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

I Just Want Shadowbane 2 Lol

Recommended Posts

I wouldn't say SB flopped because it didn't have action combat, but I think what Sheen is talking about is also true.  I think there are a lot of SB players that could thrive in that point-click sort of interface, that I have personally seen not be able to handle the more twitch/actiony stuff.  Of course, there are plenty of SB players that are bad ass at the actiony stuff too.  But, I can certainly see some negative reaction toward CF stemming from the actiony route they're taking.

Edited by mourne

"Food for the crows..."    Nobuo Xa'el

cdinUTh.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol, it was war?  It was a game.  It simulated war better than any other MMO to date [Edit just to say, not even this tbh if you take into account WWII Online], but equating "win conditions and rules" to not being able to simulate war is fallacious. (e.g.)

 

I'm not here to defend CF as a proper SB sequel - it isn't. I'm simply speaking directly to your assertion that a board game or sport couldn't describe exactly what Shadowbane (or any other MMO for that matter) is on a quintessential level. 

 

There were rules in Shadowbane.  Everything is represented artificially - the banestone:  WTF?  A rock that if you destroy it just magically makes your city safe?  WTF...your city is magically protected unless I spend a bunch of money on this magical stone?  They're just rules of the game.  They're constructs to organize the way we interact.  Sport, Game, "War"...it doesn't matter.  It's a world of make believe, governed by constructs to organize the way we interact.  Victory is simply defined within that context. 

 

Shadowbane was a "board game" or "sport" in essence.  The mechanics functioned as any would in a board or table top game to set the boundaries of the illusory environment.  It's up to your imagination to suspend disbelief - to engage the "world" from within.  The only reason our irl isn't a "board game" is because we aren't gods deciding the rules of the game.  Alas, various occult practices claim otherwise!  But, that's another conversation...

 

Essentially, you're saying you don't like the rules they've chosen.  In sticking with a board game analogy - you don't like Yahtzee, and its competition in isolation of each other player.  You like the way A&A rules were better, and how the main locus of the game was conflict and interactive competition between players.  Shadowbane was Axis & Allies, and you wanted that **** again - not Yahtzee (i.e. it's still competitive between players, but players don't impact each other). This is different than saying sports or board games are intrinsically "less than" what Shadowbane was.  Shadowbane was no better than a sport or board game in terms of being a game in which to play make believe with other humans. 

 

Now, you can, of course, say any countless other sport or board game or MMO is "less than" Shadowbane for any slew of reasons.  But, I'm having a disconnect if you're saying it's because they have rules and win conditions, and that SB was the literal opposite of a sport.  It was anything but opposite of a sport, let alone the literal representation.  Reasoning along the lines of "CF rules don't allow for knocking other players "out" of the game (see: EK), and I enjoy that aspect in my games" would have a stronger foundation.

 

 

Okay, I hoped the context would be understood to those who played shadowbane, as this is a shadowbane sub-forum, but let me clarify.

 

Obviously, everything has "rules" if you use it in a broad sense of the word.  I don't know why you're hung up on the basic use of "rules" when you should be aware of the context I'm using it in.  Shadowbane had no "rules" in so much as nothing was there to dictate a definitive outcome on a game-wide scale.  You couldn't "win" shadowbane.  You also couldn't "lose" shadowbane.  You could be awesome or suck at it, but there was no absolute valuation of this determined by the game.  I'm not saying it had no rules in an absolute sense - this should be clear.

 

Within the context of the game, you would never see "Mourne has won shadowbane".

 

Shadowbane can not be readily compared to a sport because it was an open ended experience.  Sports are not open ended; they have clearly defined rules with clearly defined outcomes.  Shadowbane could not be compared to a sport, in this regard, because well, I can't name a sport that you "can't win".  The same goes for board games.

 

It was the closest thing to simulating actual war in so far as players were given a set of tools (or rules, if you want to mince words like your banestone example).  You do as you please, and no god in the sky (developer) is there to limit you or speak otherwise.  That's what war is on a basic level.  The participating sides of a given war determine who the winner is, or break even and both declare they've won, or whatever.  

 

The participating sides determine how victory or loss is achieved.

