Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Anyone else tried Matrix Online Stress test?

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
March 5, 2005 4:16:29 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

I know it's very preliminary, but the game seems to be a very badly done
ripoff of City of Heroes. Interface is horrible, fights are kind of
confusing and the world seems very dead.

--
Rob Berryhill
March 5, 2005 4:20:11 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On 2005-03-05, Rob Berryhill <rob_berryhill@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I know it's very preliminary, but the game seems to be a very badly done
> ripoff of City of Heroes. Interface is horrible, fights are kind of
> confusing and the world seems very dead.
>

They practically had to beg for beta testers not so long ago by
giving accounts away at various fan sites. That's just how bad it
is.

It's a real shame. I liked the trilogy.
Anonymous
March 6, 2005 12:19:41 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"Rob Berryhill" <rob_berryhill@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1c93c1816d1133899896ae@news.central.cox.net...
> I know it's very preliminary, but the game seems to be a very badly done
> ripoff of City of Heroes. Interface is horrible, fights are kind of
> confusing and the world seems very dead.

They missed the window where they should have marketed this
game. No one cares about the Matrix anymore. Especially since
the movies ended on such a sour, pathetic note. This MMORPG
will most certainly fail, even though I've said the same about WoW
and it's breaking records. (I don't get it by the way, I got so bored
to tears within a few months).
Related resources
Anonymous
March 6, 2005 12:20:34 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"shadows" <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd2k1jt.ev5.shadows@helena.whitefang.com...
> On 2005-03-05, Rob Berryhill <rob_berryhill@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > I know it's very preliminary, but the game seems to be a very badly done
> > ripoff of City of Heroes. Interface is horrible, fights are kind of
> > confusing and the world seems very dead.
> >
>
> They practically had to beg for beta testers not so long ago by
> giving accounts away at various fan sites. That's just how bad it
> is.
>
> It's a real shame. I liked the trilogy.

I loved the first two.. Hated number 3. Not sure why anyone likes
it. But to each his own.
Anonymous
March 6, 2005 12:41:21 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On Sat, 5 Mar 2005 13:16:29 -0600, Rob Berryhill
<rob_berryhill@hotmail.com> wrote:

>I know it's very preliminary, but the game seems to be a very badly done
>ripoff of City of Heroes. Interface is horrible, fights are kind of
>confusing and the world seems very dead.

I'm playing it, on and off. I really like the skill system (you can
learn any skill in the game, but can only have a certain number of
them 'loaded' at any one time, determined by your memory, which
increases as you level).

Combat is annoying as the camera tends to swing all over the place,
and can be a little nausia-inducing. And the NPCs in missions have
trouble going through doorways. And the Inventory is oddly milimiting
- as well as a set numbe of slots, you are also limited by number.
And you can only stash skills and code pieces (used in crafting) in a
'bank' but not clothes or items.

It's nowhere near ready, and I doubt I'll be getting it when it is.

--

Bunnies aren't just cute like everybody supposes !
They got them hoppy legs and twitchy little noses !
And what's with all the carrots ?
What do they need such good eyesight for anyway ?
Bunnies ! Bunnies ! It must be BUNNIES !
Anonymous
March 6, 2005 6:18:44 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"Jim Vieira" <WhiplashrAT@wiDOT.rrDOT.com> once tried to test me with:

> "shadows" <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in message
> news:slrnd2k1jt.ev5.shadows@helena.whitefang.com...
>> On 2005-03-05, Rob Berryhill <rob_berryhill@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> > I know it's very preliminary, but the game seems to be a very badly
>> > done ripoff of City of Heroes. Interface is horrible, fights are
>> > kind of confusing and the world seems very dead.
>> >
>>
>> They practically had to beg for beta testers not so long ago by
>> giving accounts away at various fan sites. That's just how bad it
>> is.
>>
>> It's a real shame. I liked the trilogy.
>
> I loved the first two.. Hated number 3. Not sure why anyone likes
> it. But to each his own.

I also thought 3 was the worst of the bunch.

I enjoyed certain parts of three but it was way too much "over the top" for
me to really enjoy.

Two was great. I loved the kung fu in that one. And the chase scene with
the truck and the motorcycle. Overall I think 2 is the best "thrill ride"
of the three, 1 is the best overall film, and 3 is just kind of "eh" to
finish out the plot (in a less than satisfactory way).

