Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 182

Thread: Rise of Legends: Saturday after release, 33 people playing

  1. #1
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    7,861

    Rise of Legends: Saturday after release, 33 people playing

    Yay. 12:30 EST, 33 players online.

    Guess I'll be filing this one next to Red Orchestra in the, "Things I paid money for that no one else will be playing."

    Why do I even bother? Why don't I listen to the intelligent little voice that says, "It doesn't matter how good it is, no one will be playing this one."

    Oh, except for the people who have played 1000 games in the beta, and are now likely making things worse by slaughtering any new players who do come on with their already established build orders and 15 minute wins.

    Yes, I am dour. Yes, I am unfair.

  2. #2
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    8,027
    Crap, you would think that the sequel to one of the best RTS games would get more support. Maybe alot of people are playing the single player first?

  3. #3
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    7,861
    Quote Originally Posted by pfreak
    Crap, you would think that the sequel to one of the best RTS games would get more support. Maybe alot of people are playing the single player first?
    That is the voice that wants it to be true. The voice that says, "Maybe it just looks like accounting fraud, maybe my stock won't plummet." The voice that says, "I'm sure that once people understand how superior Kohan is, they'll switch from Warcraft."

    I would like to think it is true. I would also like it to rain candy and 20 dollar bills.

  4. #4
    I'd think that most people are buying it for the sp only.

  5. #5
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    8,027
    What I don't understand is how with the low crowd online, do we have people already at lvl 6+. Did they reset the score for the public, or did someone actually play for a few hours straight?

  6. #6
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    8,027
    Well I'm up for a game now, guess we'll have to do 1on1 until this gets straighten out.

  7. #7
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    7,861
    Quote Originally Posted by SuperHiro
    I'd think that most people are buying it for the sp only.
    I state up front that I understand the concept of different strokes for different folks. That being said, I personally can not understand buying an RTS primarily for the single player portion.

  8. #8
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    4,202
    I can't believe Tom Chick's review is still the only review out for this game. I suppose it's because of E3?

  9. #9
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    8,027
    I can't believe how much rushing is possible compared to Ron. Every time I play as the cuotl, I get rushed and they have no way to defend against a rush because of the energy cost.

  10. #10
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    8,027
    Quote Originally Posted by SlyFrog
    I state up front that I understand the concept of different strokes for different folks. That being said, I personally can not understand buying an RTS primarily for the single player portion.
    I think that the single player for Ron was probably better then the multi for awhile. Since it was a non linear campaign. This time its more linear yet still more engaging then the other rts games out there imo.

  11. #11
    Neo Acoustic
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,909
    Edge have also published a review. They gave in at 8, whatever that means. I have not read the review fully yet, only glanced at it.
    Sad that no-one wants to play. I suspect they are all tied up in garnering news from E3 and playing single player to practice for online.
    My excuse: I don't have it yet.

  12. #12
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    8,027
    Did anyone actually see any advertisements for Rol in the month before release? Honestily besides the pre order demo I don't remember seeing anything promoting Rol in any publication, The only online sites I saw were gamespy and 1up.

  13. #13
    How To Go Enidigm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    10,744
    It's not big because (from what i saw in the demo), it doesn't bring anything substantially better to the RTS plate to get me to stop playing other games, which is the key.

    I mean, yea it's good. I have Oblivion to play, i've rediscovering Rome Total War, i'll drop the occasional game of Age of Empires 3 online, try a little of this and that. Getting another Dom 2 game started. Maybe Empire at War, or Dungeon Seige 2. Maybe a bit World of Warcraft or Guild Wars or whatever. I've got far too many games and far too little time.

    Nothing RoL brings to the table makes me want to stop playing these other games. Many developers might laugh or be disgusted at the notion of "flash vs. substance"; but honestly, without some flash i'm not that interested in the substance.

    And since most of the innovations that this game has were already present in Rise of Nations, it's not like i'm just dying to see what's up with the new version of the formula.

