Slashdot Mirror


Blizzard Announces New Warcraft MMORPG

An anonymous reader wrote in to say that "Blizzard Entertainment makers of the enormously popular Warcraft, Starcraft, and Diablo series, have announced their next game: World of Warcraft, a massively-multiplayer online role-playing game set in the famous Warcraft universe. Gamespot has an extensive preview available complete with screens and loads of info on the game." It looks very pretty. I still want the Star Wars MMORPG to rock my world tho.

160 comments

  1. To be launched in... by KewLinux · · Score: 1

    ...2004

    --
    fear my zig!
    1. Re:To be launched in... by Kancer · · Score: 0

      Try 2005, I am not holding my breath..

  2. World of Warcraft by gabeman-o · · Score: 1

    Will this be released in the same time frame as Warcraft Adventres?

  3. Simple RPG... by y86 · · Score: 0

    Blizzard really needs to add some complexity to it's RPGS, They are all very point and click.

    I hope this title holds some of the old Dungeon and dragon pizzaz.

    1. Re:Simple RPG... by Jubedgy · · Score: 1

      That is why they are so popular. There are times for Baldurs Gate, and there are times for Diablo. Simplicity is not inherently a bad thing, especially when it comes to interface and gameplay (look at all the good old classic games, even simpler than diablo and addicting as hell...even old school tetris still grabs a few hours from me everyone so often)

      --Jubedgy

      --
      Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis hebes
    2. Re:Simple RPG... by tdelaney · · Score: 1

      Perhaps a better comparison would have been ...

      There are times for Fallout and Arcanum, and there are times for Diablo.

      If you want an in-depth CRPG, go grab a copy of Arcanum now.

      http://sierrastudios.com/games/arcanum/

      The Baldur's Gate series just don't cut it ... I enjoyed them, but there's no way I would play through more that the twice I have on each. OTOH, I am 70 hours into my first run through Arcanum - female half-orc diplomat-tech (smith/gunsmith/firearms master). I'm probably about 75% of the way through, if I'm lucky I've received about 30% of the available side quests, and I'm already planning my next 4 characters ... (think I'll go with a male elven mage - then maybe a half-ogre thief ;)

      Warcraft is not a CRPG. However, World of Warcraft may well be a good online CRPG. Personally, MMORPGs don't appeal to me though ...

  4. I'm waiting for Sporcraft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    So I can kill all the stupid Sporks. Stupid, confused trans-utensil twits. Get the operation and pick a team already.

    1. Re:I'm waiting for Sporcraft by Griton · · Score: 1

      Beware the wrath of the Spork King!! Sporks RULE! If you were stuck with one utensil, would you rather have a fork or a spoon? huh? No question for me. I'll take a spork ANYDAY!

  5. Fads ? by BiggestPOS · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Remember when everyone was bitching because it seemed like every new game that came out was a FPS? Then for a while they were RTS, and now it seems every time I turn around, a new MMORPG is announced. The fight for the control of THAT market is going to be ugly. Most people will buy multiple $50 titles, but not when each title also requires a subscription. Sure SOME people will buy every one, and play them, but I'm playing the odds here. Most people will probably pick ONE they like and stick with it.

    --
    What, me worry?
    1. Re:Fads ? by CBNobi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "The fight for the control of THAT market is going to be ugly."

      And I think that's a very good thing - it gives better quality, and only the good ones can survive.

      Oh wait - Everquest is still alive.

    2. Re:Fads ? by crashdavis · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My theory about why it's the new fad is because they HAVE to.

      With the PS2/Gamecube/Xbox/etc., the capabilities of these consoles have gotten better and better. Their graphics and sound are better than on PCs, and for the most part they are played on bigger, more immersive screens. If you want a FPS, play it on a console.

      So what kinds of games can't be played on consoles? PCs have better connectivity and more versatile input devices (keyboards) and that's about it. Therefore as a PC game designer, you need to make a game which uses the keyboard in a meaningful way, which means "talking" which implies some kind of roleplay.

      Who do you talk to? You can talk to NPCs, but that gets really repetitive and stupid. You also can't charge $10/month to talk to NPCs. Let people talk to other people, and all of a sudden people spend 200 hrs a month playing the game. That phenomenon is real and every game development company sees it.

      The MMPORPG is just a way to keep the PC relevant in gaming, while giving them annuity revenue models.

      --
      "The difference between theory and practice is small in theory and large in practice..."
    3. Re:Fads ? by Jubedgy · · Score: 1

      "With the PS2/Gamecube/Xbox/etc., the capabilities of these consoles have gotten better and better. Their graphics and sound are better than on PCs, and for the most part they are played on bigger, more immersive screens. If you want a FPS, play it on a console."

      Ummmmm yeah....I think I'm gonna have to go ahead and DISAGREE. sound is better on console? I dunno what kinda tin cans YOU use on your computer, but unless the game company really screwed up, computers sound much better.

      As for graphics it all depends on what kinda machine you're using...sure a PS2 will almost always look better than a 386 w/ an ega card in it, but what about in a year when the gf4 is out, ram is really cheap, P4s hit the 3+ ghz mark, etc...etc... Then the PC'll look better than the ps2. As for bigger immerssive screens...ok, I can see that...except for the resolution. Unless you have an HDTV or something...(but hell, why not just spring for a good LCD projector instead?)

      I think the PC'll always be relevent in gaming...and as voice comm gains a foothold, you'll now have 3 unique inputs over the consoles: a mouse, a keyboard, and a headset. I haven't bought a console since the old sega genesis way back when, and from playing friends consoles, I can see I haven't missed much (aka anything) by sticking with a computer.

      --Jubedgy

      --
      Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis hebes
    4. Re:Fads ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spot on. Persistent games require a lot of dedication but provide months of entertainment. Nearly nobody is going to be subscribed to several of these. My vote is, "Star Wars Galaxies" and "World of Warcraft" win hands down, one for the sci-fi and one for the fantasy fans.

      World War 2 Online shows you there's more than can be done beyond the cliche concepts, but it's going to be TOUGH for companies to find another idea like that to be able to even enter the MMORPG battle.

  6. Do you REALLY want to rely on battle.net players? by DragonPup · · Score: 1

    Considering the maturity(or lack thereof), sore loserness, and utter whining a lot of people on Battle.net, I am thinking twice to even consider getting this when it's out(And knowing Blizzard's release times, most likely be another 2+ years.).

    Don't get me wrong, I like Diablo II and the expansion, I just normally play alone

    -Henry

    --
    "Useless organic meatbag" -HK-47
  7. I guess now we know... by Redline · · Score: 1

    what Sam Latigna is working on these days. :)

  8. Cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Redundant

    I wonder if Blizzard will stick with their policy of not having a monthly charge for games, or if they will charge the de facto $10/mo like every other company.

    1. Re:Cost by tfreport · · Score: 1
      According to the Gamespot article, Blizzard is going to drop their standard free battle.net support. Instead they will charge approximately the standard $10 charge of the industry.


      Gamespot says that it makes sense since they plan on having 10-15 people continuing to work on the game after release increasing the story and such. But basically the answer is it will cost money.

    2. Re:Cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bandwidth and Support staff mainly. Will Wright (Sim City) spoke about the upcoming Sims Online game that will sport a monthly cost and he cited those two reasons for a monthly fee. He said that they had thought of everything they could to prevent a monthly fee, but in the end, the economics were simple- the estimated bandwidth fee alone would exceed revenues for the entire Maxis division. And that's before you add the 100-150 full time support and creative staff for the game.

