adamtm said:
1) Ill defined like anything else, hell we have problems properly defining a genre like Science Fiction which is around for ages. I've seen people go up in flames when calling Star Wars either scifi or fantasy. Its as well defined as it can get without a oxford dictionary definition. I've never seen anyone seriously argue that WoW Clone = WoW with new textures. Like i said, its a mental shortcut, a heuristic to convey a very big (sometimes abstract) concept in a short amount of time. WoW became a certain concept of design.
2) I can not agree to this as I did not play the game and only can go by what ive seen in press releases and online, which didnt warrant that kind of nuanced criticism as i tried to point out earlier. What I'd like to know is where you draw the line of what is nuanced enough to not be a WoW clone? Therefore name an MMO that is in your opinion a WoW clone.
3) It goes without saying that the assessment is his own, all assessments are primarily ones own and people can agree or disagree with them. There can be a consensus or disagreement however this does not impact the truth of a statement. I.e. if you are basing the accuracy of a statement of its popularity you are committing a fallacy called Argumentum ad Populum.
No one on this forum, as far as i have seen, has treated the statement as fact, they either agreed or disagreed with it. I happen to agree with the assessment.
However I'd like to add that his position and education make his opinion weighted, as i would treat an opinion of an Nuclear Physicist concerning the LHC with more weight than I would the same opinion heard from a Geologist. This is not an appeal to authority, its simply a consideration that he is qualified, im still not treating his opinion as truth.
1) I get that now, but the term is blunt and inexact, especially if the same term can be used for both Rift and TOR. It's also a disparaging description, implying that the game in question has no original and redeeming qualities. By calling a game a WoW clone based on a few game mechanics, you disregard large portions of the game, which--for the sake of intellectual honesty--should be considered. For instance, Rift is highly derivative of WoW, to much greater degree than a game like TOR.
2) And that's the problem. You should probably play it, but I realize that's easier said than done until after release. It's important to note that I consider this issue in terms of a spectrum. It's not a black/white, clone/not-clone issue. Some games, like Rift, are very close in terms of feel and play style. The lore, setting, and technology level of Rift--from my perspective--don't diverge greatly from WoW. It is another high fantasy MMO with text-box story and questing, somewhat differentiated by its "dynamic" content. TOR, on the other hand, is further down the spectrum, away from WoW. Obviously not nearly as far as a game like Eve because TOR's general structure is cut from the same cloth as WoW, but its extra features, very different quest presentation, and its differences in lore/setting separate it from the WoW experience substantially. Obviously, some players are less focused on lore, design, or how story is presented and may be more likely to disregard these differences.
3) What are his qualifications exactly? I realize that he's a financial analyst, but what is his experience playing and/or reviewing games? What is his experience with MMOs? The "truth" in his statement may only apply to certain gamers that share his tastes. In fact it must, considering the range of different gameplay reactions.
edit: at this point, it's really just agree/disagree. Without extended playtime, we're basically just going off of personal reaction to the information that has been released. If you or this analyst have been "unimpressed," my positive impression doesn't really mean much to you. And vice versa.
