WOLCEN : Lords of Mayhem (Indie ARPG)

[PACOX]

Well, a conclusion can be drawn, that people who think Wolcen is worth “7 or 8” out of ten have a very peculiar mindset. The one, that keeps them in denial that Poe is an objectively better game. Well, to be fair even diablo is an objectively better game.

RPGs live and die tied to the amount of content they offer. Desire to look pretty is not bad, but your Barbie simulators are a bit of a different genre.

So Wolcen is a bit of miss of an rpg currently, outside it’s 3 acts and a couple hours of fresh gear loop getting to lvl 60.

I can see why people like PoE but to say it's objectively better or the prime arpg is a stretch.

[Aggrophobic]

The issue is at least 2 fold.

Companies holding monopolies on many areas (where my parents live the only decent internet they can get is Spectrum, all other options are either slow as shit DSL or satellite) and just sheer landmass. The US is 3.797 million square miles, your example of Thailand is 198,117 square miles, less than the size of the state of Texas, which do you think is easier to cover in Cable?

I'd say one of the richest countries in the world is the easier to cover in cables.
It's about politics more than about landmass.

[Onikaroshi]

I'd say one of the richest countries in the world is the easier to cover in cables.
It's about politics more than about landmass.

You going to run cable out to the 3 people living on a farm 10 miles from the nearest town? Shit, they wanted 20k just to run cable to my grandparent's house, and that's not even 1/4 mile out of town

[Gref]

Why do you have to be so cringy? The unkillable mobs didn't have a hitbox. That was the entire problem, you had some unhittable others not. If you started as ranger with a bow and the stings skill you could not kill them, period.

I love it when newbies show up, play for a few hours and pretend they know everything about the game.

The truth is that the game has been a fucking mess since launch. Don't embarass yourself by trying to lecture others. You know nothing about the game at all.

so you simply suck. simple as that. I have had the same shit in diablo one. you wouldnt be able to click on those bats. you would have to click somewhere up above them. diablo 2 had the same shit. d3 has it but the best over all. it is not untargettable. it is an angle problem. 3d and height.

I tell people how to handle them as melee. that is how I dealth with them. I dont see it as a bug. If I was mage lightning spamming in diablo 1 I would simple cast in their direction again using SHIFT (i know too hard for plebs like you) then adjust the aim accordingly how it goes.

lmao at some people having problem with aim. must be too hard to hold down shift and use 1-2-3-4-5 and mouse at the same time.

the only bugs I have encountered were boss fights. basically the bosses hit somewhere else, spin 360, go in strange directions, port. And no I am not newb. I have spent thousand of hours in this genre. play some smartphone games. better for you.

[The Oblivion]

so you simply suck. simple as that. I have had the same shit in diablo one. you wouldnt be able to click on those bats. you would have to click somewhere up above them. diablo 2 had the same shit. d3 has it but the best over all. it is not untargettable. it is an angle problem. 3d and height.

I tell people how to handle them as melee. that is how I dealth with them. I dont see it as a bug. If I was mage lightning spamming in diablo 1 I would simple cast in their direction again using SHIFT (i know too hard for plebs like you) then adjust the aim accordingly how it goes.

lmao at some people having problem with aim. must be too hard to hold down shift and use 1-2-3-4-5 and mouse at the same time.

the only bugs I have encountered were boss fights. basically the bosses hit somewhere else, spin 360, go in strange directions, port. And no I am not newb. I have spent thousand of hours in this genre. play some smartphone games. better for you.

this is some golden copy pasta cringe. holy shit lmfao. the wolcels are out

[Gref]

this is some golden copy pasta cringe. holy shit lmfao. the wolcels are out

yes i must be a wolcel. I am someone who said:if blizzard released a box of shit today, I would preporder it day one knowing it is good shit. check post history.
Blizzard shill too? I am still playing d1 and d2 with my brother but d3 is kinda problematic to play with. I spent enough time in poe as well.


I am not copy pasting anything. I bought the game yesterday. I played all day. 20ms on servers, low fps, buggy boss fights. Nothing else. what is cringe about it? I honestly loved the game. and I could handle the untargettable mobs by doing what I mentioned. you either no idea what cringe means or you are as well bad. I liked the game and I am wolcel? lmao.

I tell you how I dealt with flyers as a melee. you take it or leave it. as ranged I shared my experience with d1 d2 and d3. I am not comparing these games. all diablo games are great, poe is awesome. but this one was a much needed fresh blood for me. I love arpg genre and I simply cannot understand the people having problems with left clicking and flyer targeting.

[Biomega]

I can see why people like PoE but to say it's objectively better or the prime arpg is a stretch.

I mean, those value judgments sound extreme when viewed in the absolute, but it's just a matter of relatives, really.

Is PoE better than Wolcen? Yes.

Is there a better AARPG currently on the market than PoE? No.

That doesn't say HOW MUCH the difference is, though, and to many people that's crucial because "better" doesn't simply translate to "favorite". Many people may prefer one over the other even though, by objective criteria, it's worse. And that's fine. It's how it SHOULD be, because subjective criteria SHOULD trump objective ones, even if the objective ones INFORM the subjective ones. I.e., you should be aware that criterion A is objectively worse in game 1 than game 2, but whether or not that's important enough to you to make you prefer game 2 over game 1 is a different question - but it doesn't devalue the objective fact.

I personally prefer D3, for example. I know it has serious flaws and problems. I know PoE does many things a lot better. I still prefer D3, because I enjoy it more, even with its flaws. And in much the same vein, I totally understand why people would NOT prefer D3 and would rather play PoE. But I don't tell them they SHOULD or SHOULD NOT, because that's not for me to decide.

[Wildmoon]

I mean, those value judgments sound extreme when viewed in the absolute, but it's just a matter of relatives, really.

Is PoE better than Wolcen? Yes.

Is there a better AARPG currently on the market than PoE? No.

That doesn't say HOW MUCH the difference is, though, and to many people that's crucial because "better" doesn't simply translate to "favorite". Many people may prefer one over the other even though, by objective criteria, it's worse. And that's fine. It's how it SHOULD be, because subjective criteria SHOULD trump objective ones, even if the objective ones INFORM the subjective ones. I.e., you should be aware that criterion A is objectively worse in game 1 than game 2, but whether or not that's important enough to you to make you prefer game 2 over game 1 is a different question - but it doesn't devalue the objective fact.

I personally prefer D3, for example. I know it has serious flaws and problems. I know PoE does many things a lot better. I still prefer D3, because I enjoy it more, even with its flaws. And in much the same vein, I totally understand why people would NOT prefer D3 and would rather play PoE. But I don't tell them they SHOULD or SHOULD NOT, because that's not for me to decide.

Kinda hard to set objective criterias that point to the objective "better". Unless, it's too simple like playable or unplayable. There are many different aspects to evaluate a game and people weight each one of the aspects differently. What constitute good game is inherently subjective. Even clunky animations can be seen as a good thing when they exist as certain parts of a single whole.

[Biomega]

Kinda hard to set objective criterias that point to the objective "better". Unless, it's too simple like playable or unplayable. There are many different aspects to evaluate a game and people weight each one of the aspects differently. What constitute good game is inherently subjective. Even clunky animations can be seen as a good thing when they exist as certain parts of a single whole.

I mean, you can call technical aspects "too simple" but that value judgment, too, is subjective; the actual technical criteria usually are not. A game you can't play because the servers are down is objectively worse (for that criterion) than a game you can play. You can extend this to numerous technical properties.

In design, I agree it's more difficult, but we're looking for a heuristic here not 100% logical contingency. If, say, a game decided to randomly kill you every 30 seconds by design (as opposed to a bug) that doesn't REALLY constitute an objective criterion, but so many people would be in agreement that this is terrible design that heuristically we may as well treat it like one.

That doesn't mean you can reduce EVERY design element this way, of course. In fact, I'd suspect the majority of design elements cannot be reduced like that. These are excluded from objective criteria, and are subjective.

[bbr]

GoG removed the game.
https://www.gog.com/forum/general/re...f_mayhem/page1

How are yall playing now?

ah duh, steam.
https://store.steampowered.com/app/4...rds_of_Mayhem/
Mixed reviews - not very encouraging.

[Aliven]

I mean, those value judgments sound extreme when viewed in the absolute, but it's just a matter of relatives, really.

Is PoE better than Wolcen? Yes.

Is there a better AARPG currently on the market than PoE? No.

That doesn't say HOW MUCH the difference is, though, and to many people that's crucial because "better" doesn't simply translate to "favorite". Many people may prefer one over the other even though, by objective criteria, it's worse. And that's fine. It's how it SHOULD be, because subjective criteria SHOULD trump objective ones, even if the objective ones INFORM the subjective ones. I.e., you should be aware that criterion A is objectively worse in game 1 than game 2, but whether or not that's important enough to you to make you prefer game 2 over game 1 is a different question - but it doesn't devalue the objective fact.