As for Matrix Online, I'll wait for reviews. I'm not even interested in a
free beta.

--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.
Anonymous
March 6, 2005 6:18:45 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Knight37 <knight37m@email.com> looked up from reading the entrails of
the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs say:

>"Jim Vieira" <WhiplashrAT@wiDOT.rrDOT.com> once tried to test me with:
>
>> "shadows" <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in message
>> news:slrnd2k1jt.ev5.shadows@helena.whitefang.com...
>>> On 2005-03-05, Rob Berryhill <rob_berryhill@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> > I know it's very preliminary, but the game seems to be a very badly
>>> > done ripoff of City of Heroes. Interface is horrible, fights are
>>> > kind of confusing and the world seems very dead.
>>> >
>>>
>>> They practically had to beg for beta testers not so long ago by
>>> giving accounts away at various fan sites. That's just how bad it
>>> is.
>>>
>>> It's a real shame. I liked the trilogy.
>>
>> I loved the first two.. Hated number 3. Not sure why anyone likes
>> it. But to each his own.
>
>I also thought 3 was the worst of the bunch.
>
>I enjoyed certain parts of three but it was way too much "over the top" for
>me to really enjoy.
>
>Two was great. I loved the kung fu in that one. And the chase scene with
>the truck and the motorcycle. Overall I think 2 is the best "thrill ride"
>of the three, 1 is the best overall film, and 3 is just kind of "eh" to
>finish out the plot (in a less than satisfactory way).

About the best thing about the third one was that they didn't pull a
hollywood happily ever after ending.

>As for Matrix Online, I'll wait for reviews. I'm not even interested in a
>free beta.

The info on the third movie dvd made it sound pretty damn neat, but also
complicated as all hell. Trying to do a "fighting moves" kind of game
online with lag spikes and latency sounds like a recipe for disaster.

If it actually turns out to be good, then I likely will give it a shot,
but i'll let someone else be the guinea pig.

Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
Anonymous
March 6, 2005 1:51:18 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Xocyll <Xocyll@kingston.net> writes:

> About the best thing about the third one was that they didn't pull a
> hollywood happily ever after ending.

No, they pulled a Deus ex Machina "reset" ending instead. Dunno if
that's much better.

(Oh, and it hammered "Neo = Jesus" a bit heavily. In the first movie
the connotations were merely hinted at, in the third they screamed at
you.)

MxO apparently has big problems, both in stability, gameplay and
generating any interest beyond the link to the movies. After all, Star
Wars: Galaxies is tied to the SW movie franchise, but fans were very
disappointed to find out they only got to play that peon in the
background on Mos Eisley. Fool me once and all that.
Anonymous
March 6, 2005 3:14:42 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

In article <rtcl215aee28v00s7hnfl19p8uf0mnqvms@4ax.com>, Xocyll wrote:
> Knight37 <knight37m@email.com> looked up from reading the entrails of
> the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs say:
>>"Jim Vieira" <WhiplashrAT@wiDOT.rrDOT.com> once tried to test me with:
>>> "shadows" <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in message
>>> news:slrnd2k1jt.ev5.shadows@helena.whitefang.com...
>>>> On 2005-03-05, Rob Berryhill <rob_berryhill@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > I know it's very preliminary, but the game seems to be a very badly
>>>> > done ripoff of City of Heroes. Interface is horrible, fights are
>>>> > kind of confusing and the world seems very dead.
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> They practically had to beg for beta testers not so long ago by
>>>> giving accounts away at various fan sites. That's just how bad it
>>>> is.
>>>>
>>>> It's a real shame. I liked the trilogy.
>>>
>>> I loved the first two.. Hated number 3. Not sure why anyone likes
>>> it. But to each his own.
>>
>>I also thought 3 was the worst of the bunch.
>>
>>I enjoyed certain parts of three but it was way too much "over the top" for
>>me to really enjoy.
>>
>>Two was great. I loved the kung fu in that one. And the chase scene with
>>the truck and the motorcycle. Overall I think 2 is the best "thrill ride"
>>of the three, 1 is the best overall film, and 3 is just kind of "eh" to
>>finish out the plot (in a less than satisfactory way).
>
> About the best thing about the third one was that they didn't pull a
> hollywood happily ever after ending.

