Quick Look: Tera

I think part of the reason i liked FFXI so much was because it didn't have a chance to be a WoW clone.

I swear, Brad has to be the most maddening person ever to watch do a quicklook. His constant rotating the camera and jumping around made watching this a huge chore!

@JoelHulsey said:

I swear, Brad has to be the most maddening person ever to watch do a quicklook. His constant rotating the camera and jumping around made watching this a huge chore!

It's a MMO. It's supposed to feel like a chore. He's just trying to convey that feeling to the viewer.

@rargy said:

I think part of the reason i liked FFXI so much was because it didn't have a chance to be a WoW clone.

Yeah, it was more of an EQ clone, from what I understand. ; )

People who compare this game's gameplay to Monster Hunter's are insane.

@BlindRapture said:

As much as I adore GB, I think they should stop quick looking MMOs and Fighting Games. They spread too much misinformation and end up doing more harm than good.

Lol - are you kidding? Quick looks do more harm than good? jeez chill out. How about for just plain entertainment.

@csl316: I'm considering buying Vanquish .. could you tell me how long the game is please?

@Frumpa: Not terribly long. I played it on the most difficult setting with plenty of deaths to prolong it... and it couldn't have been more than 8 hours. Still, it's definitely worth playing for cheap if you're worried about length. Amazon's got it for $16 at the moment.

There's some challenges to try afterwards, and after a couple hours of trading controllers with my friend we couldn't even beat one. So your mileage on that front may vary.

@csl316: Cheers for the reply. Been interested in V for a while as Kevin Van Ord goes on about it a lot ;)

@DarkbeatDK said:

Oh man the animals are cute and the Elin are adorable too! I don't get why people are sexually attracted to the Elin, but it takes all sorts I guess.

Yeah, the combat seems really neat in this, but I've been playing Star Wars: The Old Republic and really like that universe more.

I think Penny Arcade are right on the money on what would be the perfect MMO:

Except for the fact that Guild Wars 2 is extremely fun to play (a lot more fun then Tera, (first hand experience on both titles) and has pretty damn decent personal stories. I mean even questing in SWTOR got boring at times, just beacuse it's voiced doesn't really make it better! But from the 3 I've played, Guild Wars 2 is in a totally different place then those 2. A new generation if you will. Tera, SWTOR, Rift all tried new stuff, but were too afraid to completely go a different path. Guild Wars 2 is taking a whole new path and it seems to be working out rather well!

I always speed level characters, at least I did in WoW and EQ2. You get to see a bit of the mid level content and get to the end game quicker...at which point you can go to any of the content so you never really "miss" it...Brad I don't understand YOUR way of playing in which you would intentionally cut off part of the game for extended periods of time just to get some story lol.

Also, Guild Wars 2. I know I'm gonna sound like a fanboy but in that game NPCs actually help out A LOT during events. They heal themselves, attack, res you and if they die you are gonna have a hard time most of the time, so ressing them is essential as well! (that was to them saying that npcs are always so helpless in MMOs)

*Shrug* Brad, the way Blizzard destroyed WoW I have 0 faith in their "project Titan"... You guys should REALLY look into Guild Wars 2, that you haven't mentioned it in this Video yet is kind of bad... It's been in gaming news quite a lot except for Giant Bomb, no idea why that is because as far as I know you have some MMO players in the crew (drew, dave?). Anyway, nice quick look non the less. Always nice to see how non (hardcore) MMO players look at these new games :)

I totally wish Popori had their own non-mmo game, I would play that.

I find it hilarious that Brad expects innovation from Blizzard, the company which has made a living from taking existing concepts and polishing them to a high shine without innovating even in the slightest.

Back on topic: Tera is actually a lot of fun to play. I'm torn on the Elin debate. On the one hand I think it's really stupid to generalize people who appreciate that race as paedophiles. On the other hand the people using the excuse that they are actually hundreds of years old are pretty stupid as well.

Bottom line: they are what they are and they don't bother me more than tinkerbell does. They are also the reason I bought the game: My fiance wanted to play the game because of them. She loves them, "they are soooooo cute!"

If you see the Elin as sexualised children, then yeah they are creepy. If you see them as little pixies/fairies... they are just cute. It's all in the eye of the beholder. Sometimes I wonder about the people complaining the loudest. Maybe it's a little like homophobia?

This game looks exceptionally generic. I'd say it looks more like a poor man's WOW than Witcher, aesthetically at least. The combat seems better than WOW which is a plus, but I am not really digging the design choices that were made. Of course it also needed a race of little girls. I think I will stick to single player role playing games.

http://www.videodetective.com/games/tera/772915

At least the trailer is pretty neat. If only the actual in engine graphics were this awesome.

@Skanker said:

People who compare this game's gameplay to Monster Hunter's are insane.

They're not too far off if they're using the lancer class as a comparison.

Anyway, after reaching level 20s in Tera, I'm going to find it hard to play other MMOs where you have to take static damage ever again like WoW. Now, that you start getting better skills the combat fun factor just increased ten fold. The game actually rewards player skill more than anything elses. I can solo some BAMs by just pure skill and not with dices in the background.

And I love the visuals in this game. Kind of reminds of an HD version of Xenoblade. The music is also pretty fucking great. Kind of regret not getting the CE for dat OST. Both of these in turn makes exploring the world a blast.

Another great quick look! I am becoming interested in trying this thing out. Reminded me of good old WoW days but with nicer visuals. Really liked the channel swapping mechanic.

Brad, you should do another one after you've spent some more time with it. Hopefully towards the level cap.

Been playing the japanese version of this for a long time, and it's really a great game. Unfortunately, I can't play on the US servers cause of the IP block, and all my friends who play MMOs are american mostly. So I've kinda given up on the game, unfortunately.

Lol this has subscription fees and is basically about as MMO as Guild Wars 1?

This game is slowing getting my attention. Sure, the questing may be the overused MMO formula (what game outside of GW2 *isn't*?), but the combat, story and visuals seem to be what's keeping players interested (pseudo-porn not withstanding). The questing was never my issue- I don't really mind it, but MMO combat has always been boring to me. This, at least, is a step in the right direction. Maybe next payday I'll check it out.

@Chavtheworld said:

Lol this has subscription fees and is basically about as MMO as Guild Wars 1?

Since you phrased it as a question, I am going to go ahead and answer: Yes, it has subscriptions fees and no, it's basically "about as MMO as" WoW.

@Anund said:

@Chavtheworld said:

Lol this has subscription fees and is basically about as MMO as Guild Wars 1?

Since you phrased it as a question, I am going to go ahead and answer: Yes, it has subscriptions fees and no, it's basically "about as MMO as" WoW.

Why does it instance everyone then?

@Chavtheworld said:

@Anund said:

@Chavtheworld said:

Lol this has subscription fees and is basically about as MMO as Guild Wars 1?

Since you phrased it as a question, I am going to go ahead and answer: Yes, it has subscriptions fees and no, it's basically "about as MMO as" WoW.

Why does it instance everyone then?

You're not in your own, solo instance (GW1), but the zones are instanced to avoid over population and camping of mobs etc. This system has been in every MMO since at least Age of Conan. In fact, City of Heroes which was released in... 2004(?) had this system.

Would have been better if you showed off another class with a different combat style. The hunter class basically plays like a mix of Panzer Dragoon and a third person shooter. Oh well.

Just for mentioning TOOL, Vinnie & Brad have become my favorite Giant Bombardiers

@Anund said:

I find it hilarious that Brad expects innovation from Blizzard, the company which has made a living from taking existing concepts and polishing them to a high shine without innovating even in the slightest.

You have to be kidding me. Because they make games in existing genres? Okay, so Starcraft II wasn't a huge departure from the first game, which itself was rather innovative. (On the other hand, the overall campaign structure and the specific scenarios were pretty innovative, as far as RTS games go.) What game was it very similar to? Command & Conquer? It is only like that series in the most broad of ways. Then there is Warcraft III. Yeah, that wasn't innovative, either. Really, anyone who says Warcraft III wasn't innovative either is simply talking about something that they know nothing about or they are just determined to not give Blizzard any credit, for some reason that I can't quite fathom; I really don't know what else to say about that one. Diablo? That style of dungeon crawling is so synonymous with their series that some people simply refer to the entire genre as "Diablo clones," regardless of how different they may be, and Diablo II was way different than the first game, and I'll be damned if I can think of any games before Diablo II that do a lot of the stuff that Diablo II does. Their old console games were also interesting takes on their respective genres, though you're probably not talking about those.