 

Sports, crowfall, board games, and so on, have absolute winners and losers.  It's binary and boring.  You either won the campaign, or you lost (maybe you can "kneel" too, who cares).  Shadowbane is basically the opposite of this.  I can see why they're afraid to approach the idea again, but I think my statements are pretty valid.

 

I think you're mostly confusing shadowbane with a sport because you basically played it as one in Hyshen.  It was a sandbox, and you treated it like a sport.  You were in a guild that basically only did mine fights, gave out hugs and congratulations to victors/losers, and didn't partake in politics.  That's great, but it was only one facet of a much bigger picture.  Maybe that's why you seem to be so into this game - crowfall is shaping up to be just that; however, that's all it may end up being.

Edited by frobobo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Crowfall actually comes closer to what Shadowbane was supposed to be in a way which Shadowbane itself was ultimately unable to live up to. The political aspect of Shadowbane died off after the first couple of years, never to return. The game would be populated thereafter by the RPK guilds who were after "good fights" more than they were "world domination" or "empire building". And so each guild spread out its assets as distantly as possible to gain quick, easy access to as many areas (and mines) as possible. We'd fight the same people over and over again until it got boring and we left to play other games. A new server or some other development would draw us back with the promise of more action, and we'd repeat the process. We did this over and over with the same 500-1000 people for years until the game finally died. I don't even want to touch goofybane, that's a whole other story.

 

Crowfall avoids the sort of certain stagnation which plagued SB by giving us an end. An end in the sense that the world will end, but also an end goal to desire and work towards. Someone will win, and winning will be worth it (we don't know exactly how, but let's accept the premise for now). This feature drives people to work together, and work together to work against others. Someone has to win, but who will that be, and how will it be determined? We, the players, determine who wins and how. Wars on the GvG worlds won't be trading a few banes, but never really pursuing a complete victory for fear of losing a good competitor. Now there's an incentive to pursue a decisive conclusion to each war.

 

This game will be superior to Shadowbane in almost every way. What are you afraid of? The Eternal Kingdoms? That's like being concerned because you can't siege a guild's website! We're invading their mIRC chat room! Bring the trebuchets! Delete all their posts! Burn their video archive! We don't know how the EKs will work, exactly, but even if they're part trophy room, part carebear RP playground, this really doesn't impact gameplay for the GvG worlds at all. Cities will need to be built in the dying worlds, resources will need to be acquired in the dying worlds, equipment will need to be crafted in the dying worlds, cities will be burnt to the ground in the dying worlds. There's a place for things of consequence to happen, and the fact that there's also a place without consequence does not detract from the meaning and impact of the former. So what if someone hides in the EKs and talks ****? All you need do is invite them to the dying worlds. If they refuse, then you need not worry- they are all talk. It's been suggested that in order even have an EK, you'll need to first "win" in the dying worlds. So the badassery of your guild website/trophy room is directly proportional to how many gigantic server wars you won? Sounds awesome.

 

Bad ass post, my comrade.  And let us not forget that for every end, there will be a beginning.  A chance to continue on without character wipes and the annoying parts of the SB dwindling server restarts etc.  It's like Civilization + Shadowbane + Game of Thrones (FFG version) all in one epic Coleman experiment.  I'm on board so far.

 

It may be difficult to turn into what I'm hoping for, but there isn't anything else offering this.  Not even close, tbh.


"Food for the crows..."    Nobuo Xa'el

cdinUTh.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Twitch PvP just isn't PvP imo. Nothing wrong with action based, but jumping around in circles to avoid targeting and obtain targeting is horrible and is more suited for FPS and MOBAs. We're going to be looking at large situation PvP battles. Every darkfall PvP video I have seen is a bunch of 1v1s. Granted, every SB video everyone else has seen probably looks like people standing still and having weird color clouds go off somewhere and people die.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Within the context of the game, you would never see "Mourne has won shadowbane".

 

That's not going to happen in CF either imo.  I'm not making a self-deprecating joke either lol.  I just mean that CF is also endless, and even though there are winners and losers of a Campaign, I don't attach enough significance to that, or see it very different than simply winning a series of banes against an enemy in SB until they're helpless and on the retreat - or you've taken the cities you wanted from them to secure resources...etc. 