  9. It'll suck.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    like every other MMORPG.

  10. May have one fewer customer... by foxxtrot · · Score: 1
    Unless they plan to release a linux version of the client (something Blizzard hasn't ever expressed interest in). I won't be playing this MMORPG. Same goes for the Star Wars RPG, which I am more interested in.

    Maybe Sam can change this, how about it?

    --
    -- this .sig is my .sig it is not your .sig if you claim it I
    1. Re:May have one fewer customer... by SpryGuy · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Unless they plan to release a linux version of the client (something Blizzard hasn't ever expressed interest in). I won't be playing this MMORPG.

      Of course they're not going to. This game is designed for the masses, and for the company to make money. The company is not a charity, and making a linux version would be a money losing venture (my guess is it would be a HUGE loss). So if you want to game, why not just pick up a real computer with a real gaming OS? Stop whining that companies don't make games for your non-gaming, small-market, no-profit OS. Yeesh.

      --

      - Spryguy
      There are three kinds of people in this world: those that can count and those that can't
    2. Re:May have one fewer customer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      can you link to the Star Wars one?

    3. Re:May have one fewer customer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck you. "Facts" aren't flame-bait, you asshole moderator.

  11. possible linux support! by virion · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sam Lantinga, author of SDL, was hired by blizzard. Is he working on this title? is new warcraft will be sdl based? if so linux port should be piece of cake.

    1. Re:possible linux support! by Frums · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I very much doubt it will be run on linux (the client that is) but I am willing to be the servers will be.

      -Frums

    2. Re:possible linux support! by JAVAC+THE+GREAT · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah? I'll take that bet. I'm putting my money on Solaris.

    3. Re:possible linux support! by Frums · · Score: 1
      You're on. I'll bet you a month of WoW (whatever the cost comes out to be.

      -Frums

  12. Shattered Galaxy by tangent3 · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://www.sgalaxy.com

    I believe it's the first graphical MMORPG.

    Shattered Galaxy just came out of beta and is in commercial release since 21st August. Looks pretty good, won quite a few awards at shows.

    Blizzard will have its hands full playing catch-up, but it'll probably win the Warcraft fans over just like Ultima Online did and Star Wars Galaxy will when (hahahahaaa) it is released.

    I just hope Blizzard won't be like the idiots Electronic Arts were when they forced the Origin developers to drop the Ultima 9: Ascension project for Ultima Online. Can you imagine them putting aside Warcraft 3 for the MMORPG version?

    1. Re:Shattered Galaxy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Uh, what?

      I guess you don't know about EverQuest(.com), Asheron's Call, Anarchy Online or any of the other graphical MMORPGs.

      You're kind of^W^Wseriously fucking stupid, my good buddy.

      PS: Blizzard North is working on Warcraft 3. Blizzard South is working on World of Warcraft. This confirms my theory that you're a fucking dumbass, to not know this.

    2. Re:Shattered Galaxy by CBNobi · · Score: 1

      "I believe it's the first graphical MMORPG. "
      I don't understand your statement.

      In addition, while you can call it an MMORPG, it uses a different viewpoint (isometric 3D) and a different system (closer to an RTS than a RPG) compared to the usual first-person-kill-stuff-and-get-loot format of the usual MMORPGs.

    3. Re:Shattered Galaxy by current93 · · Score: 1

      I think he meant it is the first graphical MMORTS, seeing as Shattered Galaxy is an RTS.

    4. Re:Shattered Galaxy by Bodero · · Score: 3, Informative

      Wrongo. Blizzard North is working on World of Warcraft, Blizzard (EOT, no "South") is working on Warcraft 3, and has been for a long time. That's why the rumors of SC2 were squelched, because the Starcraft team (Blizzard) was working on Warcraft 3 (Blizzard), while the Diablo II team had just finished LoD at Blizzard North.

  13. I'll believe it when I see it... by Anonymous+DWord · · Score: 4, Informative

    "Though Blizzard Entertainment is still hard at work polishing up its highly anticipated real-time strategy game, Warcraft III, for an early 2002 release..."

    Uh huh. "Highly anticipated" is right. Oh look! The vapourware awards from 2000! [wired] Coming in at Number 6, Warcraft III. I love Blizzard (mostly), and I think they do some great stuff, but until it's shipped, it doesn't exist.
    --
    "If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
    1. Re:I'll believe it when I see it... by hiryuu · · Score: 1
      Oh look! The vapourware awards [wired.com] from 2000! [wired] Coming in at Number 6, Warcraft III. I love Blizzard (mostly), and I think they do some great stuff, but until it's shipped, it doesn't exist.


      More disappointing to me are the apparent changes it's gone through as I've followed all the prevews and whatnot over the dev time. Seeing the more individual aspects and the widely-employed role-playing elements get sucked out so they can make another RTS kinda blows, in my mind.


      --
      Karma: Excellent, but still won't get you laid.
    2. Re:I'll believe it when I see it... by Cryptnotic · · Score: 1
      If you watch the video, the guys talking about WoW say that it won't come out until after Warcraft III, which they state "probably won't ship next year".


      Cryptnotic

      --
      My other first post is car post.
    3. Re:I'll believe it when I see it... by chronos2266 · · Score: 1

      I'll believe it when I DON'T see it. Half the items on this list were released shortly after it was compiled. Blizzard is known for delays but usually it results in a quality product.

    4. Re:I'll believe it when I see it... by SilverWeed · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wow you're a smart one, have you not seen all the gameplay videos of WC3? Do you think they 'faked them'? Even the one shown at ETCS? Bah. Whatever.

      Everyone who complains about Blizzard delaying their games is an idiot. First you guys complain about games coming out with too many bugs, then you complain when companies want to hold the games until they're up to their standards.

      YOU CANT HAVE BOTH YOU IDIOTS.

      --
      Remove the Spam to email me.
  14. YES! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More delayed-for-5-years-ware! just what i wanted!

  15. More like... by szcx · · Score: 4, Insightful
    World of Warhammer.

    First Blizzard were "inspired" by the Warhammer Fantasy universe for Warcraft, then they were "inspired" by the Warhammer 40,000 universe for Starcraft.

    Were Blizzard once again "inspired" by Games Workshops announcement of a Warhammer MMORPG? It's been said that Blizzard have been working on Warcraft Online for a year. Warhammer Online was announced in April 2000. You do the math.

    1. Re:More like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you suggesting here something ?

    2. Re:More like... by Bodero · · Score: 3, Informative

      Blizzard has been working on World of Warcraft since 1999. Check the whois database on worldofwarcraft.com for proof.

    3. Re:More like... by athmanb · · Score: 1

      The worldofwarcraft.com domain was registered in August 1999.
      So I think Blizzard got the edge here. However, the similarities between Warhammer and Warcraft are indeed striking...

    4. Re:More like... by Hast · · Score: 1

      OTOH most of the "authorized by GW" computer versions of their table top versions have pretty much sucked.

      Granted however that there was a squad FPS version of 40k which was supposed to be pretty good.

      The Bloodbowl game sucked, the Epic game was really-really tragic. The Warhammer Fantasy was so-so, but I only think that hardcore fans bothered with completing it.

      It's tragic really, because at least I would love to see a /good/ computer version of Epic and Bloodbowl. (Perhaps Necromunda and 40k as well.)

      Even if Blizzard was inspired by Warhammer in [war|star]craft they did manage to do one thing right. They did good computer versions of them. (I know that GW didn't do the computer versions of the above mentioned games.)