I personally prefer D3, for example. I know it has serious flaws and problems. I know PoE does many things a lot better. I still prefer D3, because I enjoy it more, even with its flaws. And in much the same vein, I totally understand why people would NOT prefer D3 and would rather play PoE. But I don't tell them they SHOULD or SHOULD NOT, because that's not for me to decide.

D3 is better. Grim Dawn is better.
Basically any Arpg that let you respec is better.
Low criteria but hey, this is waht we have. Or not in case of PoE.

- - - Updated - - -

If you could hit them you had non-bugged ones. The real bugged ones had a hit hitbox where you could not hit them with autos or projectiles. You had to be a mage or a warrior with AoE to damage them.

You can have aoe as a bow or gun user.

[Axxil]

If Path of Exile exists, Wolcen isn't worth the time.

[Gorsameth]

If Path of Exile exists, Wolcen isn't worth the time.

I disagree, Wolcen is distinct enough, and most importantly more approachable then PoE.
There is room for more then 1 ARPG.

[Deldavala]

OK, I am done with this game now. After finally unbricking my game, they managed to first delete my stash, then my inventory and reset my city progression(Again). Oh well, atleast I managed to do the hardest content this game had to offer with 3 different builds in less than 50 hours.

[Yayeet]

I mean, those value judgments sound extreme when viewed in the absolute, but it's just a matter of relatives, really.

Is PoE better than Wolcen? Yes.

Is there a better AARPG currently on the market than PoE? No.

That doesn't say HOW MUCH the difference is, though, and to many people that's crucial because "better" doesn't simply translate to "favorite". Many people may prefer one over the other even though, by objective criteria, it's worse. And that's fine. It's how it SHOULD be, because subjective criteria SHOULD trump objective ones, even if the objective ones INFORM the subjective ones. I.e., you should be aware that criterion A is objectively worse in game 1 than game 2, but whether or not that's important enough to you to make you prefer game 2 over game 1 is a different question - but it doesn't devalue the objective fact.

I personally prefer D3, for example. I know it has serious flaws and problems. I know PoE does many things a lot better. I still prefer D3, because I enjoy it more, even with its flaws. And in much the same vein, I totally understand why people would NOT prefer D3 and would rather play PoE. But I don't tell them they SHOULD or SHOULD NOT, because that's not for me to decide.

PoE is better than most if you like complexity and farming for one item in game to create broken builds, if you don't, you're gonna get bored after a week.

Same problem with D3.

They need to create a hybrid ARPG with raids, dungeons, world events, and so on, so you have more variety, D4 is probably going to nail that and PoE2 likely won't.

[Biomega]

They need to create a hybrid ARPG with raids, dungeons, world events, and so on, so you have more variety, D4 is probably going to nail that and PoE2 likely won't.

It's likely that D4 will contain many MMO hybrid elements, but whether or not they'll "nail that" is far from certain I fear. WoW has not fared too well with implementing AARPG elements into its game, as many people are criticizing the loot structure in particular as not working as well as you might think. A key problem, for example, is that while in AARPGs one of the primary metrics for comparison is yourself (i.e. "how good is this compared to what I had before?"), the primary metric in MMOs is increasingly becoming other people (i.e. "how good is this compared to what other people are wearing?"). The more you play and compete with others, the more pronounced this problem becomes, and the more annoyed people get by the influence RNG has on things. In D3 and PoE, it's easy for people to pretend others don't exist (PoE even has a game mode that supports that) - but if you add forced multiplayer content like raids into D4, that option is eroded more and more.

[Wildmoon]

PoE is better than most if you like complexity and farming for one item in game to create broken builds, if you don't, you're gonna get bored after a week.

Same problem with D3.

They need to create a hybrid ARPG with raids, dungeons, world events, and so on, so you have more variety, D4 is probably going to nail that and PoE2 likely won't.

No raid pls.

[Aggrophobic]

You going to run cable out to the 3 people living on a farm 10 miles from the nearest town? Shit, they wanted 20k just to run cable to my grandparent's house, and that's not even 1/4 mile out of town

Yeah, as I said: politics.
Getting parts of it founded should be a priority. That or just move.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

Yeah, as I said: politics.
Getting parts of it founded should be a priority. That or just move.

People can't just move on a whim.....you know.

[prwraith]

Man this game is pretty rough around the edges, I feel like the right choice would be to wait a couple months and swing back for another try