay elements around, something of which a lot of indie developers are using these days, instead of luring folk in with a 'hey look at me', I'm a game from the future, but I have no soul within mentality.

 

I highly doubt this, nor Skyrim, will have the same effect 30 years from now, which is a shame.

Fair enough, but 'looks' don't make a great game.  It can look fantastic, but if the 'core' (the actual gameplay) ain't there, well?

 

Take a look at the 'Starflight' videos on the tube, as an example.  A game from the 80's on the Amiga (if you were around then lol) with dire looks and slow processing, but still today, has one of the best 'core' gameplay elements around, something of which a lot of indie developers are using these days, instead of luring folk in with a 'hey look at me', I'm a game from the future, but I have no soul within mentality.

 

I highly doubt this, nor Skyrim, will have the same effect 30 years from now, which is a shame.

 

You can see this with comparing Skyrim and Oblivion. Oblivion, to me, is a much better game in terms of gameplay. Skyrim got boring pretty quick - thankfully, there are some good mods to bring the gameplay out and keep it interesting.

 

As for ESO, I was wary about it when they announced it from reading some of the design ideas and as the development progressed. Sounds like these worries hold up. Now, if it wasn't a subscription-based MMO, I'd be much more excited for it - but I just don't find the justification for paying a monthly fee for 'yet another Elder Scrolls game'. Want me to buy it for $60? No problem. To me, Wildstar looks more interesting - at least they are trying to implement some new ideas.

Fair enough, but 'looks' don't make a great game.  It can look fantastic, but if the 'core' (the actual gameplay) ain't there, well?

 

Take a look at the 'Starflight' videos on the tube, as an example.  A game from the 80's on the Amiga (if you were around then lol) with dire looks and slow processing, but still today, has one of the best 'core' gameplay elements around, something of which a lot of indie developers are using these days, instead of luring folk in with a 'hey look at me', I'm a game from the future, but I have no soul within mentality.

 

I highly doubt this, nor Skyrim, will have the same effect 30 years from now, which is a shame.

 

That's all good and well. So far after putting another few hours into this game I don't think the game play is there either though. I wants so badly to be GW2's combat but it's completely hampered by the stupid stamina bar which seems like you use for everything. So whenever you get into combat you can't use your abilities. It's annoying and needs to go away.

Pay to play, it's the only thing that might stop me from buying it. 

Thanks for the answer.  Yes this game is not quite as good as GW2.  It lacks many things which I can list.  As I predicted a couple months ago when I saw the demo, that it will disappoint many Oblivion/Skyrim player-based.

 

1) This game lacks the depth.  I been watching live stream it does not have much content strategy in the dungeon.  You basically do not need to solve or form a plan with the team mate to solve a certain things.  It's all about slashing the enemy.  The only depth to it is, you can dodge and evade incoming target.  I may need to watch more in-game play.

 

2) Graphics are not very artistic or visually appealing.  Graphics are too bland, pale, and too dark.  Overall, I would say it's ok.  Playable but not superior to any current MMO on the market right now.

 

3) This game is P2P and the price is not worth it.  For a P2P, it should have better content.

 

4) Game mechanics, especially the combat mechanics looks stiff.  I have not seen any underwater combat yet but I am going to say if there is one, it's going to be as stiff as land combat mechanics.

 

5) Skill trait logistic seems a bit confusing.  I am sure it requires a bit of getting used to.

 

There's more to list but hate to trying to recall all the points I didn't jot down.

Why are you comparing it to GW2 ? GW is a completely different type of MMO it doesn't need to be like GW it if was like GW you could just play GW.

 

as for armors being bland. yes, that's what happens when you chose a more realistic style for the game over the GW and WoW mega shoulder pad armor and bare naked ladies armors. This would also account for the lack of underwater combat as you don't fight underwater with armor or bow and arrow.

 

These aren't the major faults of the game, though I do prefer slightly more stylized armors, but I also don't like the overdone armors of WoW and GW. I'll be playing it some more today to find out what I actually think about it and see, but as it is, the main problem is they need more color and virbancy in the game, a little better questing system that actually tells you what to do, and maybe a start area without so much loading.. I mean seriously, several tiny rooms with loading inbetween....

