Probably because every time Kotick opens his mouth he acts like he owns Blizzard. Someone needs to give him(Kotick) a dictionary and look up the word "merger" as well as the words "owned by Vivendi, you are."Amnestic said:
MMOG Makers Say "No Game Will Topple WoW"
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Is anyone else out there waiting with anxious, bated breath as to news on the World of Darkness MMO being developed by the makers of EVE:Online? You know, World of Darkness, the pen/paper rpg about Vampires (of the non-sparkly non-emo variety), Werewolves and Mages. Vampire: The Masquerade (a highly underrated game imo) is set in that universe.
Some have said the release date is this year, I hope not cause they'll need more time to announce and inform people to get going.
Some have said the release date is this year, I hope not cause they'll need more time to announce and inform people to get going.
Uh...blue_guy said:
I play WoW 6 hours a week, total. If that. I've been clearing ICC just fine. You can get a mount in like... a day and a half of play, TOPS. If you think that there's actual 'grinding' in WoW, then you've never seen a game where you've had to grind.
Read his post again. He didn't say that it was a NEW MMO, he said that it was done *right* - which is completely true. While it's true that of the design elements found in WoW, many if not most had been found in other games beforehand, Blizzard cherrypicked what worked and what didn't to make an MMO without a lot of the problems that plagued the genre in the past. It was polished, it was cohesive, it showed the value of accessibility and having a questable game all the way from level 1 to the level cap (with no 'hell levels' where you had to sit down and grind). You can certainly say it did nothing new, and you're well within your rights to dislike the game, but to say that the only thing WoW did right was marketing is to display a gross ignorance of the game and the MMO genre as a whole.Credge said:
YE but what I think is happening is beta at the end of this year then next as I always thought it was for 2012ish myself taken actual developing time into account.pantsoffdanceoff said:
They said that about
EverQuest
Everquest 2
Runescape
the Rome Empire
The British Empire
It will fall it will fall just give it some time.
EverQuest
Everquest 2
Runescape
the Rome Empire
The British Empire
It will fall it will fall just give it some time.
Sure MMOG makes say "no game will topple WoW"... after seeing dozens of attempts try and fail. 
Of course, I've been saying that for years, and I know the reason why.
By itself, WoW is a very capably constructed game that fishes in casuals all the way up to a hardcore endgame. If you just make your game casually accessible, you're only halfway there: you need an epic hardcore endgame too.
However, while this is a prerequisite, this factor won't bring in millions alone.
WoW's amazing success has a lot more to do with Call of Duty than it does the design: players who have enjoyed Blizzard games time and time again and are looking for more from that company make up the bulk of those who are into WoW. All Blizzard had to do is make the game good enough as to not suffer any obvious flaws, and they had people already lined up and ready to subscribe to it.
Perhaps the reason why they ended up soaking up the entire monthly subscription market has more to do with the bandwagon affect of MMORPGs. MMORPGs run on thriving player populations. If yours is the main one in town, you're likely to attract the majority of players looking for one.
It's encouraging to see Jack Emmert knows that the monthly subscription model is cornered by WoW... introduce F2P options for STO and CO plz.
Of course, I've been saying that for years, and I know the reason why.
By itself, WoW is a very capably constructed game that fishes in casuals all the way up to a hardcore endgame. If you just make your game casually accessible, you're only halfway there: you need an epic hardcore endgame too.
However, while this is a prerequisite, this factor won't bring in millions alone.
WoW's amazing success has a lot more to do with Call of Duty than it does the design: players who have enjoyed Blizzard games time and time again and are looking for more from that company make up the bulk of those who are into WoW. All Blizzard had to do is make the game good enough as to not suffer any obvious flaws, and they had people already lined up and ready to subscribe to it.
Perhaps the reason why they ended up soaking up the entire monthly subscription market has more to do with the bandwagon affect of MMORPGs. MMORPGs run on thriving player populations. If yours is the main one in town, you're likely to attract the majority of players looking for one.
It's encouraging to see Jack Emmert knows that the monthly subscription model is cornered by WoW... introduce F2P options for STO and CO plz.
QFTSev said:
wow butchered the storytelling that was in warcraft 1, 2, 3. If your new to the game, everything will be years away from achieving, if your account is hacked, your done, there's no reason to start over.
*cough* Guild Wars 2 *cough* but now at least its only lvl 20 for a mount in WoW, that shouldn't be too bad.blue_guy said:
The key to making a game that will live in the MMO market, is making it with the intent to make a fun game for a large audience, not to bring down an established giant. Another thing to do is to make unique or rarely seen features to make the game more interesting.
Seems like a pretty obvious thing to be saying to me, though I don't fault them for admitting it. Despite Everquest's influence, WoW's pretty much always been the #1 MMO, at least if you're an RPG fan. All we can hope for is that things stay the same, as Blizzard clearly knows what they're doing and how to support their game.
Six hours/week is unrealistic for a player who clears end-game content. The daily dungeon (which everyone does for the free T10 badges) requires 30-60 minutes, depending on which dungeon you pull and the length of time you spend in the queue. And, unless you're fortunate enough to belong to a loyal, honest, proficient raiding guild--which, in three years, I have yet to find--clearing end-game content like ICC is very time-consuming and often frustrating. It can take several hours just to find a group, let alone a good group that actually knows the fights and can down the bosses. Beyond that, unless you're buying gold or somehow scamming free enchants, gems, and flasks, you have to grind gold, either through farming or daily quests, both of which are time-consuming. A more accurate estimate would be 15 hours/week, although most people play more than that.John Funk said:
Any game that wants to compete with WoW needs to focus on a target demographic. For example, Wizard 101 is basically WoW for the stuffed animal crowd, and it has over 5 million subscribers. I personally would love to see a WoW-killer that caters to women and/or more mature players. It seems like WoW is increasingly dominated by drug-addled teenage boys who like to talk about each other's moms, and that's just not my scene.