 

Winning/losing a Campaign to me doesn't equate to winning/losing the entire game - which isn't possible.  The lore accounts for the continuation and constant evolving/devolving worlds.  The game is never-ending within that framework. 

 

Also, an experience from Shadowbane, such as a siege on a city, could very well be considered a sport.  Standing around your ToL in-between sieges, even if in a persistent environment, is no different than a lobby, quintessentially.  I do agree that it is very open ended, but only that the overall game in Shadowbane allowed for any number of competitive interactions without arbitrary restrictions (e.g. number caps). 

 

I just don't see any reason to think CF will impose arbitrary restrictions on the Campaign for us SB fans.  Yes, there will be other Campaigns with "carebear" rulesets, but I'm hoping the devs realize that if there is nothing fun, or nothing to gain - i.e. risk/reward - for being in the SHADOWBANE Campaign...then it will be unpopulated while people hide on "safe" servers (is this what happened with UO Trammel?)  I'm definitely worried about this aspect, but just haven't seen proof of this yet to assume any moreso than not that this is what will transpire.


"Food for the crows..."    Nobuo Xa'el

cdinUTh.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

This game will be superior to Shadowbane in almost every way. What are you afraid of? The Eternal Kingdoms? That's like being concerned because you can't siege a guild's website!

 

That's a brilliant and succinct way of putting the disconnect some are having.  The concept of this virtual EK/trophy/lobby/house thing is short circuiting perspective.


"Food for the crows..."    Nobuo Xa'el

cdinUTh.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...then it will be unpopulated while people hide on "safe" servers (is this what happened with UO Trammel?)

 

if you're asking, if 90% of the population switched facets from one day to the next, then yes, that is what happened in UO :)

Edited by freeze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The participating sides determine how victory or loss is achieved.

 

Good point, but I see the fact that Campaigns can last, it's been mentioned up to a full year irl, I think there will be plenty of opportunity for all of the amazing and fun political, ruthless, gamesmanship etc. etc. that is loved from SB. 

 

It was stated by the devs that these Campaigns are basically for when - for whatever reason - the game is getting stale and stagnant.  At the point when a server restart would happen - and bring a kajillion players back to play SB again for the new server thrill - that's when the Hunger would "win" and it's time for a new world/map/rules whatever. 

 

Also, the devs stated the Campaigns could be a testing ground for concepts WE want.  If they're genuine, that means there's a possibility of having some uber new-and-improved-SB server with tons of concepts that YOU want in the game, assuming it seems players want it, I'm guessing.  I think there's enough community momentum behind a Shadowbane experience more than anything else at this point.

 

PS I don't see why you think winning a Campaign equates to having won the game and now it's over and starts from scratch.  The only thing that gets reset will be a world map, and from what the devs have said, only when it's "needed" for stagnation purposes.  Otherwise, they've said they're open to experimentation with whatever rulesets there is enough interest for.  If SB wasn't a sport for that reason, than CF isn't a sport for the same reason. 

 

CF doesn't end, you can't win.  All you can do is show how good you are in the game by your accomplishments - amassing resources and dominating large swaths of territory, ala EVE/SB.

Edited by mourne

"Food for the crows..."    Nobuo Xa'el

cdinUTh.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you're mostly confusing shadowbane with a sport because you basically played it as one in Hyshen.  It was a sandbox, and you treated it like a sport.  You were in a guild that basically only did mine fights, gave out hugs and congratulations to victors/losers, and didn't partake in politics.  That's great, but it was only one facet of a much bigger picture.  Maybe that's why you seem to be so into this game - crowfall is shaping up to be just that; however, that's all it may end up being.

 

Hmm, not sure the purpose of this bait edit.

 

Anyway, I'm not sure why you're of the impression Hy'shen never participated in the diplomatic/political aspects of the game.  It's simply incorrect, and frankly, a confusing assumption.

 

Also, it really just seems like you're blowing things completely out of proportion.  Might it be the way you're suggesting?  Yes.  So?  We just don't know right now, we need a lot more info.  I'll be the first to get disgruntled off and leave if the game shows that it's going to have these problems being worried about.  For instance, a huge factor is how much amassed resources can "carry over" to be impactful in new Campaigns.  We just have no idea - and that is huge - tbh could be a game breaker for me.  But all I'm saying is I don't think the sky is falling.