Played tonight for an hour or so. Somehow the combat in the game feels slower than GW2 and we're back to the old mmo mechanic of first come first served. I thought GW2 taught the world that sort of thing wasn't needed anymore. That's a pretty huge mark against the game.

 

what do you mean first come first serve ? 

what do you mean first come first serve ? 

The first person to attack a creature gets it's loot, other players can't.

 

 

It is essentially a mod for morrowind (yes, the mechanics have gone back in time). What you see on your screen is individual to just you, and you see a bunch of other online players on your screen too, but if they do a quest, kill something etc. then it doesn't effect you or your quest status, it's pretty much single player but you can glance at how far your friends are through it...

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Dude, im talking about simply disable it from settings app. Because of the eu regulation, you could disable it here for years.
    • One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory by Sayan Sen Image via DepositPhotos Scientists at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have calculated how time passes on Mars compared with Earth, adding detail to how timekeeping would need to work beyond Earth’s orbit. The study, published in The Astronomical Journal, found that clocks on Mars run an average of 477 microseconds, or millionths of a second, faster per day than clocks on Earth. A microsecond is one millionth of a second, a very small unit used in precise scientific timing systems such as atomic clocks, which measure time using consistent atomic behavior. This difference is not constant. Because Mars moves around the Sun in a non-circular path (an eccentric orbit, meaning its distance from the Sun changes over time instead of staying fixed) and is affected by gravity from other bodies, the daily difference can vary by as much as 226 microseconds over a Martian year. The study also identifies smaller repeating changes of about 40 microseconds per day linked to synodic cycles (repeating periods that describe how planets line up with each other as they orbit the Sun from different positions). These longer patterns affect how time differences slowly rise and fall. To make these estimates, researchers compared Mars with Earth and the Moon. The work looks at relativistic proper time (the time actually measured by a clock depending on its speed and the strength of gravity where it is located, as described in Einstein’s relativity). This shows that each world has its own slightly different “rate” of time. This becomes more important as space missions expand into cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Moon) and toward Mars. On Earth, time systems rely on atomic clocks and satellites, which stay closely synchronized for navigation and communication. The study is based on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which shows that time is affected by gravity and motion. Stronger gravity makes clocks run slower, while weaker gravity makes them run faster. “The time is just right for the Moon and Mars,” said NIST physicist Bijunath Patla. “This is the closest we have been to realizing the science fiction vision of expanding across the solar system.” A day on Mars is about 40 minutes longer than on Earth, and a Martian year lasts 687 Earth days. But the main question is not just about days and years, but how fast time itself passes. An atomic clock placed on Mars would function normally, but compared with one on Earth, the two would slowly drift apart due to differences in gravity and motion. This requires careful calculation of what is similar to a time-zone difference across planets. Researchers modeled Mars using a reference surface and included gravitational effects from the Sun, Earth, the Moon, and other planets. This includes a multi-body gravitational system (often described as a three-body or four-body problem, where predicting motion becomes difficult because multiple large objects all pull on each other at the same time through gravity). Mars also follows a Keplerian orbit (an idealized elliptical orbit based on simple gravitational laws that assume smooth motion, before adding real-world disturbances from other bodies). In addition, the researchers accounted for solar tides (small changes in gravitational force caused by the Sun that slightly distort planetary motion and timing, especially in systems involving Earth and the Moon). These combined effects are described as relativistic proper-time offsets (small but measurable differences in elapsed time between locations caused by gravity and motion), which must be included when comparing clocks across planets. “But for Mars, that’s not the case. Its distance from the Sun and its eccentric orbit make the variations in time larger. A three-body problem is extremely complicated. Now we’re dealing with four: the Sun, Earth, the Moon and Mars,” Patla explained. “The heavy lifting was more challenging than I initially thought.” Although the differences are extremely small, they matter for navigation and communication systems that depend on precise timing. Even modern networks on Earth, such as mobile systems, rely on timing accuracy at very small fractions of a second. Communication between Earth and Mars currently takes about four to 24 minutes or more depending on planetary positions, meaning signals are not real-time. A shared and accurate time system could help future missions reduce confusion in navigation and data exchange. “If you get synchronization, it will be almost like real-time communication without any loss of information. You don’t have to wait to see what happens,” Patla said. Researchers note that fully developed interplanetary