What? They completely wimped out on the ending.
The ending *should* have been that Neo was put back into the fields of human
pods, to go through the whole thing again the next time round.
Anonymous
March 6, 2005 4:13:09 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"Jim Vieira" <WhiplashrAT@wiDOT.rrDOT.com> wrote in message
news:NnpWd.18832$3V3.17701@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> "Rob Berryhill" <rob_berryhill@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1c93c1816d1133899896ae@news.central.cox.net...
> > I know it's very preliminary, but the game seems to be a very badly done
> > ripoff of City of Heroes. Interface is horrible, fights are kind of
> > confusing and the world seems very dead.
>
> They missed the window where they should have marketed this
> game. No one cares about the Matrix anymore. Especially since
> the movies ended on such a sour, pathetic note. This MMORPG
> will most certainly fail, even though I've said the same about WoW
> and it's breaking records. (I don't get it by the way, I got so bored
> to tears within a few months).
>
>

I wouldn't be surprised if this eventually gets the axe.
Anonymous
March 7, 2005 2:53:07 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On 06 Mar 2005 10:51:18 +0100, Tor Iver Wilhelmsen
<tor.iver.wilhelmsen@broadpark.no> wrotC:D RIVE_E

>MxO apparently has big problems, both in stability, gameplay and
>generating any interest beyond the link to the movies. After all, Star
>Wars: Galaxies is tied to the SW movie franchise, but fans were very
>disappointed to find out they only got to play that peon in the
>background on Mos Eisley. Fool me once and all that.

Uhm...what kind of morons figured they'd be playing Luke Skywalker?
How stupid do you have to be to not realize that with several hundred
thousand players, no one customer could get to be the 'hero' and have
powers/privileges/etc which no other customer could have?

What did people think? That they'd kill Darth Vader or blow up the
Death Star? (Or, if they could, that they wouldn't be standing in line
to the 8,532nd person to do it? That day?)
*----------------------------------------------------*
Evolution doesn't take prisoners:Lizard
"I've heard of this thing men call 'empathy', but I've never
once been afflicted with it, thanks the Gods." Bruno The Bandit
http://www.mrlizard.com
Anonymous
March 7, 2005 9:50:22 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Lizard wrote:
>
> Uhm...what kind of morons figured they'd be playing Luke Skywalker?
> How stupid do you have to be to not realize that with several hundred
> thousand players, no one customer could get to be the 'hero' and have
> powers/privileges/etc which no other customer could have?
>
> What did people think? That they'd kill Darth Vader or blow up the
> Death Star? (Or, if they could, that they wouldn't be standing in line
> to the 8,532nd person to do it? That day?)

Well, yeah. Isn't "moron" a perfect description of the typical Star
Wars fan?


<g,d,r!>
March 8, 2005 1:20:46 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"Lizard" <lizard@mrlizard.com> wrote in message
news:6i1p211fd946cal35rjkkrmi5osmftjfa0@4ax.com...
> On 06 Mar 2005 10:51:18 +0100, Tor Iver Wilhelmsen
> <tor.iver.wilhelmsen@broadpark.no> wrotC:D RIVE_E
>
>>MxO apparently has big problems, both in stability, gameplay and
>>generating any interest beyond the link to the movies. After all, Star
>>Wars: Galaxies is tied to the SW movie franchise, but fans were very
>>disappointed to find out they only got to play that peon in the
>>background on Mos Eisley. Fool me once and all that.

> What did people think? That they'd kill Darth Vader or blow up the
> Death Star? (Or, if they could, that they wouldn't be standing in line
> to the 8,532nd person to do it? That day?)

I think they were expecting Vader and the Emporer to reward them with more
then a melon, holdout blaster and tattered jacket for doing a series of
quests.....
Anonymous
March 8, 2005 9:16:38 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

that's correct, the one thing that I never could digest was watching
people walking by Corellia with 1-3 rancors happily hopping behind
them. Pokemon Galaxies would have been a more appropriate name for
the game.
Anonymous
March 8, 2005 9:18:03 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

I tried and didn't like it either. First, no first person view at all.
That automatically kills it for me. But since it was a free playtest,
might as well play it till release... well not even. It'll be a major
flop
Anonymous
March 8, 2005 1:17:06 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Lizard <lizard@mrlizard.com> writes:

> Uhm...what kind of morons figured they'd be playing Luke Skywalker?