    5. Re:More like... by szcx · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Agreed.

      I'll probably get World of Warcraft (just like I did Warcraft and Starcraft before it) for the pure fact that they do PC Warhammer gamers better than Games Workshop :-)

    6. Re:More like... by Scott+Robinson · · Score: 1

      Way back in the original Warcraft days, Blizzard and Games Workshop (I think they were GW at the time) were in negotiations for Warhammer rights. It fell through and thus Warcraft was born.

      Scott.

    7. Re:More like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bizzard bought the name from a fan/squatter. They were not the first to have it.

    8. Re:More like... by Cryptnotic · · Score: 1
      If I recall correctly, Blizzard hired the artists who did the art for the Games Workshop books and magazines to do the art for Warcraft.


      I'm really suprised that GW didn't sue Blizzard way back when they had the chance. Perhaps Blizzard paid them off.


      Cryptnotic

      --
      My other first post is car post.
    9. Re:More like... by IronChef · · Score: 2


      I would sell a kidney for a good, modern tactical combat game like X-COM. The GW properties would be great candidates... but we are still dealing with a plague of real-time strategy games.

      Hell, even the Warzone computer game will be real-time instead of turn-based, and that is a MINIATURES GAME LICENSE. Am I the only person interested in turn-based tactics? Sheesh.

    10. Re:More like... by Skinny+Rav · · Score: 1

      Come on... of course Warcraft was inspired by WFB, but Starcraft? Well, maybe the way Marines behave, but races seem to me inspired rather by Alien vs. Predator comic series.

    11. Re:More like... by Hast · · Score: 1

      Seems to me that:

      Protoss == Eldar
      Zerg == Genestealers (What ever that army type is called, it was a long time since I played Epic/40k.)

      And Humans are naturally Imperial Guards / Space Marienes.

    12. Re:More like... by 17028 · · Score: 1

      Doh, what about Fall Out Tactics? Cool game...

    13. Re:More like... by IronChef · · Score: 1


      tried the demo. Didn't like the interface. Hated it, actually. And even in that game you were in real-time mode until combat started... and then the turn-based option seemed like an afterthought. It just didn't grab me, for whatever reason. But I stand corrected, there has been a recent turn-based game.

  16. Looks nice, but....... by Beowulfto · · Score: 1

    I am sure that it will be lots of fun, but I was hoping for something new! With the hints over the last couple of days, I wanted it to be a LOTR game. That would have been very cool! But I am sure I will loose lots of sleep over this new game anyway.

    --
    There's no point in being grown up if you can't be childish sometimes. -- Dr. Who
  17. as in Never? by Vermifax · · Score: 1

    ...I assume that's what you meant, but it is possible that you didn't know that Warcraft Adventures was cancelled.

    --

    Vermifax

    Logout
    1. Re:as in Never? by gabeman-o · · Score: 1

      yes, thats what i meant :-D

  18. could be fun... by Computer+suck! · · Score: 1, Interesting

    esp if it's Warcraft-style game, with an AI to take over when you leave...

    1. Re:could be fun... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      If the AI is as smart as the units' pathfinding in Warcraft 2, I'll be playing 24/7. Don't want my character to wander into a pool of lava, or into a huge battle, or off a cliff, or some other bad place while I'm sleeping.

  19. Re:Do you REALLY want to rely on battle.net player by CBNobi · · Score: 1

    If this game does go the traditional path of $10/month, I'd guess many of the players at battle.net can't get their mommy to pay for them..

  20. I can't wait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lets all petition the blizzard team to make a Linux version. If we apply enough pressure they will give in.

  21. this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is just another scheme to enslave your mind and turn you into a drone of capitilism, say no to this horrible weapon of fascism that is closed source subscription based software, you can free yourself from the shackles of slavery by boycotting blizzard games!

    1. Re:this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And become a marxist like RMS?

  22. Redmoon, a nice MMORPG. by }InFuZeD{ · · Score: 2, Informative

    If any of you are looking for a non-3D MMORPG, you should check out http://www.redmoon-online.com :) 3D just isn't my thing for an MMORPG. Too many blind spots that people can attack me in. Redmoon is a 2D game with overhead graphics but it has 3D buildings and whatnot. It's got some really cool features such as armies, a Battle Dimension, 9 characters to play, and about 6 skills for each character. It's being developed constantly and updates to the game are free (as well as the game itself). You do however have to pay a subscription fee on a monthly, quarterly, or bi-annual basis.

    1. Re:Redmoon, a nice MMORPG. by Fred+Ferrigno · · Score: 2

      A number of my friends got hooked on Redmoon, then stopped and convinced me not to start. Apparently, there are horrendous problems with gameplay and game balance. Leveling up involves killing thousands upon thousands of the same creatures for hours. And once you finally get to the high levels, there's nothing to do but pick on lowel leveled players, who are basically defenseless.

      And these kinds of criticisms came from the game's fans. I recognize that these problems might get fixed eventually, but why pay for a game that's only half done?

    2. Re:Redmoon, a nice MMORPG. by }InFuZeD{ · · Score: 1

      Well, it's true there is little to do for lower level players. However, you can easily get to level 200 using the Canon character in less than a week. The game is in developement, but I'm playing now, so I can enjoy the new benefits of the next patch (being released on September 18th) as a high level player.

    3. Re:Redmoon, a nice MMORPG. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can get to level 200 in a week? Jesus Christ... that is not very encouraging.

  23. Your chance to promote the truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Any & ALL, please do join this NYT FORUM (reg. req., but ITs worth it) where an unnamed (MS) corepirate giaNT is sponsoring the evil spew of several deceptive paid2post ?pr? bots (working 24/7, for 4 years now) to further MiSinform j. public, who can ill afford to be further MiSinformed. Millions of ludditious j. public's get ALL their IT inf. from forums like this one. It is an abomination to see what is happening there. We thank you. Someday, j. public will thank you, we hope.

  24. Lantinga by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People need to get his name right.

  25. Jesus Christ... by kypper · · Score: 1
    I remember submitting this. :op


    2001-09-02 16:02:16 Blizzard announces another Warcraft (articles,news) (rejected)

    1. Re:Jesus Christ... by CBNobi · · Score: 1

      2001-09-01 17:55:51 Blizzard Slips Up; Announces World of Warcraft (articles,games) (rejected)

      Beat ya by a day.
      It was at the "spilled news" stage, however.

  26. true story by JeromeyKesyer · · Score: 0

    when i was young i caught a fleeting glimpse
    out of the corner of my eye
    i turned to look but it was gone

    1. Re:true story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, basically, you've become comfortably numb.

  27. Another round of Vaporware? by OS24Ever · · Score: 1

    Hmm. Wonder if this will go to the same fate as Warcraft Adventures.

    Still patiently waiting on Warcraft III....

    --

    As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.

  28. Movies available... by crt · · Score: 3, Informative
    There's already an awesome CG trailer here, and an movie of in-game footage here.


    The gameplay footage looks good, but the CG movie is simply amazing. I wonder how many years until the games look that good.

    1. Re:Movies available... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd look, but slogging through fileplanet and their gamespy id isn't worth the hassle.

    2. Re:Movies available... by szcx · · Score: 2
      You could always use the following account;

      User: surfas@gamespy.com
      Pass: test2

    3. Re:Movies available... by tritab · · Score: 1

      Anyone have a login for fileplanet they would care to share?

  29. Yet another junky EverQuest rip off. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny


    I don't know why everyone thinks so highly of Blizzard. Yes, they have produced some impressive sales figures... But games like "StarCraft" were mostly eye candy. Contrasted with something like "Total Annihilation", where there actually were strategic choices to be made beyond "attack with my land unit or my air unit".

