Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Stickeez

  1. CBS owns the TV and IP rights for the "Prime" timeline (TOS, TNG, etc). Paramount Pictures owns the JJ-Verse. Much more likely we'll get a Prime timeline series. Voyager had it's moments but... this is pretty damning... Complete Inventory of Voyager's Photon Torpedo Stockpile
  2. Emphasis Added: This is pretty standard stuff, the kind we've seen plenty of in the past 8 years. I've met Vyvyanne. One thing I took away from speaking to her and seeing her in the ex-prod role is that she's pretty straight forward in meaning precisely what she says and being clear, which I may add are good qualities for an executive producer - who's job is really in managing a team to keep releases on time and content as expected - more so than PR. I would encourage you guys to stick to what she says, and try to add less personal perspective.
  3. 16 year old game needs engineering work to run smoothly on new hardware and also address a game wrecking dupe bug? SHOCKING DEVELOPMENT!
  4. It sounded to me like... they have a scheduling system for design focus, which she Vy stated quite clearly that's been around for a while... I think you guys really try to read to much into her posts.
  5. Well, I find the whole parse thing silly TBH. At this point, I can fly ISA/ISE in my sleep, and the amount of hull I have to chew through makes torps actually more useful than they otherwise would be. Flanking from raider + specialization = ezpz.
  6. I don't think LOTRO has things easily monotized by lockboxes the way STO does. Ships are the cash cow in STO, and there's really nothing that compares in LOTRO, which instead gatekeeps PVE content the way that STO does not. Ships aren't just a cosmetic. They are much more mechanically important/diverse and convey huge advantages that have grown since the Delta expansion (Ship mastery unlocks that gate powerful passive traits behind the lockbox lottery). Honestly, it works for STO somehow despite being utterly pay to win, but if Turbine tried something similar with Lotro this board would roast them. I think STO can do it only because their "pvp" more or less died years ago, and is a pretty abandoned system by the designers and players alike. The power creep in STO is astounding, even if the game is still somewhat fun in PVE.
  7. Thank you for that, it's a pretty fair look at things.
  8. They've tried to become Google, but at the OS level instead of Browser. I think a lot of what they're doing is going to get them in some shit in the EU. If these "features" continue after being turned off in settings, there's probably going to be some shit in the US as well.
  9. On the topic of whether players generally want a Busy/populated server vs not wanting that - I think the buildup on Brandywine shows that generally players do want to play on populated/active servers. That's not to say EVERY player wants this, but most do.
  10. Your mistake is to think that I'm spouting any party's thinking other than my own. If the engine could handle modern virtualization properly, or high player counts in small areas, they would have gone gone with FEWER clusters because that would be cheaper. That's the actual "story" here, so much as there even is one. Missing that to go on about population and going off on Frelorn is kind of silly IMO.
  11. I don't think they "revealed" anything. As I mentioned, there are single server setups able to handle many times LOTRO's population. I don't think it is shocking information that they could have gone with only 2 clusters (and if not for the account ID issue, I think they would have said a SINGLE server instead of 2). ESO uses a single server cluster for their entire population - does this fact alone mean that their population is low? I don't think LOTRO has every had more players in its history than can be handled by current hardware in a single cluster... the fact that they're opting to split the capacity into multiple clusters DOES tell you something about the game engine. I'm actually surprised you guys aren't harping on THAT, rather than the population angle.
  12. That's the thing though - they're trying to say "This hardware is REALLY GOOD". The "everyone would fit one 2 servers because population" context is coming from us. More recent MMOs use single server clusters (ESO, GW2, ETC) with larger populations than LOTRO even at the 2007 peak. I have no doubt that top of the line hardware could handle the entire LOTRO population on ONE server (If EU account IDs could be sorted out to not conflict with US account IDs). Why still have multiple servers? I believe that comes down to the engine. I think the servers could handle the entire population, but the game engine needs the division of servers to help spread people out.
  13. I really just think he was trying to make a point about the data center quality...
  14. A criticism I would level at Turbine (and a lot of studios) is the tendency to get caught up in how "neat" and smart a new system is, without making sure it is fun first and foremost. Losing sight of that early in the process tends to not end well. BBs and also LIs would fall into this for me.
  15. JWBarry was involved in the design of Big Battles.
  16. I think the logins tracking charts show Landy as an obvious top 5 pop US server, don't they?
  17. Yes. Helms deep was a pretty good fit to the way it was described in the books. However, some oddities came from allowing for players to interract - the top of the wall is a bit too wide (and the parapets are designed oddly) in an attempt to make the top of the wall better for navigation by players. Likewise the drain culvert.
  18. The proportions of things have been adjusted by most (all?) of the people who have translated the words into a more visual element. A great example is Minas Tirith, which as described in the books is a much more squat structure. Peter Jackson made a great looking city out of it by making it much taller and narrow than described (and Turbine did likewise to a smaller degree).
  19. Complete speculation on my part - but perhaps the phased part of the transfer is meant to avoid other potential problems. Having mass failures due to a land rush during the transfer would be arguably worse than some stress over names and houses. Will the transfers go smoothly and work? We'll see soon enough. I still enjoy the game, so I hope they do.
  20. I expect Brandy will have an outflow of people, due to it not being available for incoming transfer. I know several tribes planning to make the jump. On lag - there are definitely engine bottlenecks involved. It will take engineering work. You can say that IC was a mistake do to tying this sort of resource up, and I would not disagree with you. Those resources are now focused on the data moves and new transfer functions is a necessity - getting these wrong would kill the game. But they will need to address the lag as well, even if the hardware upgrade helps the engine issues will persist.
  21. You'll forgive me I hope that being at work I would prefer a discussion than producing a monologue. Perhaps I will provide something a bit more when I am free. Were you by chance in the RoR beta? Well, the land rush has certainly played a role in this - Brandy is still capping out frequently. I think there are some graphics issues - as OSG is definitely more resource intensive to run than the 7 year old textures/geometry of the moors. It's a problem for sure. Load balancing via transfers, newer hardware will hopefully provide some improvement here.
  22. LOL Whatever Snowlock. Never change! If you think class balance and faction are bland topics, you probably aren't a PVPer. That's ok, I don't particularly like MMO PVE so to each their own.
  23. And a broad answer was given. You are welcome to ask more specific questions if you'd like.
  • Create New...