No, that they would play a hero in a Star Wars game, like in the many
Star Wars games preceding it. Not that they would play a farmer or
hunter in a sci-fi grind-a-thon that had a vague link to the Star Wars
universe. Which was what they got.

The movies aren't about gathering minerals or shooting animals. Why
would a game that bears the Star Wars name be about things that don't
occur in the movies?
March 8, 2005 1:17:07 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On 2005-03-08, Tor Iver Wilhelmsen <tor.iver.wilhelmsen@broadpark.no> wrote:
> Lizard <lizard@mrlizard.com> writes:
>
>> Uhm...what kind of morons figured they'd be playing Luke Skywalker?
>
> No, that they would play a hero in a Star Wars game, like in the many
> Star Wars games preceding it. Not that they would play a farmer or
> hunter in a sci-fi grind-a-thon that had a vague link to the Star Wars
> universe. Which was what they got.
>
> The movies aren't about gathering minerals or shooting animals. Why
> would a game that bears the Star Wars name be about things that don't
> occur in the movies?

It's changing now, rapidly which is causing folks like me who
found killing animals and gathering minerals fun to leave. I
might have said it in another post but you're quite right. If SWG
didn't use the Star Wars License and just had the great economic
engine it would have been a winner.
Anonymous
March 8, 2005 3:06:21 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Knight37 wrote:

> "Jim Vieira" <WhiplashrAT@wiDOT.rrDOT.com> once tried to test me with:
>
> > "shadows" <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in message
> > news:slrnd2k1jt.ev5.shadows@helena.whitefang.com...
> >> On 2005-03-05, Rob Berryhill <rob_berryhill@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> > I know it's very preliminary, but the game seems to be a very badly
> >> > done ripoff of City of Heroes. Interface is horrible, fights are
> >> > kind of confusing and the world seems very dead.
> >> >
> > >
> >> They practically had to beg for beta testers not so long ago by
> >> giving accounts away at various fan sites. That's just how bad it
> >> is.
> > >
> >> It's a real shame. I liked the trilogy.
> >
> > I loved the first two.. Hated number 3. Not sure why anyone likes
> > it. But to each his own.
>
> I also thought 3 was the worst of the bunch.
>

They have ruined 3 with those Dragon-Ballz-Super-Saiyan-style fighting at the
end....me and my friends were sitting in the theater, eyes popped and jaws
dropped and thinking: "WTF...is this Matrix or is this Dragon Ballz-starring
Kianu Reeves?"

--
-------------------------------------------------------------
"Aaaaah yourself!.....Uh, oh-o!"
-Serious 'Second Encounter' Sam-
-------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous
March 8, 2005 6:38:10 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 22:20:46 GMT, "Tron" <Imnot@home.net>
wrotC:D RIVE_E

>
>"Lizard" <lizard@mrlizard.com> wrote in message
>news:6i1p211fd946cal35rjkkrmi5osmftjfa0@4ax.com...
>> On 06 Mar 2005 10:51:18 +0100, Tor Iver Wilhelmsen
>> <tor.iver.wilhelmsen@broadpark.no> wrotC:D RIVE_E
>>
>>>MxO apparently has big problems, both in stability, gameplay and
>>>generating any interest beyond the link to the movies. After all, Star
>>>Wars: Galaxies is tied to the SW movie franchise, but fans were very
>>>disappointed to find out they only got to play that peon in the
>>>background on Mos Eisley. Fool me once and all that.
>
>> What did people think? That they'd kill Darth Vader or blow up the
>> Death Star? (Or, if they could, that they wouldn't be standing in line
>> to the 8,532nd person to do it? That day?)
>
>I think they were expecting Vader and the Emporer to reward them with more
>then a melon, holdout blaster and tattered jacket for doing a series of
>quests.....
>

Well, I guess that's fair. :)  Didn't they revamp the loot tables a
while back?

*----------------------------------------------------*
Evolution doesn't take prisoners:Lizard
"I've heard of this thing men call 'empathy', but I've never
once been afflicted with it, thanks the Gods." Bruno The Bandit
http://www.mrlizard.com
Anonymous
March 8, 2005 6:38:11 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On 8 Mar 2005 06:18:03 -0800, wolfing1@yahoo.com wrotC:D RIVE_E

>I tried and didn't like it either. First, no first person view at all.