communication networks are still far in the future. However, understanding how time behaves across planets helps prepare for those systems. “It may be decades before the surface of Mars is covered by the tracks of wandering rovers, but it is useful now to study the issues involved in establishing navigation systems on other planets and moons,” said Neil Ashby. “Like current global navigation systems like GPS, these systems will depend on accurate clocks, and the effects on clock rates can be analyzed with the help of Einstein’s general theory of relativity.” Patla added that the results also help improve understanding of time itself under relativity. “It's good to know for the first time what is happening on Mars timewise. Nobody knew that before. It improves our knowledge of the theory itself, the theory of how clocks tick and relativity,” he said. Source: NIST, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 by Razvan Serea TeraCopy is a compact program designed to copy and move files at the maximum possible speed, also providing you with a lot of features. Copy files faster. TeraCopy uses dynamically adjusted buffers to reduce seek times. Asynchronous copy speeds up file transfer between two physical hard drives. Pause and resume transfers. Pause copy process at any time to free up system resources and continue with a single click. Error recovery. In case of copy error, TeraCopy will try several times and in the worse case just skips the file, not terminating the entire transfer. Interactive file list. TeraCopy shows failed file transfers and lets you fix the problem and recopy only problem files. Shell integration. TeraCopy can completely replace Explorer copy and move functions, allowing you work with files as usual. TeraCopy is free for non-commercial use only. For commercial use you need to buy a license. The paid version of the program includes the following features: Copy/move to your favorite folders. Save reports as HTML and CSV files. Select files with the same extension/folder. Remove the selected files from the copy queue. TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 changelog: Added support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. Improved exception handling and automated bug report upload. Fixed several minor bugs and small memory leaks. Build 26 (June 24) Fixed a rare exception when a transfer completed. Features added since version 3.17: Enhanced speed graph. New multi-threaded copy engine. Support for copying to multiple targets. Queue system for managing multiple copy operations. Support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. TeraCopy entry in the modern Windows Explorer context menu. Integrated toolbar in the title bar. Why receive LocalSend transfers with TeraCopy? Handle file conflicts: Skip, overwrite, or rename files when a file with the same name already exists. LocalSend always creates another copy, which can waste time and disk space, especially when resuming an interrupted transfer. Filter unwanted files: Apply ignore lists or remove files manually before accepting a transfer, so unnecessary files are not downloaded. Better performance on fast networks: In tests over a 10 Gbps connection, TeraCopy received files several times faster than the standard LocalSend app on Windows. Download: TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 | 14.5 MB (Freeware, paid upgrade available) View: TeraCopy Website | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Briefly used Turbo Pascal (and Turbo C++) in 97 and soon after that I bought PC magazine that included a full version of Delphi 2. I still use Delphi today, some 29 years later.
    • Age of Empires Mobile comes to PC, here's how to carry over progress from your phone by Ivan Jenic Image: YouTube/Microsoft Microsoft just released Age of Empires Mobile for PC. The game, officially called Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, is available for free on Steam and Microsoft Store, almost two years after its initial release for handheld devices. Age of Empires is one of those franchises that entire generations grew up with. The original came out in 1997, and immediately got people hooked to building civilizations and crushing their enemies on the battlefield. However, the franchise today is a far cry from its roots, as Age of Empires Mobile is, well, a game optimized for handheld devices, and not a classic RTS title we’ve all loved for years. And, of course, it includes in-game purchases. The PC version is still a mobile game at its core, but it’s been optimized for desktop play. There’s mouse control, full keyboard compatibility, and a refined UI. Microsoft also refreshed the visuals with some 4k textures, so the game should look better on larger screens. The game supports Crossplay, so you can switch between your phone, tablet, and PC without losing anything. But linked progress doesn’t come out of the box, as you have to enable it first. Here’s how to link your progress: On your mobile device, open Age of Empires Mobile. Go to Settings (Gear icon) > Account. Select Bind Account and choose a sign-in option. Once you enable account binding, sign in on PC using the same method, and your progress will be accessible across all your devices. Xbox Game Pass subscribers also get a bonus reward pack on PC, which includes: 1 Monthly Pass Token 1 Custom Resource Chest 10 Universal 60-Minute Speed-Ups 1,000 Empire Coins Exclusive Player Portrait Frame You can find more info about Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, as well as download links, on the Age of Empires official website.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      459
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      79
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!