    I'm not trying to denegrate the game, only explain why i haven't really had much interest in it (and by association, probably everyone else).

  14. #14
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    First Terrace of Purgatory
    Posts
    6,218
    Quote Originally Posted by pfreak
    Did anyone actually see any advertisements for Rol in the month before release? Honestily besides the pre order demo I don't remember seeing anything promoting Rol in any publication, The only online sites I saw were gamespy and 1up.
    There were ads in the major magazines - very nice ads, too.

    My thinking is that it got swallowed up in the pre-E3 and E3 hype. The early days are important for a game like this and it could take a while for any buzz to get going. There was quite a bit of coverage in the last year, but not in the last month or so.

    Plus, as talented as BHG and Reynolds are, it's not Ensemble and it's not Blizzard. There isn't the built-in audience or community strength that those developers have. RoN was a great, great game but never attracted the MP following that WC3 and AoE3 have.

    Troy

  15. #15
    Broad Band
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    200
    Quote Originally Posted by SuperHiro
    I'd think that most people are buying it for the sp only.
    That's certainly what I'm doing - I'll play through the campaign, try a few skirmish games against the computer, and then probably move on.

    I'm sort of interested in the idea that this game doesn't have enough chrome, though - I've only really seen the Vinci so far, but the art direction is extremely impressive.

  16. #16
    How To Go triggercut's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Washington DC
    Posts
    13,878
    I think it's a spring Saturday afternoon at 12:30 and people are either 1., sleeping still, or 2, outdoors or running errands. Also, it's a holiday weekend; folks are traveling to go see Mom.

  17. #17
    Mad Chester
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,308
    For Rise of Nations, I have only played it in single-player and at LANs with friends. I have never played an RTS on the internet with random opponents.

  18. #18
    Account closed How To Go
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Gamertag: Japrufrock
    Posts
    13,675
    Quote Originally Posted by Derek French
    For Rise of Nations, I have only played it in single-player and at LANs with friends. I have never played an RTS on the internet with random opponents.
    Exactly. I like a good RTS, but would never consider playing it online... I think I tried multiplayer C&C and hated it. That was that.

  19. #19
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    7,861
    The problem with saying you will only play it single player is that does not explain the number RTSs that do have a large player base. Obviously some games are capable of bringing out large numbers of online players.

  20. #20
    Account closed New Romantic
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Mountain View, CA; Gamertag: Corvidae
    Posts
    5,125
    Quote Originally Posted by SlyFrog
    I state up front that I understand the concept of different strokes for different folks. That being said, I personally can not understand buying an RTS primarily for the single player portion.
    RTS single player: Look at the pretty units, play around with the nifty things they can do, kick butt.

    RTS online: Die screaming beneath the booted feet of a player who clickclickclickclicked out a perfect sequence of dozens of buildings and units, never wasting a single second.

    The first option can be somewhat fun for me. The second...not so.

  21. #21
    I play RTS's pretty strictly for the mp. if I play sp, it's to acclimate myself to the game mechanics. Then it's off to mp with friends. I never plumb the random game sewer. I agree, facing off against some 13 year old who has all teh hotkeys and l33t builds memorized is not fun. Unless you're a child molester and that's your "in".

    I could really care less about how many people are online at one time. What I want to know is how many of my internet people are online and does the game allow easy connectivity between us. So far it's not looking good. Probably won't stop me from grabbing this though, because I'm a whore.

  22. #22
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    9,006
    Quote Originally Posted by Damien Neil
    RTS single player: Look at the pretty units, play around with the nifty things they can do, kick butt.

    RTS online: Die screaming beneath the booted feet of a player who clickclickclickclicked out a perfect sequence of dozens of buildings and units, never wasting a single second.

    The first option can be somewhat fun for me. The second...not so.
    With the exception of Blizzard, single player RTS campaigns bore me to tears. But I have had a lot of fun over the years playing skirmishes against computers. It may or may not be a challenge (although in my experience I can always adjust the difficulty level and number of opponents in order to make it one), but either way it gives me a nice tactile and mental pleasure to work the game mechanics.