WHAT?

To quote Keanau Reeves: "Whoa."

I was unaware of that. It just dropped from 'maybe if I have some free
time and money' to 'No'. Smeg. What were they THINKING?


*----------------------------------------------------*
Evolution doesn't take prisoners:Lizard
"I've heard of this thing men call 'empathy', but I've never
once been afflicted with it, thanks the Gods." Bruno The Bandit
http://www.mrlizard.com
Anonymous
March 8, 2005 7:15:12 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

shadows <shadows@whitefang.com> writes:

> It's changing now, rapidly which is causing folks like me who
> found killing animals and gathering minerals fun to leave. I
> might have said it in another post but you're quite right. If SWG
> didn't use the Star Wars License and just had the great economic
> engine it would have been a winner.

There is another game with a great economic engine, plus PvP and
gorgeous graphics (as background to the "window system" the actual
game takes place in :)  )...

http://www.eve-online.com/
Anonymous
March 9, 2005 3:30:12 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Yep, sound makes up for it, like you know... real life? Call it
immersion.
I only switch to third person view during some fights. Play 1st person
view 99% of the time. There's a difference between feeling like you're
there and feeling like I'm playing marionettes... pull right cord,
'toon' pulls up his right leg, I just hate that feeling.
Anonymous
March 9, 2005 8:34:16 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Tor Iver Wilhelmsen <tor.iver.wilhelmsen@broadpark.no> looked up from
reading the entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good,
the signs say:

>Xocyll <Xocyll@kingston.net> writes:
>
>> About the best thing about the third one was that they didn't pull a
>> hollywood happily ever after ending.
>
>No, they pulled a Deus ex Machina "reset" ending instead. Dunno if
>that's much better.
>
>(Oh, and it hammered "Neo = Jesus" a bit heavily. In the first movie
>the connotations were merely hinted at, in the third they screamed at
>you.)

Well having Neo defeat Smith, then force peace on the machines, then
have he and Trinity living happily ever after would have been a far
worse ending than the one used.

>MxO apparently has big problems, both in stability, gameplay and
>generating any interest beyond the link to the movies. After all, Star
>Wars: Galaxies is tied to the SW movie franchise, but fans were very
>disappointed to find out they only got to play that peon in the
>background on Mos Eisley. Fool me once and all that.

The info on the dvd made it seem like it could be pretty neat IF they
manage to pull it off. I'm sure as hell not going to be an early
adopter though.

Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
Anonymous
March 9, 2005 10:05:27 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Lizard <lizard@mrlizard.com> wrote in

>>I tried and didn't like it either. First, no first person view at all.

> I was unaware of that. It just dropped from 'maybe if I have some free
> time and money' to 'No'. Smeg. What were they THINKING?

Probably something along the lines of "it's easier to watch your back if
you can actually SEE your back".

I can't understand how some people can play in first person view. I'd have
to do three-sixty turns every five seconds just to make sure nobody was
behind me.

Making sure I'm not surprised from behind is SO much easier in third
person. Much less stressful playing that way.

--
Samy Merchi | samy@iki.fi | http://www.iki.fi/samy | #152235689
Reader of superhero comic books, writer of superhero fanfiction
"*Astrolabe*...whirls...*twirls*!"
Anonymous
March 9, 2005 10:22:59 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"Samy Merchi" <samy@iki.fi> wrote in message
news:Xns9614D785E1F3Dsamyikifi@130.232.1.14...
> Lizard <lizard@mrlizard.com> wrote in
>
> >>I tried and didn't like it either. First, no first person view at all.
>
> > I was unaware of that. It just dropped from 'maybe if I have some free
> > time and money' to 'No'. Smeg. What were they THINKING?
>
> Probably something along the lines of "it's easier to watch your back if
> you can actually SEE your back".
>
> I can't understand how some people can play in first person view. I'd have
> to do three-sixty turns every five seconds just to make sure nobody was
> behind me.
>
> Making sure I'm not surprised from behind is SO much easier in third
> person. Much less stressful playing that way.

You can only see a few steps behind your back in most 3rd person
views, depending on camera distance. If someone is 10 feet or more
behind you, you won't see them either. They could still come running
up and catch you off guard. You are only gaining a couple of steps of
view range.

