Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
facerip

Shadowbane 2.0

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, facerip said:

Wintergrasp is a battleground in an unrelated game.  If "120" sided battles is all you saw in shadowbane then you didn't actually play and are just spewing more fake news.  

Tell me more about conquest server war efforts and how it relates to a 2.5 hour insignificant instanced battleground.  100% LEL

If you have proof that shadowbane had larger than 120vs120 happening every other hour on multiple different servers at a time then I'd love to see it.  Until then it's pretty obvious that WoW was able to create much larger battles much more frequently.  They simply condensed the sieging experience so players could enjoy the "good parts" of it frequently. 

1 hour ago, BraveSirRobin said:

Never heard of VN, non factors imo.  I played WOW for the first 6 weeks after launch and the PVP was absolute sheet.

 

Hey BSR, welcome back!  Are you excited for crowfall?


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The large scale battles in SB looked like stop motion photography at best or a still life at worst.  Any server population fight caused the game to cry and hide under a table.  At least all of the SB battles that I was in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, zolaz said:

The large scale battles in SB looked like stop motion photography at best or a still life at worst.  Any server population fight caused the game to cry and hide under a table.  At least all of the SB battles that I was in.

I'm sure that eventually with hardware jumps and bandwidth jumps sb became playable lag wise on some emulator in 2017, back when the game was actually a live service and had a large population though, not a chance.  The game was so poorly optimized, even by industry standards at the time. 


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

I'm sure that eventually with hardware jumps and bandwidth jumps sb became playable lag wise on some emulator in 2017, back when the game was actually a live service and had a large population though, not a chance.  The game was so poorly optimized, even by industry standards at the time. 

Small unit ganks were fun though. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

If you have proof that shadowbane had larger than 120vs120 happening every other hour on multiple different servers at a time then I'd love to see it.  Until then it's pretty obvious that WoW was able to create much larger battles much more frequently.  They simply condensed the sieging experience so players could enjoy the "good parts" of it frequently. 

Hey BSR, welcome back!  Are you excited for crowfall?

It's obvious you didn't play Shadowbane in any sort of real capacity.

 

Wintergrasp was terribe.  I suggest you ask for a WoW forum.  The only good thing in WoW was the arena.  Trying to compare and instanced battleground to an entire conquest game is silly.  You probably wont give up the fake news vomit, but it doesn't really matter much since what you are saying  doesn't even make sense.  You have a lb understanding of Shadowbane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, facerip said:

It's obvious you didn't play Shadowbane in any sort of real capacity.

 

Wintergrasp was terribe.  I suggest you ask for a WoW forum.  The only good thing in WoW was the arena.  Trying to compare and instanced battleground to an entire conquest game is silly.  You probably wont give up the fake news vomit, but it doesn't really matter much since what you are saying  doesn't even make sense.  You have a lb understanding of Shadowbane.

But I am not comparing it to an entire game, I am comparing the scales of battle.  In which case WoW absolutely crushes shadowbane in how large its fights were and how frequently they were occurring. 

If you look at battles of any size whether it's 1v1 2v2 3v3 5v5 10v10 15v15 40v40 120v120, wow offered it all, it offered it at a much larger frequency, and while the merits of open world pvp and the unevenness of open world combat is something I prefer in mmorpgs, you should very well know that those instanced based battles match closer to competitive gaming and that the tactics and requirement for coordination and precision are much higher.  Not to mention WoW was just a faster game than shadowbane in general. 


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WoW wasn't a conquest game.  You can't compare a battleground to server conquest.  WoW doesn't offer, war declaration, town destruction, inventory loot, Base Class/Promotion Class/Disc combination character building, resource control per guild and a million other sandbox player driven content.

 

Shadowbane was the best game ever my man.  Sorry you were bad and didn't play very long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, facerip said:

WoW wasn't a conquest game.  You can't compare a battleground to server conquest.  WoW doesn't offer, war declaration, town destruction, inventory loot, Base Class/Promotion Class/Disc combination character building, resource control per guild and a million other sandbox player driven content.

 

Shadowbane was the best game ever my man.  Sorry you were bad and didn't play very long.

What WoW did offer was constant PvP in all shapes and sizes with different themes and a higher skill-ceiling though. 

Shadowbane was a nice idea implemented poorly, hopefully crowfall will work out where shadowbane failed! :)


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

Gear never mattered in WoW in competitive play if you were good, everyone acquired the best gear, it was relatively easy to attain.  People tend to glorify the good old days when the new ones are not working out well for them, but shadowbane had a low skill-ceiling, on all fronts.

Just because I can work people over in Tecmo Bowl doesn't mean I can't also work them over in Madden. Enjoying the past and enjoying the present aren't mutually exclusive propositions.

