DC universe online looks promising.

Its been a while since my last post. Been pretty engrossed with my ps3 lately! too many games.... However this mmo did catch my eye. Looks like its off to a good start.

Here's a trailer

Do Mmo's really need levels?

The less time I have to play Mmo's, the more I realize that leveling system's are often a hinderance to gamers who dont have alot of time.

Some may argue that mmo's already cater to the casual gamer too much. That the hardcore playstyle has to be rewarded, and that levels are one representation of the amount time put into a game. If there are no levels, then what do you grind for. What new shiny reward to you get when you accomplish something in the game.

The inherent problem with levels, is that in most games you have to play with someone at or near your level. Unless the game has some type of apprentice system. Even so, most apprentice systems arent as appealing to the character with the higher level.

Thousands of players online, but i can only select from the small percentage of folks who happen to be at my level and online at the same time as me. Think how much fun the game would be if you could team up with anyone, anytime and the group be enjoyable for both parties.

Who hasnt found themselves in this situation plenty of times. You meet someone from a good group outing, add them to your friends list, get busy with work, life, etc... log back on and they are 20 levels higher than you!!! Or Vice Versa! Doesnt really seem like a great way to build community, does it?

While many mmo games like to have a thriving community, I feel that levels actually prohibit community development, since you can only group with people at your same skill level. It's extremely rare to meet someone who stays at your level, unless you decide to only use that character when both people are on, and if im paying a monthly fee, im definatley not waiting to play!

Levels are an outdated system used to show advancment. Levels also obsolete alot of the game world as the game matures. There are many ways to show character advancement, repution systems, ala wow, trophy systems, ala warhammer online, badge system, ala cox.

I always thought that levels were purely psychological mumbo jumbo to keep the player base appeased. Sure players feel more powerful when you go to an area as a level 22 and smash level 10 mobs. But, an alternative way to simulate this would be to have players skill against mobs increase over time.

Not with any type of trackable level or skill advancement. For example, if player x kill troll's everyday for a week, in the beginning they will be harder to kill, but by the end of the week player x will be mowing them down. Simply put, the more u do something the better you get at it. Similarly as my adventures take me to other lands, my skill against trolls would diminish, however it would take less time to become proficient at dispatching them if I chose to take them on again.

Grouping when exploring new area's in encouraged, as players will have less experience fighting the mobs. As the groups skill increases fighting certain types of monsters, they can aid other groups/guildmates new to the area.

Of course, their are some real roadblocks when designing a game with no levels. How do you handle itemization, Gear, and skill advancement....

But that, is another tale....

My first night with Metal Gear Solid 4

For those of you who dont know, Metal gear solid was released on thursday june 12th. The highly anticipated game made exclusively for the ps3 has made a big splash with reviewers. I grabbed a copy from Gamestop on the 12th. But being the busy person that I am, only was able to dig into it last night. Here's my thoughts.

As I said I picked up the box, it was very exciting looking at the graphics on the cover. Since I knew I wouldnt have time to play right away I carried the book around with me like a set of car keys! LOL! The manual has the standard instructions and control info. It has a funny comic about online play in the book. I felt the manual was pretty good for a ps3 title. Alot of drawings that correlate to the controls in the game.

So after reading the book for a couple of days off and on, I finally loaded the game. There was about an 8 minute install time. Usually that would have disturbed me, but you are treated to a great graphic of snake(the main protagonist) smoking during the load screen. The graphics on the load screen are insane!

I gotta say it again... the GRAPHICS ARE INSANE!!!

INSANE i tell you! Im a new ps3 console gamer. Ever since my ps2 got old, I have mostly been playing on the pc.

But I have to say, I didnt know a game could look this good... I really can't emphasize it enough!

I started the game up, and the intro movie scenes all look fantastic. I have the sound hooked up thru digital optical out to my sound system. The digital sound is very well done, movie production quality.

I actually had a sense of awe while watching the game. The metal gear series has always had a deep and sometimes humorous storyline, and its no different in this case.

Gameplay wise, the controls are very similar to previous entries. They have however been tweaked for the better, especially with camera controls and switching to first and third person.

The games cutscenes and gameplay are interwoven seemlessly so far. Granted im not that far into the game, but I am enjoying it immensely.

Gameplay video's and screenshots online do not give this game justice. When you see the game for yourself, you will realize how truly groundbreaking the graphics are.

I did go crazy before logging off and started shooting everything in sight! Man when snake gets sent flying by a grenade it really is an Oh s!#@!! moment!

Tried online a little last night, long sign up process. Gameplay is a little slower than conventional shooters. But graphics are great as well, and after about an hour I was used to the new slower pacing. It has potential, I will need to play longer before knowing if the online gameplay can keep me enthralled. But so far it was rather enjoyable as well.

I definatley recommend the game to any ps3 owners who want to see what there system is capable of.

This definately has me concerned about the pc game industry. I dont think it will be too much longer before consoles *ARE* the new pc's for gamers.

Great job Konami.

Entering the next generation of console gaming

So I finally picked up a PS3! Of course, the week went straight to hell and I didnt get alot of time to check it out. But so far it has me hooked!

I started off with a little Burnout Paradise and GTA4. Both games were entertaing.