Still, the reason some of us prefer a first person view is they find it to
be more immersive. Also, with good 3D sound, you'll know if someone
is coming behind you.
Anonymous
March 10, 2005 11:25:56 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

wolfing1@yahoo.com writes:

> Yep, sound makes up for it, like you know... real life? Call it
> immersion.

Don't argue "real world" ANYTHING with MMORPGs. And in real life you
can move your head sideways - in first person games it seems your
character has some sort of neck injury.
Anonymous
March 10, 2005 1:23:42 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Tor Iver Wilhelmsen <tor.iver.wilhelmsen@broadpark.no> wrote on 10

>> Yep, sound makes up for it, like you know... real life? Call it
>> immersion.

> Don't argue "real world" ANYTHING with MMORPGs. And in real life
> you can move your head sideways - in first person games it seems
> your character has some sort of neck injury.

Yeah, in real life your average person has somewhere between
140-180 degree field of vision, and with only slight turning around
of the head, you can fairly easily have a very good feel for 270
degrees around you. In a computer game, you're pretty much
restricted to a third of that: there's no easy way to keep turning
your head around subtly, constantly, to have a good perception of
the area around you. Furthermore, sound is often quite poor
compared to real life -- whereas in real life I would rely on the
sound of footsteps to know if somebody's approaching behind me, I
can't really rely on that in a computer game.

In short, the restrictions inherent to a computer game (until a
high quality virtual headset is perfected) necessitate third person
view. *For me*.

If some people like first person, whoopee for them.

Me, I can't deal with it. Makes me feel claustrophobic.

--
Samy Merchi | samy@iki.fi | http://www.iki.fi/samy | #152235689
Reader of superhero comic books, writer of superhero fanfiction
"*Astrolabe*...whirls...*twirls*!"
Anonymous
March 10, 2005 1:26:12 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Jim Vieira wrote:
>
> Still, the reason some of us prefer a first person view is they find it to
> be more immersive. Also, with good 3D sound, you'll know if someone
> is coming behind you.

Mind you, in the case of MxO, the character will be doing backflips,
frontflips, sideflips and various other assorted acrobatics, right (I
mean, the Matrix was a tech-demo for Wire Fu, amongst other things). An
FPS view of all that would induce motion sickness fairly reliably :) 

--
Remove the mess to reply.
Anonymous
March 10, 2005 1:26:13 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"Cataleptic" <cat.the.mess@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
news:XRJXd.8243$1S4.881327@news.xtra.co.nz...
> Jim Vieira wrote:
> >
> > Still, the reason some of us prefer a first person view is they find it
to
> > be more immersive. Also, with good 3D sound, you'll know if someone
> > is coming behind you.
>
> Mind you, in the case of MxO, the character will be doing backflips,
> frontflips, sideflips and various other assorted acrobatics, right (I
> mean, the Matrix was a tech-demo for Wire Fu, amongst other things). An
> FPS view of all that would induce motion sickness fairly reliably :) 

I should have mentioned I was speaking generally, as the person I
responded to seemed to be questioning first person view in general.
I'm not fully famaliar with the Matrix Online. I can imagine how it
would work better in 3rd person. Like I said, I was speaking in
general.
Anonymous
March 11, 2005 3:15:13 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Samy Merchi wrote:

> Lizard <lizard@mrlizard.com> wrote in
>
> > > I tried and didn't like it either. First, no first person view at all.
>
> > I was unaware of that. It just dropped from 'maybe if I have some free
> > time and money' to 'No'. Smeg. What were they THINKING?
>
> Probably something along the lines of "it's easier to watch your back if
> you can actually SEE your back".
>
> I can't understand how some people can play in first person view. I'd have
> to do three-sixty turns every five seconds just to make sure nobody was
> behind me.
>
> Making sure I'm not surprised from behind is SO much easier in third
> person. Much less stressful playing that way.
<end quote>

why not they just add a rear-view mirror like the race-sims did?

--
-------------------------------------------------------------
"Aaaaah yourself!.....Uh, oh-o!"
-Serious 'Second Encounter' Sam-
-------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous
March 11, 2005 3:15:14 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"ChoyKw" <newsreader@newsgroup.com> wrote on 11 maalis 2005:

>> Making sure I'm not surprised from behind is SO much easier in
>> third person. Much less stressful playing that way.

> why not they just add a rear-view mirror like the race-sims did?