    I confess I am generally intimidated by the mad skillz of online RTS competitors. I enjoy competing in a casual context with people I know, though mostly that just happens at LAN parties.

  23. #23
    Account closed New Romantic
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    5,229

    From what I've seen of it, this game deserves to succeed.

    In a week, when I'm not so busy, I will be extremely interested in playing some RoL with you gentlemen.

  24. #24
    Social Worker
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    3,462
    Quote Originally Posted by SlyFrog
    The problem with saying you will only play it single player is that does not explain the number RTSs that do have a large player base. Obviously some games are capable of bringing out large numbers of online players.
    The only two that have done it consitantly that I see are Blizzard and Ensamble though and maybe C&C years ago. People get into the one game and just seem to stick with it regardless of what else comes out. Kinda like how most online FPS players are still cranking away at Counter-Strike after all these years.

  25. #25
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Knee-deep in XCode
    Posts
    5,979
    I plowed stores yesterday (Friday being releaseday around here),
    but no RoL for sale. Europe is forgotten again :/

  26. #26
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    Posts
    5,736
    Their matchmaking algorithms are ridiculously bad. Their game browser is absurdly slow. There is no reason this should be as terrible as it is. I have not been able to get a single random 2v2 or 3v3, no matter how long I wait.

  27. #27
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    7,861
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeSofaer
    Their matchmaking algorithms are ridiculously bad. Their game browser is absurdly slow. There is no reason this should be as terrible as it is. I have not been able to get a single random 2v2 or 3v3, no matter how long I wait.
    Well, I might be wrong, but I genuinely believe that is because there are not 3 or 5 other people on looking for a 2v2 or 3v3. It is hard enough to find a 1v1 when you have a grand total of double digit online players.

  28. #28
    Mad Chester
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Silver Lake, WA (Oregon born)
    Posts
    1,234
    I don't get all the bitching and moaning about not a lot of people online....THE GAME JUST CAME OUT...I'm playing RVS online now for the 3rd year and we still have 200-600 playing during the day and night...give it time....I swear a lot of you have A.D.D.

    I don't want thousands of people online, 100-1000 dedicated non-uber competitors would be nice. I don't like RTS's generally but I bought this one and have had two good game experiences and one annoying one online so far.

    They need to get rid of that play now crap...and just have everyone go to custom to create, join games...that's all I do.

    And to play the Cuotl you definitely have to be as defensive as possible until you get your uber units....its tough but somewhat doable.

  29. #29
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    Posts
    5,736
    Quote Originally Posted by SlyFrog
    Well, I might be wrong, but I genuinely believe that is because there are not 3 or 5 other people on looking for a 2v2 or 3v3. It is hard enough to find a 1v1 when you have a grand total of double digit online players.
    I don't think that's it. There's some other netcode screwup. Sometimes it gets all the people it needs, goes to "launching game" for a while, then starts over.

    People are starting to make custom games called "2v2" and I got in a few that way. It's got to be some bug in the auto launcher.

  30. #30
    New Romantic
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    7,861
    Quote Originally Posted by TheRock
    I don't get all the bitching and moaning about not a lot of people online....THE GAME JUST CAME OUT...I'm playing RVS online now for the 3rd year and we still have 200-600 playing during the day and night...give it time....I swear a lot of you have A.D.D.

    I don't want thousands of people online, 100-1000 dedicated non-uber competitors would be nice. I don't like RTS's generally but I bought this one and have had two good game experiences and one annoying one online so far.

    They need to get rid of that play now crap...and just have everyone go to custom to create, join games...that's all I do.

    And to play the Cuotl you definitely have to be as defensive as possible until you get your uber units....its tough but somewhat doable.
    You've found a game that has 100 dedicated people who have played it for years who are not so good at the game that they make it fairly inpenetrable for newcomers?
    Last edited by SlyFrog; 05-13-2006 at 09:16 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •