Krai Mira: Work in Progress MMO

Morbus

Morbus

Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!
Amidst the whole Russian chaos of the webpage and all the fonts my computer doesn't understand, we still get an idea of what this new MMO will be about. Krai Mira is the name, and it promises interesting features like real winnings. Take a look.<blockquote>The World:
The world consists of numerous islands – pieces of land remaining after a global disaster. The year is 2061. The Player lives and grows in a virtual world, interacting with other online players, non-player characters (NPCs) and other objects in the game world.

Krai Mira has no predetermined storyline, and the player has a great number of the ways of development. (...)

Player's abilities:
# Exploration of the World;
# Searching for resources and items;
# Barter and trade;
# Fulfillment of quests;
# Communication and barter with other online players;
# Fights with NPÑ – animals, people, mutants;
# Fights with other players;
# Raising the level of player’s skills;
# Getting new knowledge of the game world and teaching new skills and abilities;
# Crafting new items from ingredients;
# Stealing items;
# Players co-operation (collective and group fights, united exploration of new lands, collective quests etc.);
# Options to play for bad character;
# Fulfillment of Super-Quest with real winnings.</blockquote><center> </center>

One of the developers dropped by to ask for help with the English, so if you're able, give 'em a hand.

Link: Krai Mira game features
 
World of Warcraft: be scared, be very scared...

By the way, my Russian-speaking friend says "Krai Mira" means "The Verge of the World", in case somebody's interested. Too bad it looks horribly amateur/low budget.
 
Ranne said:
World of Warcraft: be scared, be very scared...

By the way, my Russian-speaking friend says "Krai Mira" means "The Verge of the World", in case somebody's interested. Too bad it looks horribly amateur/low budget.
Click to expand...
Looks don't mean shit.

What looks amateurish is the design, but I can't dig too much into that from what they give us... :\
 
Ranne said:
By the way, my Russian-speaking friend says "Krai Mira" means "The Verge of the World", in case somebody's interested.
Click to expand...

Literally, yes. But literal interpretation aside, it means "A place afar".
Unless I'm forgetting my Russian... which is quite possible too.

Oh and the screens look GREAT.
 
[...] and it promises interesting features like real winnings
Click to expand...
What exactly does this mean? That if one kill, for example, a boss, he will never come back? This, of course would be a very good thing, as it would make the plot live, but I can't imagine a way of doing this without uninterrupted work.

Also, while the graphics look like amateurish, this not necessarily is a bad thing, as this term origins from a Latim word, "amatore", which means "made with love".
And I disagree that those are bad graphics.
 
Ranne said:
Too bad it looks horribly amateur/low budget.
Click to expand...

Are you talking about the screens?? They look fantastic! I wouldn't mind playing Fallout 3 with these graphics...
 
Morbus said:
Krai Mira has no predetermined storyline, and the player has a great number of the ways of development. (...)
Click to expand...

Some time ago I thought the MMORPGS are played in a way that tries to simulate some world, where you can do what you like, and it is you that creates stories/quests etc. (for example you can send someone after something, and it would be like normal fetch-quest, but the difference would be that it is YOU who is the quest giver).

I was thinking that way and then I had heard about FOOL. I was very enthusiastic about it. I started to imagine that the posibilities in a world like of Fallout are endless, everyone could start as some dweller, or some villager, and then could take its own path. Find a local gang, and be a rider. Find a brotherhood, and try to be a paladin. Or maybe you will have to earn some hard carsh not from a loot, but from caravans.

Then I tried WOW. It was like, wtf is going on here. It is like diablo, but more players. Boring. The reality was very cruel to me, naively thinking that the MMOs are really revolutionary :?
 
scypior said:
Then I tried WOW. It was like, wtf is going on here. It is like diablo, but more players. Boring. The reality was very cruel to me, naively thinking that the MMOs are really revolutionary :?
Click to expand...

I've played (or closely observed other people playing) World of Warcraft, Everquest II, LOTRO, Vanguard, Archlord, EVE Online, Lineage II, Earth & Beyond, and several other less known or older MMORPG titles, and I can honestly say that applies to every single one of them. MMORPGs have some redeeming qualities (PvP and player interaction can be fun, for instance), but they can rarely be called story-driven or complex gameplay-wise. Generally speaking, you're right on point: most of them can be called Diablo clones with built-in IRC channels, but I don't remember paying $16 a month for playing Diablo...

Back to the subject. Sorry, but the game does look horribly low budget and amateurish by today's standards. Fallout, an 11-year-old game, looks like it can compete with graphics like these, and it's not a good sign at all. So yeah, the game looks unpromising both graphically and gameplay-wise. As for its so-called "features", do you honestly have any positive expectations about any of these? Those are not features, those are the basics of the basics of any MMORPG.

Communication and barter with other online players;
Fulfillment of Super-Quest with real winnings;
Fulfillment of quests;
Fights with NPÑ – animals, people, mutants;
Fights with other players;
Raising the level of player’s skills;

Makes me wonder, does all that skepticism and criticism only apply to Bethesda's creations?

game3.jpg
game7.jpg
 
Ranne said:
Makes me wonder, does all that skepticism and criticism only apply to Bethesda's creations?
Click to expand...

Aw, come on, did you have to sully your post with that snipe?

The rest of the thread isn't exactly an uncritical hotbed of unqualified enthusiasm. You aren't the first to raise the issue of the quality of graphics or gameplay.

However, if you want to know why people might be willing to accept a lower standard from developers other than Bethesda, then there are two things to keep in mind: 1) This is not a sequel to previously great games series being produced by a triple-A developer, 2) The developers are not claiming to able to deliver the moon on a stick and render obsolete everything that has come before it.

This seems to a relatively modest project, and is presumably mentioned here because of the resonance of setting and gameplay with those of the original Fallout (along, I presume, with a heads-up from the developers?).
 
Ranne said:
Makes me wonder, does all that skepticism and criticism only apply to Bethesda's creations?
Click to expand...

huh?

Bethesda called their game Fallout 3. These guys call their game "a fun little independent project". Kind of a world of difference there, don't you think? Would be a bit unfair to judge them by the same measures, don't ya think?!

Or did you not realise this isn't a professional AAA game? Kinda weird to miss that.

The graphics are fantastic for an independent project.
 
You assume I see skepticism and criticism as negative concepts. I don't.

I also try to avoid having double standards regardless of the circumstances. Objectively speaking, I'd rather play Bethesda's Fallout 3 than this: no matter how bad of a Fallout game it will be, it'll still be a AAA-class title with infinitely better graphics and slightly more advanced gameplay options than the ones listed above. Besides, at least for me, this looks really bad even for a small project. I have my respect toward underpaid software developers, but that doesn't change the fact that low-budged titles are more often bad than not. And when I say bad, I mean really, really BAD. The kind of BAD that gets 2.8 on Gamespot and nearly impossible to play for anyone who has any appreciation for his or her leisure time.

That being said, I wouldn't want that being seen as an approval of Bethesda's mutant creation. It's normal for an amateur homemade project to be sub-par; it takes a certain level of incompetence to base a multimillion-dollar title off a well-developed and elaborate franchise and make it that weak, dull and simple-minded. But again, my frustration with Fallout 3 has little to do with my view on Krai Mira.
 
Ranne said:
You assume I see skepticism and criticism as negative concepts. I don't.
Click to expand...

Uh, well, what can I say: we do.

And we tend to be a lot more forgiving and supporting of independent projects. I'm not sure where you're coming from with the whole "sub-par" thing. The graphics are high-end for an indie, the feature list is ok but honestly I can't make heads or tails of a lot of it (needs better translating).
 
Well, what can I say... I have no real desire to explain my personal views or diss a project I have no stake or interest in. Can we agree to disagree on this?

EDIT: Sorry to contradict myself and pick up on this but it has nothing to do with this game and I'm actually interested in your reply. What about your views on skepticism toward Fallout 3? Do you see it as unhealthy but necessary, or you can admit that it has its own positive moments? I'm mentioning it because, among with such concepts as scientific skepticism and constructive criticism, I think it's a good example of positive aspects of those two and their relationship to reasoned analysis.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top