People who say World of Warcraft wasn't innovative, I think either did not really play any MMOs before that game, or their memories are playing tricks on them. Just the combat alone is miles above what came before it, even if it's starting to feel a little stale these days, and that's just one thing. That said, of all of their PC games, the innovations of that game are probably the most subtle, at least on paper, even though they had a tremendous impact on how that genre actually plays. While I still think that WoW was innovative, it would be the last of their games I would use to try to make the case.

Is a game not "innovative" unless it's an all new genre, or what? Is something not innovative unless it's new on the scope of Katamari Damacy? I'm curious as to where your seemingly rather high bar for something being considered innovative is.

If something isn't innovative just because it looks superficially similar to other games on the surface, then I'd say innovation is rather overrated.

@Telemekos said:

Three Words: Guild Wars 2

three words: it's going to suck

@vizionblind said:

@Telemekos said:

Three Words: Guild Wars 2

three words: it's going to suck

Which course do you want to sign up for first? English or math?

I will be interested to try this out when it inevitably goes free-to-play/freemium.

I just don't get the mileage out of MMO's anymore that would justify buying the game up front.

@Forum_User said:

@Anund said:

I find it hilarious that Brad expects innovation from Blizzard, the company which has made a living from taking existing concepts and polishing them to a high shine without innovating even in the slightest.

You have to be kidding me. Because they make games in existing genres? Okay, so Starcraft II wasn't a huge departure from the first game, which itself was rather innovative. (On the other hand, the overall campaign structure and the specific scenarios were pretty innovative, as far as RTS games go.) What game was it very similar to? Command & Conquer? It is only like that series in the most broad of ways. Then there is Warcraft III. Yeah, that wasn't innovative, either. Really, anyone who says Warcraft III wasn't innovative either is simply talking about something that they know nothing about or they are just determined to not give Blizzard any credit, for some reason that I can't quite fathom; I really don't know what else to say about that one. Diablo? That style of dungeon crawling is so synonymous with their series that some people simply refer to the entire genre as "Diablo clones," regardless of how different they may be, and Diablo II was way different than the first game, and I'll be damned if I can think of any games before Diablo II that do a lot of the stuff that Diablo II does. Their old console games were also interesting takes on their respective genres, though you're probably not talking about those.

People who say World of Warcraft wasn't innovative, I think either did not really play any MMOs before that game, or their memories are playing tricks on them. Just the combat alone is miles above what came before it, even if it's starting to feel a little stale these days, and that's just one thing. That said, of all of their PC games, the innovations of that game are probably the most subtle, at least on paper, even though they had a tremendous impact on how that genre actually plays. While I still think that WoW was innovative, it would be the last of their games I would use to try to make the case.

Is a game not "innovative" unless it's an all new genre, or what? Is something not innovative unless it's new on the scope of Katamari Damacy? I'm curious as to where your seemingly rather high bar for something being considered innovative is.

If something isn't innovative just because it looks superficially similar to other games on the surface, then I'd say innovation is rather overrated.

Holy shit.

I'll admit. I had to look up "lfg"

@Paindamnation said:

I'll admit. I had to look up "lfg"

That's funny. It's mentioned so much in videos and the bombcast, etc. that I sometimes wonder if people get it. I guess not always. Seems so elementary to me, but I've been playing these types of games for years.

@nrh79 said:

@Paindamnation said:

I'll admit. I had to look up "lfg"

That's funny. It's mentioned so much in videos and the bombcast, etc. that I sometimes wonder if people get it. I guess not always. Seems so elementary to me, but I've been playing these types of games for years.

Yeah. I played WoW on a private server for like a month, went level 60 or whatever, did the stuff and went "eh" not for me. Plus I suck at LoL. So Much effin' clicking. So some of this MMORPG or MOBA jargon is totally lost in translation. I KNOW GG I KNOW GG though.

@Anund said:

@Forum_User said:

@Anund said:

I find it hilarious that Brad expects innovation from Blizzard, the company which has made a living from taking existing concepts and polishing them to a high shine without innovating even in the slightest.