    Then there was that whole bullshit of "safe disk": Blizzard "copy protected" their Diablo 2 disk with data encoded in the subchannel. This was some new definition of "copy protected" of which I was not previously aware. It broke the CDROM standard, which caused my hardware to corrupt data reads about 50% of the time. (Tested extensively under linux.) The only way to actually install and play this game involved first making two copies of the "copy protected" disk. One with and one without the subchannel data. (As I stated, some new definition of the term "copy protection" of which I was not previously aware.)(*)

    Anyhow, I did play and enjoy D2 for a while. I was somewhat put off by their ludicrous AI code. Like a monster walking through, or standing in, my firewalls rather than just taking one step aside. (Come on folks -- This isn't that difficult of a computational problem.) Or their class balancing: Like the necro being able to take out any large group of monsters, regardless of level, by playing them off against one another...

    After the 1.08 patch, I gave up on Blizzard. I spent a lot of time collecting a bunch of bullshit items. Which was fun at the time, I suppose. Only to have everything yanked out from under me in a massive nerf that was, pretty obviously, intended to "encourage" me to shell out another $40 their latest upgrade to get back some of what they'd taken away.

    I found a cheaper solution. I gave away everything I had collected, and deleted the game.

    I'll never trust Blizzard again!

    Afterward, while wandering through a "Best Buy", I spotted EverQuest for $10. I always wondered what it was like... First month was free... What the hell I thought. I'll probably delete it in the morning...

    I have been truly amazed at the differences between these two games: EverQuest and Diablo2. It's night and day. Not because of the massively-multiplayer nature of EverQuest. I played D2 on battlenet, and the differences between 8 people and 2000 people are not that significant.

    But the depth of the gameplay. The sheer size and scope of the world. The volume of spells, equipment, and options. The tradeskills. The quests. The class and race balancing. Everything from the lighting and architecture to the faction balancing. It completely blew me away.

    So now blizzard, with their track record of producing "minimal" gameplay with great eye candy has taken notice of the profits available from MMORPGs, and is targeting that realm.

    Unless it's free, they are going to be providing too little, too late.

    My $0.02.

    (*) Writing as Anonymous Coward to avoid persecution under the DMCA.

    1. Re:Yet another junky EverQuest rip off. by Meorah · · Score: 1

      As a long-time EQ player (level 56 monk as main character, started June 2000), I'm going to have to disagree with your comparison of Diablo II and EverQuest.

      EQ has been improved upon, balanced, debugged, secured, nerfed, and un-nerfed ever since its release. When it was first released, it was fun but unbalanced, buggy as hell, hacked inside out, and overcrowded. If you say EQ is balanced, you'd be right... but ask the players who played as Rogues before high damage weapons and strong armor became available for them. Ask them if they felt balanced compared to the Druids who solo'd their way to 50 in a matter of weeks, or if they felt balanced compared to the Necros who used their specialized spells and pets to solo monsters that other classes STILL can't solo at level 60.

      The "wow! it's so huge!" factor wears off of EQ. It lasts for a good while, though. Long enough that you decide its worth the $10/month to keep on playing. Its not until you cancel your account and tally up 1 1/2 years of monthly payments, software (and expansion) purchases, and time invested (over 100 days on my main character alone, others I know have over 300 days on a single character), that you realize its just a big "press button, get cheeze" experiment which happens to have some REALLY nice environments and monsters and character abilities for the first 30 or so levels.

      Level 30 takes twice as long to get through as any other normally scaled increase (they all take longer, but 30 is twice what it should be). Most people would quit at this point, but they've become immersed enough to see those shiny new toys that are "only 20 more levels". Yah, I forgot to mention that levels 35, 40, and 45 are also designated "hell levels" like 30.

      Oh, but you want to see the dragons? You want to go on a dragon hunt with 30 of your friends? That sounds fun, right? Wrong. First you have to go get a whole bunch of additional armor and gear to improve your resistances for the type of breath the dragon has. If you don't, you die. If none of your 29 buddies does, you all die. Preparation is key, and it takes a LONG TIME and a pretty good amount of cash. Then you all have to schedule a time to kill the dragon, since everybody has their own life... hopefully, the dragon will actually BE THERE when you've scheduled your raid, although there's a good possibility that some other group will kill the dragon about 2 hours before you get there (did I mention the most accessible dragons only spawn once a week?). But lets assume the dragon is up... it will now take your designated "raid leader" approximately 3 hours to orchestrate all of the individual players into cohesive groups and organized with signaling through designated channels of communication that will transform all 30 of you into a single, well-oiled machine. During these 3 hours, people will crack jokes, get pissed off at others not paying attention, curse the fact that this is a waste of time. Finally when everything is placed, you bum-rush the dragon and have a 5-10 minute long fight which you MIGHT win if you're experienced. If you have never done this before, you will fail and have to start the 3 hours of prep over again, this time including a corpse retrieval from under the dragon's feet. Its a great adrenaline rush, but nothing different than what I can get by jogging for 30 minutes. And I don't have to prep for 3 hours when I go jogging.

      So what's the point of EQ? Simple, figure out the system. Just like any complex system, it will take you about a year to figure out all the parameters, interfaces, levels, customizations, content and context, characters, and MOB AI. This is the draw for ALL of these types of games, and they are forced to make the system more and more complex in order to retain their customers.

      So what happens once you lose that sense of newbieness? You realize that it really wasn't a magical realm and the other players weren't really your friends and the game wasn't really all that much fun.

      Gimme Diablo II any day of the week. Sit down, kill a ton of monsters for 30 minutes, and quit. Sweet instant gratification, and no monthly charge!

      --
      Protector of Capitalist views,
      Meorah
  30. Am I the only one with Online-Gaming issues? by kypper · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I find that the big trend these days is to move towards online-only gaming. Look at Final Fantasy XI. Look at Ultima. Look at the new 'Warcraft'.


    I think video game companies need to realize something:

    Not all of us can guarantee having enough time available to warrant a monthly service fee for a game.

    Some of us like playing on our own.

    We don't all have Cable or DSL! LAG.

    High graphics and bandwidth just don't work well, and it's always slow and irritating. Even Diablo 2 has this problem on Battle.net

    1. Re:Am I the only one with Online-Gaming issues? by demaria · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Some of us don't play games all the time, but only once and a while.

      I don't like getting my ass kicked by young punks who play video games 10 hours a day, every day, and then being called {lame|loser|suck|asswipe} or what have you.

      Sometimes I just like setting the difficultly level down as low as possible, and just kicking butt. Nothing more fun than stomping through a village in Warcraft destroying all buildings and peons in the way.

    2. Re:Am I the only one with Online-Gaming issues? by NullAndVoid · · Score: 1


      I find that the big trend these days is to move towards online-only gaming. Look at Final Fantasy XI. Look at Ultima. Look at the new 'Warcraft'.


      Except it isn't Warcraft, it's an RPG. Warcraft I-III are RTS. Not that I wouldn't mind MM strategy games, but RPGs seem to be the popular form for MM games. And most of these are fantasy - why couldn't Blizzard have been just a *tiny* bit more original and based it on Starcraft?

      --


      -- Sigs are for losers
    3. Re:Am I the only one with Online-Gaming issues? by ferkelparade · · Score: 1

      Amen to that. I play mostly strategy games, and I have a feeling the single-player component of RTS games is slowly dying. Companies seem to invest way more time in multiplayer balancing/tweaking than in creating compelling single-player missions with interesting storylines.

      I've been hanging out on various AOE/AOK forums for a couple of years, and as good as nobody there is talking about how to create good, playable scenarios - it's all about build orders and practicing your multiplayer skills for several hours a day. It's a frickin' game, goddammit!

      (needless to say, I almost completely quit playing FPS because almost every FPS game recently released was multiplayer only)

      --
      frotz grue
    4. Re:Am I the only one with Online-Gaming issues? by SpryGuy · · Score: 1, Informative

      Check out "Max Payne". It's a great single-player-only game. No multiplayer aspect at all. Great plot, great graphics, and a totally fun time. Highly recommended.

      --

      - Spryguy
      There are three kinds of people in this world: those that can count and those that can't
    5. Re:Am I the only one with Online-Gaming issues? by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 1

      High graphics and bandwidth just don't work well, and it's always slow and irritating. Even Diablo 2 has this problem on Battle.net

      I almost never have problems with Battle.Net. I hear other people complain about all the problems they have.

      I guess one's milage may very as such, but for the most part, Battle.Net works better for me than having someone else host the game.

      True, LAN play works best, but I HATE opened characters. There's no thrill in trading because if you didn't hack the stuff you're trading, the other person probably did.

      Battle.Net is as close to a cheat free environment as I've seen (ignoring the exploits that pop up now and then - kudos to Blizzard for being on top of them, though...)

      --

      "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

      Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
    6. Re:Am I the only one with Online-Gaming issues? by haedesch · · Score: 1

      try www.planetarion.com a game entiely in your browse, its cool and has a (compared to other games) rather mature community. No need to install any sotware at all

    7. Re:Am I the only one with Online-Gaming issues? by Fred+Ferrigno · · Score: 2

      Another poster mentioned Max Payne, a recent game that has no multiplayer aspect at all.

      I don't know the sales figures for Max Payne, but Starcraft (which is at heart a multiplayer game) sold millions world wide. Imagine if Blizzard had charged even a tiny amount for what they gave away for free -- that's what they're hoping for here.

      You might like single player games, but subscription games are much, much more profitable. They're also much harder to copy. Max Payne had all sorts of fancy CD-copy protection, but was cracked and released quite quickly. Starcraft, however, is practically worthless without a legitimate CD-key for Battle.net.

      Game companies don't care that they're not serving you and the few people like you. If a small handful of people don't like their game, that's OK, because a lot of people do, and collectively they'll shell out more money than you will. There will always be a place for games like Max Payne, made whenever a market segment goes unexplored, but they're just not the safe bet that multiplayer games are.

    8. Re:Am I the only one with Online-Gaming issues? by Tarpan · · Score: 1

      Starcraft, however, is practically worthless without a legitimate CD-key for Battle.net.

      Not really worthless. I play it with some friends alot on LAN, all you need is a nice keycracker (the internet servers usually notices that this is not a legimit key and threw you out). And i play it alot at home too, kinda like to when i get home go a round of starcraft against the computer(s).

    9. Re:Am I the only one with Online-Gaming issues? by Tarpan · · Score: 1

      I agree. Max Payne was really really fun to play.

    10. Re:Am I the only one with Online-Gaming issues? by Meorah · · Score: 1

      For 1 week. But I beat it, so why play it again? It took them 2 years to develop a game that I conquered in 1 week? I paid $50 for 1 week of entertainment? Ok, I played almost 15 hours, but that still translates to $3.34 per hour.

      I'm sorry, but MMORPGs are a far better value for the customer, and make more money for the developers and producers. Although the Diablos and Pac-Mans and Contras and Unreals will survive, the MMORPGs are better, deeper, more meaningful games.

      --
      Protector of Capitalist views,
      Meorah
    11. Re:Am I the only one with Online-Gaming issues? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The times they are a changing.

      Early 90s the fad was FPS, late 90s it was RTS, now its MMORPG. Wonder what stupid genre is next on the bandwagon list?

    12. Re:Am I the only one with Online-Gaming issues? by IronChef · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ...MMORPGs are better, deeper, more meaningful games.

      Better is certainly a subjective sort of thing. What's better, steak or ice cream?

      Deeper? More meaningful? You must be in an EQ guild, and all the damn virtual hugs have addled your brain.

      A bat tries to bite you but misses!
      You crush a bat for 2 points of damage.

      You have slain a bat!
      You gain experience.
      You have lost faction with Brown Flying Rats. You gain faction with the Awkwardly-Animated Elves.

      Posingasagirl shouts, "Anyone have some platinum to spare?"

      13yearold says, "SoW?"
      13yearold says, "SoW me??"
      13yearold says, "Screw you"

      Whiner tells the guild, "G'nite"

      Crybaby tells the guild, "HUGS! KISSES! HUGGLES! MEGASUPERKISSES!"

      You think you are facing North.
      You have become better at Sense Direction! (13)

      ----

      Despite the totally ridiculous amount of "huggles" thrown around by grown men in EQ, and all the bat-slaying that goes on, I think that the MMORPG genre has a lot of potential and I look forward to future games. I just hope that the Blizzard guys don't consider any of the crap on the market now to be their inspiration. EQ is a MUD with a 3d GUI. Spare me. I'd rather play Pac Man. (and I tried to like EQ, I really really did, but it's not the right kind of crack for me at least.)

    13. Re:Am I the only one with Online-Gaming issues? by IronChef · · Score: 2


      I actually used to be a RTS game designer (for a real game, at a real publisher, from a real studio). The figures we got from the publisher on multiplayer were fascinating. According to their expensive research, only a few percent of all players used multiplayer at ALL. Now, this was a few years ago, but still... Everyone still put multiplayer code in because if you didn't the reviews would DESTROY you, of course.

      I guess times are a-changin' though, there's about sixteen billion people playing CS right this second, and EQ has 400k subscribers or so.

    14. Re:Am I the only one with Online-Gaming issues? by SpryGuy · · Score: 1

      At $3.34/hour, it's still better than a movie or dinner. :-)

      Besides, there is some replay value. There's lots of 'cool things' I missed on the first time through. And starting it again gives you a nice feeling of 'closing the loop', since the whole thing is told in flash-back. In fact, they give away the ending in the first segment, but you don't realize that until you play it again. Very clever. Very well done. And worth every penny.

      I wonder what kind of mods will show up?

      --

      - Spryguy
      There are three kinds of people in this world: those that can count and those that can't
    15. Re:Am I the only one with Online-Gaming issues? by dollargonzo · · Score: 1

      Not everyone has cable or DSL? well, technically yes, but the average ping on online games has gone WAY down. most people actually DO have cable or DSL now. In games like CS, they are beginning to add features that rely on lower pings and higher bandwidth, so even all yuo people who still play those "old 56k friendly" games might be shit out of luck anyway.

      --
      BSD is for people who love UNIX. Linux is for those who hate Microsoft.
  31. The MMORPG Swarm by discore · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Everyone wants to release an MMORPG. The fact of the matter is, most companies don't know how to successfully build and support an online game. They have become too used to releasing it, and that is the end of development. Expansion packs not included.

    The things that all successful MMORPGs have in common are, decent customer service, a stable client/world/communication setup, and a "world" rich with content and/or things to do, items to gain, monsters to challenge.

    We saw Anarchy Online pretty much crash and burn on release. It was horribly unstable. I had been playing AO since the first public beta. When I heard they shipped version 12.1 in a box I couldn't believe it.

    Then we saw them crash and burn again on Customer Service. Do GMs exist in that game? As far as I know there is no phone based support what so ever.

    My point is, a publishing company better get it's act together if they want to release an MMORPG. It's a very long term investment. With so many companies producing them, there are going to be a lot of sub-par products, with a few games that actually meet the standards a successful MMORPG has.

  32. Remember... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remember a little Warcraft game called 'Lord of the Clans'? It was supposed to a be a kind of weird cross between an expansion for Warcraft 2 and a FPS. It got canned after about a year of development.

    Blizzard is good at a lot of things. They have great ideas and novel imaginations. When they do make a game, its always a good one.

    But they are so god damn slow when it comes to actually developing games. One every year has pretty much been breakneck speed, and that is when you consider 'expansions' a new game. Considering that people at the 1999 E3 were watching movies for Warcraft 3, expecting Blizzard to actually release any new game before 2003 is at best a longshot.

    Chances are, by the time this 'Warcraft 4' or whatever they want to call it comes out, developers like Sierra, Verant, Cornered Rat, Funcom, and Lionhead will already have been making superior MMORPGs products.

  33. Suggestion for slashdot... by kypper · · Score: 3, Insightful
    if it recognizes the same link, then they should have a 'already submitted' instead of 'rejected'.

    It would make us folk a little happier.

  34. 4 years after WC3? by rapett0 · · Score: 1

    At this rate, there timeframe in this is going to be during Starcraft :)

    (If your lost, check the homepage, they say it takes four years after WC3.)

  35. Grab the DivX file for video gameplay! by antdude · · Score: 3, Redundant

    This is the trailer from ETCS: Download here. You need DivX codec to view the AVI file. :)

    I have to say WoW for this game! :)

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  36. Or get the DivX format (smaller size) by antdude · · Score: 3, Informative

    This is the gameplay trailer from ETCS: Download here. You need DivX codec to view the AVI file.

    I have to say WoW for this game! :)

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    1. Re:Or get the DivX format (smaller size) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You ROCK.

  37. MMORPG by sandalwood · · Score: 2, Insightful

    MMORPG is a silly and unnecessarily complicated acronym which will serve to turn off people who don't know what one is. I suggest at the very least simplifying it to MRPG, with the M for Metaverse-like, or some such.

  38. Masssively multiplayer online *what*? by prizog · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Great characters"? No mention of it.
    "Fascinating stories"? Not mentioned.
    "Player-driven plot"? Yeah right.

    So, where's the role-playing? As far as I can tell from the article, there isn't any. The trailer didn't show any talking. So, maybe MMOH with an H for Hackfest would be a better name.

    1. Re:Masssively multiplayer online *what*? by jcampbell · · Score: 1

      Yeah or it could be the fact that it has only been in development for roughly 8 months. Most of the time has been getting the _technology_ in place. They don't start building the storyline in until it is actually feasible to play the game on a technology level. Blizzard knows how to make games.

    2. Re:Masssively multiplayer online *what*? by prizog · · Score: 2

      They have also developed a substantial amount of art. You can't have art and story completely separate - they need to be intertwined. And their example "quest" was so hack-and-slash typical...

      I understand that Blizzard knows how to make violence-oriented games. I loved Starcraft, and woulld love to play SC2, if they ever build it. This doesn't mean they know how to make RPGs. As far as I can tell, nobody has successfully made a MMORPG which features any significant amount of RPing for the majority of players.

      This trailer is an advertising move for Blizzard. So, looking at what Blizzard is emphasizing in its ads is a good way to learn what they think is important in building a game. Clearly, they see good technology and lots of violence as more important than a good player-driven story and good characters. So, they should be making RTS games, instead of trying to make RPGs.

  39. Guess what? Everquest wasn't original. by Lelon · · Score: 1

    All the MMORPGS or whatever the hell you call them are just GRAPHICAL MUDS. Actually they're something a bit less than MUDS as far as game play is concerned. Until you have a game that is as complex as the best MUDS, its really a waste of stime. So far, i've heard that WoW will PvP protection and you wont loose anything when you die. sound like any other hack and slash games they've made (cough diablo1 diablo2 cough)

  40. Betting starts now... by donpezet · · Score: 1

    Oddly enough, I'd almost put money on it that we see the Warcraft MMORPG released before Warcraft III. Actually, I'd pretty much wager on anything out there being released before Warcraft III.

    1. Re:Betting starts now... by Edgewize · · Score: 1

      I'll take you on :) Last I heard, Warcraft III is nearing code-completion, all that remains is play-balance and the final UI art. The core engine and network code has been done for almost a year.

      Beta testing is supposed to start in late October, but I'll bet that's just for signups and the beta won't begin until late November.

    2. Re:Betting starts now... by rhavyn · · Score: 2

      It can't possibly end up any later than Team Fortress 2 (if you don't know don't worry, but it was originally supposed to come out as a mod for quake2).

  41. When do I have the time? by Rimbo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe I'm not part of Blizzard's intended audience, but although this looks damn cool, when am I supposed to find the time to play all these great games?

    It seems the only worthwhile games on the PC any more are these whiz-bang immersive-world internet-enabled games that require 20 hours a week to enjoy, or 40 if you really want to get the most out of them. Where am I supposed to find the time to play these?

    Back in the past, there were dozens of great games that didn't take so much time. They were fast, furious, and you could get a lot of fun out of them in a five-minute coffee break. Like Pac-Man, Galaga, and the like. There aren't many "hop on and have fun for a bit" games like that any more. Nowadays, games need commitment.

    So I spend most of my time on the PC playing games like MAME.

    Am I the only person who has this problem? Am I the only one here who between job and friends doesn't have all evening to chase down the old man who'll tell him to say "syzygy" to get past the rabid monkey guarding the gate to the blue unicorn?

    1. Re:When do I have the time? by jbarnett · · Score: 3, Funny


      There aren't many "hop on and have fun for a bit" games like that any more. Nowadays, games need commitment.

      Oh, I see now. I thought my level 87 Barb had something special with your level 78 Amazon. What are you saying, are you saying you would like to play other games? I thought we had something special...power leveling for 20 hours a day...

      I bet it is that Quake3 game, it is such a slut... just there when you are lonely and want to blow some stuff up, in and out huh? No long term commitment... your such a typical gamer.

      So you just want to be freinds? If you ever see me power lvling around Hell/Hell Act 4, give me a party invite ok? ok?

      I have to go, there is a rumor that some guy is trading SOJs for Prefect Skulls on USEast and have to check it out... hope to see you around.

      Love,
      Barb_Kill_Joo
      Level 87 WW Lance Barb
      USEast

      --

      "`Ford, you're turning into a penguin. Stop it.'" -THHGTTG
    2. Re:When do I have the time? by kndnice · · Score: 1

      I agree with you. In the days of programming for hours on end, where my job seems like an endless RPG, it's nice to have a quick break from all the stress....something exciting enough to take your mind of problem-solving, and just be.

      I've found Quake to be the best solution for me.

      You're not alone! ;)

  42. Another diablo(w) and you getta pay for it too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm so excited!
    Another hack and slash(masquerading as an RPG no less) with pretty colors and lights to distract the ignorant from the fact that there is no story line, and it's only designed to feed into the multiplayer madness while contributing minimal effort to actual story building and player interaction beyond getting your next quest of "Find my lost anvil".
    Whatever.
    I'll be playing Morrowind.

  43. Wrongo yourself. by Edgewize · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Blizzard HQ (South) in Irvine, CA, has two product development teams. Team 1 is their RTS team, composed of many of the developers who brought us Warcraft II and Starcraft. Team 2 is comprised of mainly new hires (from companies such as Activision and ID) as well as some previous members of Team 1.

    Blizzard North is taking a short break after working on Diablo games for six years. They have not announced what their next project will be, but their design team has probably begun story-boarding it already.

  44. Security Issues by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    So, in order to play this game, I need to be connected to a Blizzard Server, rather then one of the matching servers ?

    Considering that Blizzard is *the* leading game company when it comes to running spyware on their users computers, I think it will be a cold day in hell before I buy this game. Remember when it was discovered that they were trying to grab personal information from the registry "to improve security for you ?"

    Or Verant scanning your harddrive to see if certain other software programs were present "to improve the gaming experience for you"

    But the MMORPG Genre is so addictive that I'm sure that whatever PR Disaster they make for themselves will be instantly forgiven so that people can keep logging in to push the pellet dispencer another 200 or 300 times

    Blizzard and Starcraft

    Verant and Everquest

  45. Re:Guess what? Everquest wasn't original. by prizog · · Score: 2

    EQ *was* original. Not good, but original. It was the first 3d graphical MUD of any quality - and so, original.

    Of course, whether it's a waste of time (compared to MUDs) or not depends on what you want out of a game. Good MUDs (usually actually MUSHes or MOOs) feature good stories, intense player participation, etc. Good MMOHs feature lots of blowing shit up. Which one you chose to play depends on what you want.

    My sole point is that it's not accurate to call WoW a MMORPG, because there's *no role-playing*.

  46. Why is it that I have to register to see movie? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All I want to do is view the trailer movie but fileplanet requires registration. I don't get it. Why do they need to know who I am.

    I wish all these companies that require registration for every single little thing would just lay off. They really don't need to know anything about me if I don't want them too.

  47. Is it just me or... by TrevorB · · Score: 2

    For anyone who plays a lot of Diablo.. Do you find it amusing that the characters are either:

    1) Standing Still
    2) Fighting
    3) RUNNING!

    A lot like Diablo II...

    Doesn't anyone walk anymore?

  48. John Cash? by [amorphis] · · Score: 1

    Does anyone know if John Cash (ex-id) is working on this title?

  49. Nobody learned from any of the MMORPGs that failed by jetski666 · · Score: 1

    The most wildly popular MMORPG has to be Ultima Online, or the most addicting. With all it's flaws it still was one of the best games in the world. The game lacked any advanced graphics possible, all 2D. The game had the best gameplay ever. It's not about the graphics with a game that has so much interaction with the world around it. These companies are trying to build 3D worlds that still don't compare to the UO world. I'd play UO again, but then I'd be out of a job and lock myself in a room all day.

  50. More fantasy? Gah! by Seemlar · · Score: 1

    Ultima Online, Everquest, Asherons Call... and now more fantasy?

    Why?

    Why not something science fiction, whether full on sci-fi or even near future settings?

    1. Re:More fantasy? Gah! by Meorah · · Score: 1

      Because Sci-Fi isn't doing so hot.

      --
      Protector of Capitalist views,
      Meorah
    2. Re:More fantasy? Gah! by Dallan · · Score: 1

      Star Wars Galaxies.

      'Nuff said.

      --
      Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.
    3. Re:More fantasy? Gah! by db_two · · Score: 1

      I was going to say Fallen Age was a good SCI-FI coming out, but read the press release below:


      For Immediate Release

      FALLEN AGE IS PUT ON INDEFINATE HOLD


      Diamond Bar, California, July 27, 2001-Fallen Age, the innovative massively multiplayer online game from Netamin has been placed on hold indefinitely, the company announced today.

      "We have run into creative differences with our partners in Korea, and have decided this week that we had no choice but to put the game on hold," said Daniel "Savant" Manachi, Producer of Fallen Age.

      "We sincerely apologize to our testers for the time and effort they've put into helping test the game and hope we will be able to re-launch the title soon," said Manachi. "Because of their dedication, we are working with the folks at Mythic Entertainment to enable Fallen Age testers to move to the Dark Age of Camelot Beta."

      "We'll have details in the coming week(s) for the testers regarding this move, and we greatly appreciate Mythic for working with us. While we are all competitors, it's nice to know that the players can come first," said Manachi.

      For more information about Netamin, contact Kathleen O'Guin, Director of Business Development, at (909) 598-7177, extension 103, or email at
      kathleen@netamin.net.

      --
      David Byrd
      CEO - 21st Century Tech., Inc.
      URL: http://www.nite-surfer.com
      See our Illuminated Keyboard
  51. Star Wars MMORPG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Star Wars is gonna suck. Look who is working on it! Almost everybody that is on SWG now was responsible for the gigantic design cluster fuck that is Ultima Online, and only in the last year has the current team started to fix their mistakes. The SWG team couldn't have learned from UO's mistakes because they quit working on it soon after it launched, so they're doomed to repeat those mistakes again.

  52. Who else thought... by Jimmy_B · · Score: 2

    Who else thought of NetHack when they saw the acronym for that title?

    You zap the Wand of Wishing. You may wish for an object.--More--
    For what do you wish? Box of World of Warcraft
    l - World of Warcraft box
    a
    What do you want to use or apply? l
    You start playing World of Warcraft...
    Oh wow! Great stuff!

  53. Four Years after WC3? by phoon12 · · Score: 1

    Does anyone else find it amusing that Blizzard is already announcing a sequel to a game that they haven't released yet?!?

  54. Star Wars MMORPG FAQ by Lumpish+Scholar · · Score: 2

    I still want the Star Wars MMORPG to rock my world tho.

    The official Star Wars MMORPG FAQ is updated from time to time. (I like this FAQ: "2.13 Will I cast twin shadows on Tatooine?" "We are remaining true to the continuity of the movies, so only one shadow is cast on Tatooine.")

    They're saying "second half of 2002"; patient, a Jedi must be.

    --
    Stupid job ads, weird spam, occasional insight at
  55. That's not proof by cronio · · Score: 2, Informative

    That just means that they had the inkling of the idea that they might want to create "world of warcraft" game in 1999, so they bought the domain for $70.

    --


    My plan is to pimp before they realize I'm a jackass. Hit 'em hard and fast.
  56. Re:Sad News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was talking with Jamie earlier, and he suggested that the problem may be incidently related to the recently discovered TCP stack buffer overflow /remote root exploit.

    Around the same time as the John Bobbett Special was occurring, some script kiddies did root Malda's personal box, and used it as a launching point to break root slashdot. The Cisco firewall prevented blocked the data from ever reaching slashbox, but it crashed it, which is why slashdot was toes up a coupele days ago.

    It's too bad LNUX stock is worthless now; if it had any value, Malda could have bought windows 2000, and this never would have happened.

  57. nice by syrinx · · Score: 1

    Finally, an MMORPG that might be worth getting. I was so looking forward to the Middle Earth one, then Sierra suffered a seg fault or something, canceled the game, and very quickly became a completely irrelevant company. Blizzard is probably the only game company I implicitly trust to come out with kickass games. They sure do take a long time about it, though. It's true that the whole fantasy theme has been a bit overdone, but I don't think that the Starcraft 'universe' really fits with the whole MMORPG concept (though it'd be cool to play a Zerg queen and shoot broodlings into other players...).

    --
    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
  58. Does anyone remember.. by shiva600 · · Score: 1

    ..Warcraft Adventures ?
    After WC 2 came out, there was a game called "warcraft adventures" in development at blizzard; there was a lot of marketing hype around, too (of course). The basic idea was to create an "interactive adventure" in the warcraft universe. It should have had a kind of "comic look and feel", as all characters + the gaming environment looked comic style (no polygons inside).
    It was silently axed some time later, cant remember the reason though.
    Maybe they couldnt get over that, because basically its the same idea transferred to todays standards (3D, MMORPG).

  59. "One of the richest settings ever made"? by willfe · · Score: 1

    The concept is made all the more exciting when applied to the Warcraft setting--one of the richest settings ever made for a computer game.

    What the hell are they talking about? Warcraft and Warcraft II were brilliant games, but what storyline and immersive world are these guys thinking of?

    The "story" of Warcraft (and Warcraft II) was dead simple: somebody ripped the fabric o' the universe a new one and orcs poured out from the hole eager to kick human ass. Now it's up to these humans to kick orcish ass before the orcs can kick human ass. Either the humans seal the hole, or the orcs kill the humans.

    What immersive setting did I miss here?

    --
    Read my stuff.
  60. The Requisite OS Flame by David+E.+Smith · · Score: 2

    The WoW FAQ is somewhat less than informative...
    For what platforms will the game be available?
    The game will initially be available for PCs.
    Wow, that helps. They do forget that not all the world's a Windows box, don't they? Where's the (Linux/BeOS/*BSD/QNX/other-fave-thing-that-runs-on -PC-hardware) port?

  61. You may rape me, I am 12-year-old. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have very tight buttocks, I think it would be funny if somebody would rape me in the buttocks.

    Give me your phone number and I will call you.

  62. Buy Anarchy Online - it's out now by PsyQ · · Score: 1

    It's a MMORPG, it's 3D and it's sci-fi. See this site for more info.

  63. neocron by dollargonzo · · Score: 1

    Hmmm, sounds like they are trying to catch up to neocron. funny if they would release earlier... neocron is getting pretty "popular" even though it hasnt even been released yet (WOOHOO! go NFF), and blizzard is obviously seeing all the hype about the new MMORPG scheduled to be released only in 4-6 months. There is obviously already a trailer for the game, and a beta. Now all the people who led clans in CS, can spend all their time posting on neocron forums and requesting bullshit requirements of their clan members like at least X posts a week (i mean GOD DAMN!! the game's not even out yet!) ;-)

    --
    BSD is for people who love UNIX. Linux is for those who hate Microsoft.
  64. Is there a Java based, free MMORPG? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about a FSF-MMORPG in Java? I bet that a group of dedicated Slashdotters could write and host something better than any of these commercial companies.

    How about getting W3C to help organise a standard XML extension for RPG world-environment description while we are at it? Then some of us can have 2D, others can have 3D, and you oldies can have a CLI..

  65. Remember, this is the team... by freeBill · · Score: 2

    ...that worked on a quest-based CRPG set in the Warcraft world (now, I guess, it's the "World of Warcraft") for a couple years before abandoning the project because they couldn't meet their own standards.

    Don't expect them to release this unless they can do it right. (This is a good thing.) So don't get your hopes too high. If it doesn't come to fruition, it will be because they couldn't make it as fun as they thought it should be. If it is released, it will probably be late. (Blizzard has a reputation for taking the extra time to do things right.)

    It will probably also be very good.

    --
    Eternal vigilance only works if you look in every direction.
  66. That does not prove intent. by Inoshiro · · Score: 2

    They could've just been snapping up any domains with "Warcraft" in the title. If "worldofhalflife.com" is registered, does that mean Half-Life will come out in MMORPG format?

    Doubtful.

    --
    --
    Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
    1. Re:That does not prove intent. by Bodero · · Score: 2
      http://www.sclegacy.com/article.php?thold=5&mode=n ocomments&order=0&sid=365

      The worldofwarcraft.com domain was registered on August 11, 1999, a full two years ago. But then again, the game has been in development since 1999, so...

      Well, that's the best I can do. Can you do any better in disproving me, or is your case just rampant speculation?

  67. The obligatory reality-check response by Edgewize · · Score: 2

    About 95% of the target audience for MMORPGs has access to a Windows computer. An additional 5% gain in revenue cannot justify the cost and maintainance of ports to alternate platforms.

  68. MMORPG by Magius_AR · · Score: 1
    Argh, i hate these damn MMORPGS. I really don't see where the interest comes from.

    Normally the servers are lagged to all hell, the game is vastly unbalanced (future patches just serving to unbalance the game further), most of them are fairly poor in dealing with anything more than "kill things and get more powerful" (aka questing and plot and rpg value are serverely lacking) In many of them, you spend almost half your time walking or running somewhere. In fact some games like Ultima Online had you doing monotonous tasks like building shit like chairs and tables for hours just so you could get money to buy stuff. At least the text based MUDS of old had pretty good rpg value with clans and semi-balanced play and people who new how to roleplay rather than simply log on and gain xp for a couple hours and log off. Bah.

    Magius_AR

  69. Re:To be launched in... Also Dark Ages of Camelot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    With the introduction of Lineage into the US, and Destination Systems lining up its MMORPG to the mix, its seems every gaming company is scrambling to release their own brand into the mix. Currently the big leaders are Ultima Online, Everquest, Asheron's Call, WWII, and Anarchy Online. And announcements for more like Blizzard's World of Warcraft (see other slashdot reference) due in the future, and Dark Ages of Camelot which is set to be released this fall.

    Two new Dark Age of Camelot Previews

    Gamespy and Frictionless Insight have both published previews of Camelot based on their own beta test experience.


    Frictionless Insight had this to say:


    "I'm as excited for Dark Age of Camelot as I have been for any game in what seems like a long while. Camelot looks like it is on track for its October release. When the final release comes out we will, of course, do a full review. In the meantime, cross your MMOG fingers, because Camelot is looking good, real good."

    Gamespy's summary was just as glowing:

    "Take all the good things I've pointed out in this preview to heart. DaoC is actually fun to play. It offers a massive world with lots of diverse characters, classes, skills, magic, and trade skills. Later on down the road it will offer housing and PvP combat. Put all this aside and one key factor rises to the top: It's actually fun to play. And to be honest about it, that's all that matters in the end!"


    Can wait to get my hands on these!!! Just which one???????


  70. Re:To be launched in... Also Dark Ages of Camelot by db_two · · Score: 1

    More to the list:

    Ultima Online
    Everquest
    Asheron's Call
    Anarchy Online
    WWII Online
    Lineage --- NCSoft
    Dark Ages of Camelot --- Mythic
    Earth and Beyond --- Sierra
    Fallen Age ( on hold ) --- Netamin
    Tabula Rasa --- Destination Systems
    Star Wars --- Sony/Verant

    Any others?

    --
    David Byrd
    CEO - 21st Century Tech., Inc.
    URL: http://www.nite-surfer.com
    See our Illuminated Keyboard
  71. Even Quake3 tanked on Linux... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and Linux is by far the most popular of the completely irrelevant minority of non-Windows PC operating systems on which people only want free stuff to play the hacker type. Whenever I read about a commercial game being developed for Linux I have the eerie feeling it will never happen.

    We're talking market share here, nothing about technical prowess or philosophical stances so please no fanboys come up.

  72. Wow Time Frame by Veras'Tor · · Score: 1

    The time frame is 4 years after the end of WC3... that leaves a lot open, seeing as WC3 isn't out yet, of course.

  73. Re:Do you REALLY want to rely on battle.net player by Veras'Tor · · Score: 1

    Very true. The 13 year-olds will probably quiet down a bit... What would be really nice is if a Code of Conduct were to be enforced, so the next person that says "Gay people are stupid." gets banned.

  74. Bad news guys, it's Battle.Net we're talking about by Veras'Tor · · Score: 1

    Alright, so Blizzard makes some of the best games I've ever played. I'm a rabid fan of Diablo, Diablo 2, D2X, Warcraft 1 and 2, Starcraft, and Brood War. The fact remains: Battle.net sucks. I'd use a more polite word, but none come to mind... While I'll be getting WoW, because the game will more than likely be amazing, we all need to get used to 15-20% packet loss from overcrowded, underpowered B.Net servers. Maybe, just MAYBE, they will upgrade their servers to accomodate all of the users, but I'll have to see it before I believe it.