What would be kind of interesting is if they had picture-in-pictures,
smaller frames inside the main screen, for left and right, and perhaps
rear. I'm picturing, your left 90 degrees in a small PIP view on the
upper left corner, your right 90 degrees in a small PIP view on the
upper right corner, and maybe rear in the bottom middle. That'd allow
you to see all around fairly quickly, equally easily as you can in
real life.

I suspect it'd take some getting used to, but I bet after a few weeks
playing like that, it'd become second nature.

--
Samy Merchi | samy@iki.fi | http://www.iki.fi/samy | #152235689
Reader of superhero comic books, writer of superhero fanfiction
"*Astrolabe*...whirls...*twirls*!"
Anonymous
March 12, 2005 1:45:29 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"Samy Merchi" <samy@iki.fi> wrote in message
news:Xns961646DF071DCsamyikifi@130.232.1.14...
>
> What would be kind of interesting is if they had picture-in-pictures,
> smaller frames inside the main screen, for left and right, and perhaps
> rear. I'm picturing, your left 90 degrees in a small PIP view on the
> upper left corner, your right 90 degrees in a small PIP view on the
> upper right corner, and maybe rear in the bottom middle. That'd allow
> you to see all around fairly quickly, equally easily as you can in
> real life.

I've seen something similar to that in a dungeon crawl shareware game.
Four view windows of equal size, one for each of the cardinal directions.

RelMark
Anonymous
March 14, 2005 11:54:17 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

it's still 10000% more immersive than watching a toon from his back,
you can never feel like you're there
Anonymous
March 15, 2005 2:01:53 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 04:58:15 +0000 (UTC), Samy Merchi <samy@iki.fi>
wrote:

>"ChoyKw" <newsreader@newsgroup.com> wrote on 11 maalis 2005:
>
>>> Making sure I'm not surprised from behind is SO much easier in
>>> third person. Much less stressful playing that way.
>
>> why not they just add a rear-view mirror like the race-sims did?
>
>What would be kind of interesting is if they had picture-in-pictures,
>smaller frames inside the main screen, for left and right, and perhaps
>rear. I'm picturing, your left 90 degrees in a small PIP view on the
>upper left corner, your right 90 degrees in a small PIP view on the
>upper right corner, and maybe rear in the bottom middle. That'd allow
>you to see all around fairly quickly, equally easily as you can in
>real life.

One of the features I miss from the original System Shock...

>I suspect it'd take some getting used to, but I bet after a few weeks
>playing like that, it'd become second nature.

It was very easy to get used to.
Anonymous
March 15, 2005 9:20:39 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

so you're telling me that, if I put my hands to the sides of my eyes
thus reducing my field of vision just like playing in FPV is not more
immersive that attaching a camera to my back with a pole hanging from
10 feet and wearing goggles that show me what the camera shows?
let's get real please, I agree the 3rd person view is tactically more
convenient, but definitely not more immersive than 1st person view
Anonymous
March 15, 2005 2:14:26 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

wolfing1@yahoo.com writes:

> it's still 10000% more immersive than watching a toon from his back,
> you can never feel like you're there

No it's not more immersive. "First person" in games is just a camera
with no "real" player model attached to it (but there might be a
weapon stuck to the camera). And the field of vision is, as has been
pointed out, smaller than "in the real world". And the lack of
pointing the "head" in a different direction than the direction you
move in is exceedingly rare (generally only found in 'mech games).
Anonymous
March 15, 2005 3:00:45 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

wolfing1@yahoo.com wrote:
> let's get real please, I agree the 3rd person view is tactically more
> convenient, but definitely not more immersive than 1st person view

If you are in 1st person view you will never be able to see your
character do the cool moves, like the scorpion kick, side spins, virus
attacks etc. First person view would be fine for games where all you
have to do is look around, move, fire a weapon. In MxO hands, arms,
legs, body etc. are all involved as you fight with your body. (You can
"specialize" in long range fire and not bother with hand combat, but
that will diminish the flavour of the Matrix, IMHO.)

Mind you the game is still buggy in the stress test. I've had to do
some quests more than once because of bugs, e.g. an NPC was ordered to
follow you, but she did for 2 steps then just stood there, your guard
wouldn't follow you up certain stairs etc. And it would not let me take
another quest without finishing the one before, so I had to abort the
mission and restart it, and hope I don't run into bugs.
!