You have to be kidding me. Because they make games in existing genres? Okay, so Starcraft II wasn't a huge departure from the first game, which itself was rather innovative. (On the other hand, the overall campaign structure and the specific scenarios were pretty innovative, as far as RTS games go.) What game was it very similar to? Command & Conquer? It is only like that series in the most broad of ways. Then there is Warcraft III. Yeah, that wasn't innovative, either. Really, anyone who says Warcraft III wasn't innovative either is simply talking about something that they know nothing about or they are just determined to not give Blizzard any credit, for some reason that I can't quite fathom; I really don't know what else to say about that one. Diablo? That style of dungeon crawling is so synonymous with their series that some people simply refer to the entire genre as "Diablo clones," regardless of how different they may be, and Diablo II was way different than the first game, and I'll be damned if I can think of any games before Diablo II that do a lot of the stuff that Diablo II does. Their old console games were also interesting takes on their respective genres, though you're probably not talking about those.

People who say World of Warcraft wasn't innovative, I think either did not really play any MMOs before that game, or their memories are playing tricks on them. Just the combat alone is miles above what came before it, even if it's starting to feel a little stale these days, and that's just one thing. That said, of all of their PC games, the innovations of that game are probably the most subtle, at least on paper, even though they had a tremendous impact on how that genre actually plays. While I still think that WoW was innovative, it would be the last of their games I would use to try to make the case.

Is a game not "innovative" unless it's an all new genre, or what? Is something not innovative unless it's new on the scope of Katamari Damacy? I'm curious as to where your seemingly rather high bar for something being considered innovative is.

If something isn't innovative just because it looks superficially similar to other games on the surface, then I'd say innovation is rather overrated.

Holy shit.

...so are you going to answer or what? Your ball.

Ohhh, boy. The ugly intersection of GB and 4chan has caused quite a fracas, hasn't it? (Well, not really.)

'Cause that's really the place where all this comes from, the pedophilic jeering about Elins and such. I know it's completely fucking futile, but allow me to offer that it's simply in jest - they - we, honestly - say this kinda stuff because it simply IS so crazy and shocking, and we can, not from any sincere desire to sleep with children.

When you foster a image-centered forum for disaffected nerds, give them absolute anonymity, and literally bathe them in weird Japanese pornography, this is what results. If you don't want to experience it, which is really probably the right reaction, I'd advise you not to play Tera whatsoever, because it is people like me - /v/irgins, /b/tards, and whatever /a/ calls themselves - who you'll be interfacing with for dozens of hours.

Why do these games keep pretending to have a story?

When you can reduce the entire experience to:

Find exclamation mark, open menu and click blue highlighted words, find orange dot on mini map, kill emenies marked with exclamation mark and return and click question mark, it's like worse than having no story at all.

Why do they instead go all out on creative uses of the combat, since that's all leveling is about anyways?

It's like the inclusion of story limits the amount of fun you could have, and it even stretches out the boring road to max and all the MMORPG fun you want to have.

Is chat in MMO's usually like that? I couldn't stop looking at it after Vinny pointed out the penis comment. Some people are the worst.

Wait, you can be a pug? Fuck it, I'll play this

@spilledmilkfactory said:

Wait, you can be a pug? Fuck it, I'll play this

Market researchers, take note of this. Players want more playable humanoid pugs. Would we steer you wrong?

@NegativeCero said:

Is chat in MMO's usually like that? I couldn't stop looking at it after Vinny pointed out the penis comment. Some people are the worst.

Nah, you're more likely to see dumb conversations about religion or something in most of them, and probably someone will call some other people "sheep," at some point, which I always find slightly ironic.

Seriously, though, usually at launch, it's just people talking about how great a game is, being the new thing and all, or talking about other MMOs, particularly WoW, although I think that bringing up WoW has started to fall out of fashion because it's become something like an in-joke that people always are talking about WoW in every new MMO. Of course, people will also just be asking questions about how to do this or that in the game. I guess this particular game's chat is a victim of the game's rather questionable stylistic choices.

I kinda want to get this game but i'll have to wait a few months :(

@nrh79 said:

@Anund said:

@Forum_User said:

@Anund said:

I find it hilarious that Brad expects innovation from Blizzard, the company which has made a living from taking existing concepts and polishing them to a high shine without innovating even in the slightest.