Edited by mourne

"Food for the crows..."    Nobuo Xa'el

cdinUTh.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

some said the players decide the win.....

partially true....in that it is indeed they who are fighting

but Code determines the win condition...

part of my difficulty is that in SB the conflict wasn't over until the players said it was...and both sides did not have to agree on it at all

now you can say that campaigns will serve the same functions...the "war" can just continue on the next one...

possibly true....unless you are in the same faction or realm or god or whatever other set of coded rules are in effect...


again...not saying I am writing this off yet.....just that as of now it does not appear to me to be living up to the play2crush mantra as I understood it when I saw the original splash...

 

EDIT: for the horribad typing on my phone...

Edited by doc gonzo

FIQw0eP.png

let the Code build the World and it's Laws....let the Players build the rest...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sone said the players decide the win.....

 

partially true....in that it is indeed they who are figbting

 

but Code determins the win condition...

 

part of difficulty is that in SB the conflict wasn't over until the players said it was...and both sides did not have to agree on it at all

 

now you can say that campaigns will serve the same...you can just continue on the next one...

 

possibly true....unless you are in the same faction or realm or god or whatever other set of coded rules are in effect...

 

 

again...not saying I am writing this off yet.....jst that as of now it does not appear to me to be living up to the play2crushantra as I understood it when I saw the original splash...

 

Until we know how much of the player conflict and rivalry can extend from one Campaign to the next, I think automatically assuming it will turn out to be impossible/nonexistent is premature.  Just saying the sky isn't necessarily falling yet.


"Food for the crows..."    Nobuo Xa'el

cdinUTh.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every time they compare this game to a board game or a sport, and talk about win conditions and rules, it makes me cringe in that SB was the literal opposite of a sport - it was war.  I don't think it will fill the void that SB left, but there's still a small chance they will execute amazingly, or change some of their core designs.

 

Exactly. Shadowbane distinguished itself because it was truly a medieval-fantasy war simulator. Most PvP-oriented MMOs out there are like e-sports or e-competitions. Shadowbane was not.

 

I think the devs are right that stagnation can quickly kill off games like these, or at least prevent them from being very successful. Artificial conditions and rules are not the answer though, or at least shouldn't be a universal answer.

 

I think if they set aside a significant portion of the game to cater to those looking for a Shadowbane-like experience, things may turn out okay for us. No point completely calling this game quits until we see the beta and what kinds of things they plan on adding to it.

 

Let's face it, CF is kind of our only hope. No other studio or team has the experience, talent, and desire to make something like SB 2 right now. Maybe one will pop up in 5-10 years, but right now there's zilch.

 

The devs at least claim to be very open to community suggestions for worlds and rulesets. So it can't hurt to petition for the sort of things we want to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the end of the day, people say they'd settle for a SB2.  Just a new SB with a new engine and new graphics etc.  What's is the practical difference if they reset the server because of stagnation by 1) explaining it with lore, or 2) by just throwing the switch to reset?

 

In Shadowbane, when the resets came we didn't get to keep jack ****.  At least in CF your characters carry over, and an undisclosed portion of your assets.  At least they took the time to put in a lore explanation way for resets to occur.  It's a good idea, in theory, but I just want more info.

Edited by mourne

"Food for the crows..."    Nobuo Xa'el

cdinUTh.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say SB flopped because it didn't have action combat, but I think what Sheen is talking about is also true.  I think there are a lot of SB players that could thrive in that point-click sort of interface, that I have personally seen not be able to handle the more twitch/actiony stuff.  Of course, there are plenty of SB players that are bad ass at the actiony stuff too.  But, I can certainly see some negative reaction toward CF stemming from the actiony route they're taking.

 

If you want to kind of get used to action combat either pick up Tera, or play Smite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to kind of get used to action combat either pick up Tera, or play Smite.

 

I always suggest that people try out smite or gw2 as a hybrid system to slowly ease their way into action combat.  Smite is very good though, and free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love Smite.  And it's the most expensive free to play game I've played. :(  But, I don't mind paying for fluff content on a game I want to help succeed.  Been playing Smite since closed beta, and I'm probably pushing $450 spent at this point.


"Food for the crows..."    Nobuo Xa'el

cdinUTh.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...