I just picked up metal gear solid and hopefully I can get a chance to log my opinion on the early part of the game.

But so far it looks absolutely amazing!!

Its been a rough week, hopefully I can get some meaningful posts goin soon.

Whatever happened to Star Trek Online?

For some strange reason, wondering what happened to this game has been on my mind.

While I was excited with the original announcement of the game going into development back in September of 2004. I always wondered how they could pull it off. Finding details on the game was extremely difficult back then. I believe even a couple of fan sites launched and eventually closed as it became obvious that the game would not see the light of day.

I cant say that im surprised. Ever since the game announcement, I always felt MMo's lacked the innovation to develop a game from the Star Trek IP. The game details that eventually surfaced were miniscule, simple screenshots of a ship interior, or the concept design of the avatar's in the game. However, Eventually some core game design info came out. None of which I thought were positive.

The core reason, or rather the fatal design flaw which doomed the game in my view, is making it a 1st/3rd person game.

The game would revolve around players Players who would start at Starfleet Academy, where they would have learn basic game skills. After graduating they would get assignments on ships, planets and star bases.


But how much can you really do on a federation starship? Run quests? Simulations on the holodeck perhaps? The fact of the matter is, life on a federation starship is quite boring most of the time. Especially for a lowly ensign. At least thats how it seems to me. Besides, the Star Trek Universe is based more on political and moral dilemmas, with combat as a last resort.

Large Ship to ship combat was going to use a teamwork system. Where players assigned to your ship would help you in combat situations. I didnt like this design decision as well. How do you make the science officer's role fun and endgaging. How do you stop mr chekov from firing at will? It is a game after all, kids will do what they do. Forced grouping is always bad in my eyes, and this appeared to be another game killing design flaw.

As of right now, I dont think the technology exists to make a MMo game that is true to the Star Trek universe.

If I were to play a star trek mmo, I would prefer a game designed around running a starship crew, not an indivual person. The core gameplay would evolve around leveling up and assembling a crew. I would start the game in starfleet acadamey, you have control over a small group of cadets, whom you train to fill the core ship needs. Captain, engineer, helm, science officer etc...

Your level in the game is represented by two factors, your crew size, and your ship class. Since there is no cash in star trek, as you complete missions you gain prestige or rep. You would use this to increase the stats of your crew, or to garner more favor with starfleet to gain a promotion or new ship.

Every player has a ship and crew and players can work together for combat missions, space exploration, saving the universe type stuff. Of course players can join non federation factions as well, klingons, romulans, and engage in pvp combat. In fact a star trek mmo based on the klingon empire would probrably way more engaging than a federation effort.


Graphics would need to by simple and stylized, when a pary beams down to a planet you would need to be able to see multiple crews at the same time. Similar to an rts. I would have slightly better ship graphics for ship to ship combat and damage modeling.

Instead of crafting in the game I would have planet building. Once players reach a certain level of prestige they would be allowed to create an explorable planet, generate quests, policitical intrigue and problems. Based on a certain rules the developers have designed within the planet generator tool. Once you create your planet it would enter the game world in unexplored space. Similar to the concepts behind the unreleased "spore" game.

Players can visit your planet, solve quests and explore. There should be some way to reward players for good planet design as well.

just my ramblings on STO. While I still dont think its possible to make star trek online in the current environment. Who knows, maybe the new developers can pull it off.

Gears of War2 video - not for the faint of heart!

This Game trailer looks awesome! It's amazing the level of graphic detail we are getting with these next gen games.

Check it out for yourself!

No AOC for me

Since my pc lacks the power to play AOC in all its glory I am forced to put it on the backburner. Its not that I dont think aoc is a fun game or would look great on a new machine. Its just that in order for me to justify a $1000 dollar upgrade, the game has to do more than be just a pretty face.

It has to be a keeper.

Granted, not knowing first hand is a handicap. But having read countless forum post's, video reviews and blogs. I have come to the conclusion that while AOC may not be perfect, it is definately a fun game that many will enjoy.

While the general opinion seems to be that itemization and end game content are not finished. For a casual gamer like myself this is a non issue. Basically, what it comes down to is economics. Cold - hard - cash.

How do you define a games fun level, is it worth $1000 dollars? Is the amount of fun I can gain from AOC worth that much of an upgrade? For me, the answer is "NO".

For me to upgrade to that extreme 1 of 2 things has to happen.
1. The game has to be considered the "second coming" a "must buy" a "10" ala GTA4. (which I will prolly be getting a ps3 and this instead of my new rig)

Thats not the feeling I get from Aoc posts and forums... the feeling I get is its a good game with the potential to be great. That the game is still fun, even though it has not yet delivered on all its promises. It's not even shipping with DX10(I always thought those aoc dx10 screenshots looked a little iffy!)

Or the second thing is

2. My system can no longer play any and all new and upcoming games.

Those are the conditions I look for, and unfortunately AOC just doesnt fit the bill right now. I still play cod4 on a regular basis and enjoy it.

Before I heard about AOC, I new my pc was aging, but I never really thought about upgrading yet...(maybe next year, after taxes...)

Who knows, maybe in 3 months if it hits that "great" tag, perhaps I'll reconsider.

Looks like the streets of liberty city may be my next home for now.