You have to be kidding me. Because they make games in existing genres? Okay, so Starcraft II wasn't a huge departure from the first game, which itself was rather innovative. (On the other hand, the overall campaign structure and the specific scenarios were pretty innovative, as far as RTS games go.) What game was it very similar to? Command & Conquer? It is only like that series in the most broad of ways. Then there is Warcraft III. Yeah, that wasn't innovative, either. Really, anyone who says Warcraft III wasn't innovative either is simply talking about something that they know nothing about or they are just determined to not give Blizzard any credit, for some reason that I can't quite fathom; I really don't know what else to say about that one. Diablo? That style of dungeon crawling is so synonymous with their series that some people simply refer to the entire genre as "Diablo clones," regardless of how different they may be, and Diablo II was way different than the first game, and I'll be damned if I can think of any games before Diablo II that do a lot of the stuff that Diablo II does. Their old console games were also interesting takes on their respective genres, though you're probably not talking about those.

People who say World of Warcraft wasn't innovative, I think either did not really play any MMOs before that game, or their memories are playing tricks on them. Just the combat alone is miles above what came before it, even if it's starting to feel a little stale these days, and that's just one thing. That said, of all of their PC games, the innovations of that game are probably the most subtle, at least on paper, even though they had a tremendous impact on how that genre actually plays. While I still think that WoW was innovative, it would be the last of their games I would use to try to make the case.

Is a game not "innovative" unless it's an all new genre, or what? Is something not innovative unless it's new on the scope of Katamari Damacy? I'm curious as to where your seemingly rather high bar for something being considered innovative is.

If something isn't innovative just because it looks superficially similar to other games on the surface, then I'd say innovation is rather overrated.

Holy shit.

...so are you going to answer or what? Your ball.

You're not even discussing the main issue of my post, but alright, I will explain my standpoint.

The combat in WoW was not innovative. Only someone who has never touched a pre-WoW MMO could possibly say that. They took what was already there and made some minor changes, some would argue they dumbed it down. I am loathe to call them improvements: I don't believe they were. They also removed the "grinding" part of the MMO by allowing everyone to run on their own, questing all the way to max level. Innovative? Doubtful. City of Heroes beat them to the punch. Still, credit where credit is due: WoW was the first big MMO which actually penalized team play by making it quicker to level while playing on your own, a trend we are since hopelessly stuck with. That was pretty innovative, I will give them that.

Starcraft was innovative, you say. How? What did Starcraft do that was a huge, groundbreaking improvement on games like Dune 2 or Command & Conquer? Did they tell a better story? I honestly don't know. Good balancing between the three sides? Is that an "innovation"? Not to mention that Starcraft 2 is just more of the same game with polished graphics: Yet again hardly a sign of innovation.

Diablo, sure. They did come up with something fairly new there, manually clicking enemies until they die. Then they remade the same thing once and now we are all eagerly awaiting the next remake of the same concept.

I'm not saying they have never ever come up with an idea of their own: phasing in WOW is a recent example. However, they are not a company known for their ground breaking ideas. They are a company known for taking known concepts and perfecting them. This is why it's surprising people expect Blizzard to carry any genre forward. They preserve. They polish. They perfect. They, as a general rule, do not break new ground.

And with this, I am done discussing Blizzard. This thread it about Tera.

@Anund said:

@nrh79 said:

@Anund said:

@Forum_User said:

@Anund said:

I find it hilarious that Brad expects innovation from Blizzard, the company which has made a living from taking existing concepts and polishing them to a high shine without innovating even in the slightest.

You have to be kidding me. Because they make games in existing genres? Okay, so Starcraft II wasn't a huge departure from the first game, which itself was rather innovative. (On the other hand, the overall campaign structure and the specific scenarios were pretty innovative, as far as RTS games go.) What game was it very similar to? Command & Conquer? It is only like that series in the most broad of ways. Then there is Warcraft III. Yeah, that wasn't innovative, either. Really, anyone who says Warcraft III wasn't innovative either is simply talking about something that they know nothing about or they are just determined to not give Blizzard any credit, for some reason that I can't quite fathom; I really don't know what else to say about that one. Diablo? That style of dungeon crawling is so synonymous with their series that some people simply refer to the entire genre as "Diablo clones," regardless of how different they may be, and Diablo II was way different than the first game, and I'll be damned if I can think of any games before Diablo II that do a lot of the stuff that Diablo II does. Their old console games were also interesting takes on their respective genres, though you're probably not talking about those.

