If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the Forum Rules. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Welcome to RPGamer's new forums running under Vanilla Forums! If you're run into any odd or strange issues after our software migration please see this thread for details

Impression - RIFT

OcelotOcelot is not declawedRPGamer Staff
edited May 2011 in Latest Updates
Our valiant reporter has delved into the besieged world of Telara and sampled the many activities available. How is this ambitious MMORPG looking a couple months after launch?

[Defiants Rool, Guardians Drool!]
Becky Cunningham, Staff-at-Large
Twitter: BeckyCFreelance


  • freykinfreykin Member Full Members
    edited May 2011
    Sums up how I feel about the game myself. If I hadn't encountered some frustrating frame rate issues with it and my new computer, I'd be sinking a lot more time into it than I have been.
  • Rya_ReisenderRya_Reisender Solipsist Snowflake Full Members
    edited May 2011
    I always keep wondering why people claim that P2P MMORPGs are far superior over F2P MMORPGs. To me the P2P ones pretty much seem to be always the same. Nobody tries something completely unique. Sure the Rifts are new, but gameplay-wise they play pretty much like any other form of grinding in other MMORPGs. It's basically instanced dungeons just without a loading screen.

    Oh well, even if P2P MMORPGs would be good and unique I probably wouldn't pay for them ever. If I pay for something monthly I feel forced to play the game in order to make use of the money I've paid and this feeling of being forced always ruins all my enjoyment.
  • freykinfreykin Member Full Members
    edited May 2011
    They aren't far superior anymore, but they tend to be much more polished than the F2P games.

    The Rifts are more than just instanced dungeons without a loading screen, since anyone can join in against them at any time, and if they aren't dealt with, there are area/server wide consequences. They're an expanded version of public quests from Warhammer Online/Champions Online, and they're pretty darn neat.

    I've played my fair share of both P2P and F2P mmos, and they both are fun. I've probably had the most fun with Everquest 2 and City of Heroes, but some F2P ones do offer content I enjoy as well, such as Vindictus and Forsaken World.

    Since they just opened up a 7 day free trial, give Rift a try. See what the P2P hype is all about for free.

    I get that sense of obligation from paying per month for it, it's the main reason why I don't stick with them for long. However, for those who do pay, they tend to play just that game. I've got a friend who's been playing WoW since launch, and its continued to be his main game that whole time. I'd say $15 a month for a game that keeps you entertained that whole month is quite a bargain.
  • PawsPaws Purr RPGamer Staff
    edited May 2011
    The thing that I dig about RIFT is it takes all of the sexiest part of other games and brings them together. It has the collections from SOE games, the public quests from Warhammer, WoW's combat system, and PVP from DAOC. No, it brings very little new but it does bring together the best parts of the genre thus far and uses that to its advantage.
    My primary concern right now is the cost of the game. When you're Blizzard you can charge 60 bones for a game. I'd be way more likely to get in under 30$.
  • QuinQuin ne cede malis RPGamer Staff
    edited May 2011
    I always keep wondering why people claim that P2P MMORPGs are far superior over F2P MMORPGs.

    In my long time as an MMO player, I often find this to be the case. P2P MMOs often feel much more polished, while F2P MMOs usually come off as buggy, unfinished and in a number of cases, badly localized from international games (FFXI's translation was pretty solid, by comparison).

    Also, in a lot of cases, F2P games often aren't F2P, by virtue of attaching large portions of the game to microtransaction systems. In those cases, "F2P" really becomes a misnomer.
    freykin wrote: »
    I'd say $15 a month for a game that keeps you entertained that whole month is quite a bargain.

    Pretty much.
    Paws wrote: »
    The thing that I dig about RIFT is it takes all of the sexiest part of other games and brings them together.

    This is both a blessing and a curse, I feel. While it's nice to see these things together, I just couldn't shake off the feeling that I was playing something rather generic and bland. I think having just done the 1-85 run in WoW, I was feeling a lot less inclined to do that all over again in another game for a while.

    It's the sort of game where now I have a retail copy and an inactive account, I can jump in later when the other MMOs I play start to bore me again. It definatly deserves another shot.
    befriend (v.): to use mecha-class beam weaponry to inflict grievous bodily harm on a target in the process of proving the validity of your belief system.
  • OcelotOcelot is not declawed RPGamer Staff
    edited May 2011
    Yeah, one of the big things I've been enjoying about RIFT is that I can play a tank rogue, which is something I've always wanted to do in WoW, but can't because of the more restrictive class system. It's the differences that make RIFT worthwhile, and that I hope the development team concentrates on going forward.

    I personally tend to prefer subscription-based MMOs for a couple reasons. Firstly, they tend to have far superior lore and quest content to FtP games. Secondly, since subscription-based games make their money primarily by retaining players over time, development time can be spent primarily on improving and expanding the main game in order to reach that goal. FtP games, on the other hand, need to concentrate on finding ways to get money out of people via microtransactions, (most of which aren't really micro anymore... I understand $20 is pretty normal for a virtual mount!) so development time is split and retention of customers is secondary to getting money out of whoever happens to be playing.

    And then there's Guild Wars, the game that's FtP as long as you buy the retail box, which has a minimal amount of microtransaction content. Those guys are just crazy, but somehow it works for them. :)
    Becky Cunningham, Staff-at-Large
    Twitter: BeckyCFreelance
  • Rya_ReisenderRya_Reisender Solipsist Snowflake Full Members
    edited May 2011
    Well it's kind of true that many F2P MMORPGs seem unpolished.
    And the bad translation is usually not directly the F2P aspect's fault. Square Enix and also Blizzard (+ the fact that Blizzard is actually an English speaking company in the first place) have translators hired in pretty much every language already, so it's much easier for them to be close-connected with their translators and can rely on them to do a professional translations.
    If you are just an unknown Korean company that just had an amazing idea for an MMORPG and created it, you will only really be able to maintain it properly in your own language. Not to mention that there will be usually communication problems. You will see all this in the English translations, the font chosen usually works for Korean letters but looks incredibly crappy in other languages. The lines/words are cut off at the correct positions, the bad language word filters don't make much sense and ignore "spaces" complete so that it for example censores "finish it".
    But again I think this doesn't depends on P2P or F2P but rather on the size of the company and from which country they are from.

    Even if F2P MMORPGs require you to pay via microtransactions those payments still depend a lot more on how much you actually play the game.

    Yeah a P2P MMORPGs is worth it if you play it >30 hours per month, but I'm not really doing that. The feel of being forced to play it, lowers my motivation so much that I just don't want to play it anymore. Same happened when I got XBox Live Gold. The first two days I really enjoyed playing various games online, then I felt like "bleh always only the same games where the online feature is actually fun" and then I just stopped liking those games because I've overplayed them. Now I've been paying the past 6 months without using it at all~

    And I surely don't wanna start playing something if I know I can only play it for 7 days.

    Besides I wouldn't play really much in this time. During weekdays work is always so exhausting (in terms of thinking alot) so when I come home I don't really feel like playing anything more complicated than a hack 'n slash game or bullet hell shooter (or Rez or Fantavision). So complex MMORPGs are pretty much for weekend only, where I can usually play them about 2 hours in row, then get bored, do something else, then play them another 2 hours. So in the end I can pretty much only spend 8 hours max on an MMORPG per week.

    By the way, I'd always prefer "completely new and original game" over "stealing stuff from a good game". It's really sad that unique MMORPGs are not really successful. For example Tales of Eternia Online died right in Japan before ever leaving it. =/

    Ocelot wrote: »
    I understand $20 is pretty normal for a virtual mount!
    Yeah, but that's for a PERMANENT mount, meaning you only pay once in a lifetime. You don't feel pressured to use it because it won't run out ever.
    (I don't like F2P MMORPGs that use time limited item shop items, those cause the same problems as P2P MMORPGs)
  • KiralynKiralyn Member Full Members
    edited May 2011
    One big issue with F2P games is all the stuff they try to sell to give you "advantages". Like all the PvP games, where you need to buy all the temporary buff & recovery items if you want to have a chance against any of the other players. Or the ones that are massive grinds, so you want/need to buy the "bonus XP" potions. And, of course, many of these games with bonus power & recovery items in the cash shop tend to throw game balance out the window.
  • Rya_ReisenderRya_Reisender Solipsist Snowflake Full Members
    edited May 2011
    Yeah, in PVP games it is indeed a huge problem. It's no real fun to compete with other if obviously the richer person always wins.
    But since I don't do PVP I couldn't really care less. In fact I'm always happy if some rich kid is in my party and makes me level up fast. :3

    I don't mind grinding so much as long as it's fun. You might think I'm crazy, but I think this quest-driven system doesn't work at all in MMORPGs. It makes it SO hard to find a simple "just for fun" party because everyone will be like "I need a different quest than you so we can't party". If the game doesn't have quests, you are free to go anywhere and can help and party with anyone you want to without any boundaries. I wonder if MMORPGs will ever manage to find a better way to add some kind of a story to MMORPGs. Maybe quests should only require exploration and not be fixed on killing certain monsters. Main reason why Ragnarok Online is still my favorite MMORPG of all times, there you could just go everywhere you wanted and just role-play and quests were usually story-only things that didn't involve any monster killing and you could do easily alone (except for a few that require teamwork).
  • freykinfreykin Member Full Members
    edited May 2011
    The only F2P game to get any money out of me so far is League of Legends. However, I've been a DotA addict since 2005, so that should be no surprise.

    Rya, the two P2P mmos that get the just for fun party thing down to a T are Everquest 2 and City of Heroes. Both make it super easy to quest with people of varying levels, and reward everyone properly for doing so. I remember running around at level 10 in Everquest 2 with a level 80 guy helping me out. It wasn't imbalanced since they have a built in mentoring system that scaled him down to my level so things were still a challenge, yet he was earning the game's alternate advancement currency for doing so, so we both were getting something out of it mechanically, along with having a good time.

    Edit: Also, I totally understand grinding being fun. I still play Diablo II in it's various mod incarnations, and every now and then when I feel like just grinding I log on in to Maplestory.
  • TheAnimeManTheAnimeMan Member Full Members
    edited May 2011
    I actually gave the free trial a run and I gotta say that graphically Rift had some major issues. The most major issue i found graphically was female character movement. The waists move just a little to far in each direction. Combined with the arm movement is just looks ... blahh.

    Also some of the character creation stuff wasn't that great, better then WoW but by far not better then Aion.

    Honestly from all I saw it was like warhammer, WoW, and Aion mixed in a bag tossed out, and needs some improvement.

    Also will say that there are some issues with the graphics then just character movement. I changed some settings around and the world went from ugly to fugly <.<

    28 years of gaming and still going strong
    and now a mostly annoyed Father with first son. And now a father again to a second son :D

    Winner of the 2015-2016 Fantasy gaming Pool
  • OcelotOcelot is not declawed RPGamer Staff
    edited May 2011
    Is your game set to run in the low-performance graphics mode? If not, it comes down to a matter of opinion, as RIFT is generally considered one of the better-looking MMOs out there right now. I won't argue with you on the other point, though... RIFT is pretty fun but definitely needs to take more steps to establish its own identity.
    Becky Cunningham, Staff-at-Large
    Twitter: BeckyCFreelance
  • Rya_ReisenderRya_Reisender Solipsist Snowflake Full Members
    edited May 2011
    The world in RIFT looks good, but the characters (+animations) look really horrible if you ask me.
Sign In or Register to comment.