20 hours ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

How often did SB have 120+ vs 120+ battles?  Wintergrasp had them every other hour and each battlegroup was hosting its own wintergrasp, let alone multiple instances of it on populated battlegroups. 

I can't recall a single SB battle that was 120 vs 120, the highest I ever saw was 80 vs 140.

I know the siege of Xanten on Mourning, which was shortly after you admittedly quit SB, had a factor several times higher than that on the offensive side. Even as late as 2006-7, I fought in open field battles and sieges with numbers of greater than 150 total.

13 hours ago, BraveSirRobin said:

Never heard of VN, non factors imo.  I played WOW for the first 6 weeks after launch and the PVP was absolute sheet.

 

Then by the same standard VN applies to himself, you are an all knowing expert on the game!

11 hours ago, zolaz said:

The large scale battles in SB looked like stop motion photography at best or a still life at worst.  Any server population fight caused the game to cry and hide under a table.  At least all of the SB battles that I was in.

It wasn't too bad by 2005 for me - and that includes several sieges and open field fights with 150+ characters.

3 hours ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

But I am not comparing it to an entire game, I am comparing the scales of battle.  In which case WoW absolutely crushes shadowbane in how large its fights were and how frequently they were occurring. 

If you look at battles of any size whether it's 1v1 2v2 3v3 5v5 10v10 15v15 40v40 120v120, wow offered it all, it offered it at a much larger frequency, and while the merits of open world pvp and the unevenness of open world combat is something I prefer in mmorpgs, you should very well know that those instanced based battles match closer to competitive gaming and that the tactics and requirement for coordination and precision are much higher.  Not to mention WoW was just a faster game than shadowbane in general. 

I agree it was a faster game, but that's the point I was trying to make earlier. WoW had more frequent large fights because at the end of the day, NONE OF THEM MATTERED. Your reasoning is analogous to someone playing a hand of hold 'em with an oversize deck and thinking they are good enough to win the World Series of Poker. At the highest levels of poker, having the patience to set up your foe and understand their play before it is made. Discipline is equally key - and endurance is as well. 

The scale of the fight in players may have been higher, but the scale of the fight in length to victory is nowhere close. You can't look at a single metric and draw a conclusion for all of them.

Edited by vandarr

CF_Van.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, vandarr said:

Just because I can work people over in Tecmo Bowl doesn't mean I can't also work them over in Madden. Enjoying the past and enjoying the present aren't mutually exclusive propositions.

Sure but the shadowbane players aren't really proving they've adapted to modern pvp games.  That's why I simply ask for present day success to show that they aren't just veterans of an old small slow game that were unable to adapt.

 

I agree it was a faster game, but that's the point I was trying to make earlier. WoW had more frequent large fights because at the end of the day, NONE OF THEM MATTERED. Your reasoning is analogous to someone playing a hand of hold 'em with an oversize deck and thinking they are good enough to win the World Series of Poker. At the highest levels of poker, having the patience to set up your foe and understand their play before it is made. Discipline is equally key - and endurance is as well. 

A fight mattering is all perspective.  Do fights in shadowbane matter after most of the players left and the game itself was simply a slow game with a low skill-ceiling?  To me they don't.  To someone that lived and breathed shadowbane they do, but what matters to me is what is skillful in pvp.  I don't let nostalgia cloud my judgment. 

The scale of the fight in players may have been higher, but the scale of the fight in length to victory is nowhere close. You can't look at a single metric and draw a conclusion for all of them.

The length of shadowbane fights had nothing to do with skill and more to do with the slow pace of the game.

 


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

But I am not comparing it to an entire game, I am comparing the scales of battle.  In which case WoW absolutely crushes shadowbane in how large its fights were and how frequently they were occurring. 

I don't even know why people argue with you; you're the embodiment of narcissism. You'd give asuka langley from evangelion a run for her money (bring out my weebs).

Wow had the potential for larger fights because quite frankly it had a higher population in comparison to shadowbane. Shadowbane had more eventful and meaningful pvp tho.

Edited by izkimar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I played both and the fact of the matter is SB had larger fights.

 

we had over 300 at

some some sieges because you don't spend months building a city and then let someone take it from you without calling in every favor, ally, merc or even the enemy of your enemy.

 

was the performance good? No.

 

but we had fun anyway because it meant something .

 

 


www.lotd.org       pking and siege pvp since 1995

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, PaleOne said:

I played both and the fact of the matter is SB had larger fights.

 

we had over 300 at

some some sieges because you don't spend months building a city and then let someone take it from you without calling in every favor, ally, merc or even the enemy of your enemy.

 

was the performance good? No.

 

but we had fun anyway because it meant something .