People who say World of Warcraft wasn't innovative, I think either did not really play any MMOs before that game, or their memories are playing tricks on them. Just the combat alone is miles above what came before it, even if it's starting to feel a little stale these days, and that's just one thing. That said, of all of their PC games, the innovations of that game are probably the most subtle, at least on paper, even though they had a tremendous impact on how that genre actually plays. While I still think that WoW was innovative, it would be the last of their games I would use to try to make the case.

Is a game not "innovative" unless it's an all new genre, or what? Is something not innovative unless it's new on the scope of Katamari Damacy? I'm curious as to where your seemingly rather high bar for something being considered innovative is.

If something isn't innovative just because it looks superficially similar to other games on the surface, then I'd say innovation is rather overrated.

Holy shit.

...so are you going to answer or what? Your ball.

You're not even discussing the main issue of my post, but alright, I will explain my standpoint.

That wasn't me.

@Anund said:

You're not even discussing the main issue of my post, but alright, I will explain my standpoint.

The combat in WoW was not innovative. Only someone who has never touched a pre-WoW MMO could possibly say that. They took what was already there and made some minor changes, some would argue they dumbed it down. I am loathe to call them improvements: I don't believe they were. They also removed the "grinding" part of the MMO by allowing everyone to run on their own, questing all the way to max level. Innovative? Doubtful. City of Heroes beat them to the punch. Still, credit where credit is due: WoW was the first big MMO which actually penalized team play by making it quicker to level while playing on your own, a trend we are since hopelessly stuck with. That was pretty innovative, I will give them that.

Starcraft was innovative, you say. How? What did Starcraft do that was a huge, groundbreaking improvement on games like Dune 2 or Command & Conquer? Did they tell a better story? I honestly don't know. Good balancing between the three sides? Is that an "innovation"? Not to mention that Starcraft 2 is just more of the same game with polished graphics: Yet again hardly a sign of innovation.

Diablo, sure. They did come up with something fairly new there, manually clicking enemies until they die. Then they remade the same thing once and now we are all eagerly awaiting the next remake of the same concept.

I'm not saying they have never ever come up with an idea of their own: phasing in WOW is a recent example. However, they are not a company known for their ground breaking ideas. They are a company known for taking known concepts and perfecting them. This is why it's surprising people expect Blizzard to carry any genre forward. They preserve. They polish. They perfect. They, as a general rule, do not break new ground.

And with this, I am done discussing Blizzard. This thread it about Tera.

Oh, I get it now. If you don't like an innovation, then that means that it isn't one.

If you think Diablo II is the same as Diablo I, then that truly explains a lot. As I said, apparently something isn't innovative in your book unless it's a brand new type of game. At least you implicitly acknowledged that Warcraft III was innovative by not touching the subject, I guess.

@Ares42 said:

I gotta say I find their "MMO retrospective" conversation sorta strange. You have to remember that MMOs are multiplayer games, in the same way CoD or SF4 are multiplayer games. You don't play them for the "epic singleplayer campaign", you play them for the gameplay. It makes no sense for the genre to delve into exploring and story, as multiplayer doesn't really add anything to that. If that's what you're going for you're better off making a singleplayer game.

sorry but that is not true. Story and exploration is much better with a friend. Remember MMO's really came from pencil and paper roleplaying games and have much more in common with those than silly fps deathmatch. Pencil and Paper roleplaying games with good story and exploration (like any of white wolfs products) are really all about playing make believe as an adult and are some of the most fun you can have.

@FMinus said:

This is how it goes it seems; Girl, little, little clothing; Must be game for pedophiles.

By this logic I was on a beach for pedophiles last summer, because while I was sunbathing there was about 100 kids under 10 running around naked.

And let's not forget the priest classes in games, they're all played by pedophiles who like to touch little children.

Idiots.

um yeah I would say nude beaches due cater to pedophiles....the priest class of course not but I can't think of a reason to go to a nude beach with a lot of children other than pedophilic ones. Are you french per-chance?

Holy crap this was such a good quicklook, I abandoned MMOs but this makes me want to take it back up!