 

 

So you say it is a fact of the matter that sb had larger fights, then you say you had over 300 at some sieges.  But WoW had so many that were even greater than 300 at points.  Ahn Qiraj gate opening, TBC release, stuff like that on pvp servers was wild.  Then of course wintergrasp as I mentioned distilled it to be 120+vs120+ frequently. 

And while WoW also suffered some performance obviously it was never to the level that SB suffered in big fights.

As far as fights meaning something, it all depends on the scope I guess, to me it means something to do well in high skill games, that to me is the point of competition vs other gamers. 

That's what matters in PvP, others might like more of a roleplaying narrative, where joe triggered guild A and joe was a part of guild B and then they had lots of back and forth and eventually settled it in a fight.  And while shadowbane politics and drama were definitely interesting, the actual playability of the game was quite subpar, the skill-ceiling was low, and I guess it's just hard for people to admit that.  You can enjoy something without it being a high quality product, but why pretend it was better than it actually was in that department.


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

So you say it is a fact of the matter that sb had larger fights, then you say you had over 300 at some sieges.  But WoW had so many that were even greater than 300 at points.  Ahn Qiraj gate opening, TBC release, stuff like that on pvp servers was wild.  Then of course wintergrasp as I mentioned distilled it to be 120+vs120+ frequently. 

And while WoW also suffered some performance obviously it was never to the level that SB suffered in big fights.

As far as fights meaning something, it all depends on the scope I guess, to me it means something to do well in high skill games, that to me is the point of competition vs other gamers. 

That's what matters in PvP, others might like more of a roleplaying narrative, where joe triggered guild A and joe was a part of guild B and then they had lots of back and forth and eventually settled it in a fight.  And while shadowbane politics and drama were definitely interesting, the actual playability of the game was quite subpar, the skill-ceiling was low, and I guess it's just hard for people to admit that.  You can enjoy something without it being a high quality product, but why pretend it was better than it actually was in that department.

What would get you more interested in winning?

If we spar just for bragging rights that instantly go away with the next match

or if we win I get to take your house?


www.lotd.org       pking and siege pvp since 1995

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

實而備之,強而避之,怒而撓之,卑而驕之,佚而勞之,親而離之,出其不意,攻其不備。

  • If your enemy is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is in superior strength, evade him. If your opponent is temperamental, seek to irritate him. Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant. If he is taking his ease, give him no rest. If his forces are united, separate them. Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PaleOne said:

What would get you more interested in winning?

If we spar just for bragging rights that instantly go away with the next match

or if we win I get to take your house?

What if that house is only worth 50k because it is in an undesirable location? 

Even crazier, what if that house is made of temporary pixels?


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

What if that house is only worth 50k because it is in an undesirable location? 

Even crazier, what if that house is made of temporary pixels?

That is a question I Wonder about Crowfall.

In SB worlds were permanent and you would work hard to build something defendable and lasting.

You would show up at 3 am for sieges whether you had work or school.

I was a siege commander for a large established guild. It felt like a second job.

When worlds are temporary will there be the same fear of loss?


www.lotd.org       pking and siege pvp since 1995

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, VIKINGNAIL said:

What if that house is only worth 50k because it is in an undesirable location? 

Even crazier, what if that house is made of temporary pixels?

You burn it down either way. DUH!


CF_Van.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Sure but the shadowbane players aren't really proving they've adapted to modern pvp games.  That's why I simply ask for present day success to show that they aren't just veterans of an old small slow game that were unable to adapt.

Winterblades (and others) seem to be doing ok in the beta tests thus far. Would you disagree?

Quote

A fight mattering is all perspective.  Do fights in shadowbane matter after most of the players left and the game itself was simply a slow game with a low skill-ceiling?  To me they don't.  To someone that lived and breathed shadowbane they do, but what matters to me is what is skillful in pvp.  I don't let nostalgia cloud my judgment.

I'm not perfect, but I'm a pretty objective and rational person. Simply put, the emotional attachment someone has to pixels they build over the course of hundreds or thousands of hours makes a fight matter more to that player than a random engagement.

Look at paintball vs. laser tag. In the former, one hit and your game is over. In the latter, getting hit is almost meaningless, because 10 seconds later you are back in the game. There is no real advantage in taking a position when a "dead" guy can just walk up and shoot you anyway. Part of the reason SB bled pop was because people couldn't take the stress of losing a 9 hour fight and seeing all of their work destroyed. You don't see that in WoW - the closest you will see is someone quitting a guild because a multiple hour raid loot didn't get granted to them. 

Quote

The length of shadowbane fights had nothing to do with skill and more to do with the slow pace of the game.

You are trying to compare a game of rock, paper, scissors to chess and stating that chess takes no skill because it's too long of a game. Remember, WoW PvP was originally a total afterthought. The game was designed for CAREBEARS, not Gankers.

Edited by vandarr

CF_Van.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...