Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

World Of Warcraft Alpha Explored, Blizzard Quizzed

Posted by simoniker on from the razzle-dazzle-of-quizzing-blizzard dept.

Thanks to GameSpy for its two-part tour of World Of Warcraft, as they "got the chance to get our hands on... [an] early 'alpha' build" of the eagerly-awaited Blizzard PC MMORPG. The author praises the "incredible atmosphere and game speed... solid interface [and] fun quests", while expressing a few reservations about the "[lack of] character customization options" and the "racially restricted zones" in which "NPCs...would automatically attack any members of another race." The preview is closely followed by an interview with designer Jeff Kaplan, in which he addresses questions on design philosophy ("It's very important not to fall into that trap of trying to manipulate your community as if you're trying to run an ant farm") and in-game housing ("We do not anticipate that our player housing system will ship with the initial product.")

43 comments

  1. my predictions for WoW by feidaykin · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I'm a die-hard Blizzard fan. I've played every Blizzard game on the PC, and most of the SNES games. Thus, I kind of know their strengths and weakness. Their biggest weakness (most evident in say, Diablo II) is completely underestimating their fanbase.

    Back in the days of the Diablo II stress test, we were told it would be impossible to solo in Hell difficulty games in Act IV. Guess what? That's what everyone ended up doing. It was the standard way to level as fast as possible.

    Blizzard has flat out said that WoW is going to be different than other MMORPGs in that it won't require as much of a time investment. So here's what I see happening. The gamers are going to breeze through all of WoWs content upon its release in a very short amount of time, and become bored rather quickly.

    I could be totally wrong on this... it is just my prediction. At least one very good thing about MMORPGs is that they are constantly being updated, so hopefully Blizzard can patch in some new monsters/areas or whatever will be needed.

    Bottom line, though, is that Blizzard has a track record of underestimating the average gamer.

    --

    "To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit." -Stephen Hawking

    1. Re:my predictions for WoW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think some of the content or areas will be locked out when it first comes out. Also didn't they say there are something like 1400 quests in the game? That ought to keep you busy for a while.

    2. Re:my predictions for WoW by feidaykin · · Score: 3, Interesting
      I think some of the content or areas will be locked out when it first comes out. Also didn't they say there are something like 1400 quests in the game? That ought to keep you busy for a while.

      It depends on how involved these quests are. Throwing a number at me doesn't really impress me without an average time for completion of a quest. If each quest takes an hour, then yes, you have a lot of content there, but if each can be done in a few minutes... it wouldn't satisfy cross-over customers used to games like EQ, daoc, etc...

      When Blizzard flat out says that the game is designed with casual gamers in mind, I really believe that seasoned MMORPG veterans are going to be a bit dissapointed. Honestly, I hope I'm wrong though. The game looks breathtaking.

      --

      "To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit." -Stephen Hawking

    3. Re:my predictions for WoW by fireduck · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The gamers are going to breeze through all of WoWs content upon its release in a very short amount of time, and become bored rather quickly.

      while its true that blizzard has rapid fans (who do strange things like getting lvl 50 characters in D2 within 4 days), I think Blizzard is aware of this.

      Sure, people breezed through D2, but did they stop playing? No. That's the beauty of the game. You finish the quests, but your now in pokemon land where you "gotta catch 'em all" when it comes to set items, rare items, crafted items, etc.

      I imagine WOW will be the same way. Sure the content designers will probably find that some people have used up all the quest content, but there'll be something else in there to artificially keep the player interested.

    4. Re:my predictions for WoW by frenchgates · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you are right, that the kind of people who play MMORPGs now will play so obsessively and efficiently that they breeze through the content, this may not matter. There is an untapped market waiting to be exploited.

      I was an early beta tester of the original EQ and as it developed it became abundantly clear that, as an adult with a job and a wife, I would never be willing to put the in the time the game required to progress satisfactorily in levels. The time commitment, especially of repetitive activities in the same zones was far too high.

      I have been waiting for an MMORPG to come around that has two qualities: most of the time spent in the game is fun, and that I can play a few hours a week and feel I'm making progress. This game seems to fulfill those things. In this over-scheduled age we live in, I bet there are a lot of potential MMORPG players like me. The game that hooks them will make a lot of money.

      --
      Syntax error: loose != lose, affect != effect, then!=than
    5. Re:my predictions for WoW by Rallion · · Score: 1

      He says the quests take anywhere from a half-hour to a week.

    6. Re:my predictions for WoW by Rallion · · Score: 1

      Well, I don't know if you've played Diablo II since they released 1.10, but man, now solo in Act 4 Hell IS impossible. MUCH harder. They adapted to the players in that case, they've learned to do it now, and it would be easier to implement in a MMO game. I have confidence that if, though I doubt this, the game's not balanced, they'll fix it. It's more important in this case, and they know it. Diablo II was a mindless hack-n-slash, essentially.

  2. Another new mmporg by Osmosis_Garett · · Score: 1

    From the information that has been released about WoW and from what I've heard about from alpha testers, the graphics are fabulous but there is nothing much new here. The same problems exist as they do in other mmporg games: level treadmill, convoluted classes unable to compare to the uber classes, poor to no PvP, and a never ending quest for the uber item. I fully expect Blizzard to deliver a beautiful world to play in for a while, but this is still a first generation mmporg.

    1. Re:Another new mmporg by Liquidrage · · Score: 4, Insightful

      convoluted classes unable to compare to the uber classes

      This is not true. Blizzard has put in a small number of classes compared to most similar games. There are no true hybrids that will always fall short of a warriors tanking for example. Instead, their Paladin, while having some ability to tank, is like a Diablo II palidan. They have auras. So in large group environments, the pali isn't some half assed tank that can't get an invite, it's an aura machine that chips in some melee damage.
      There's no monk or compete with the rogue for less tanking + better meele damage king. Instead, there's just the rogue.
      Casting classes are similar.

      It's a great move by Blizzard because it solves the problem you mention where a subset of classes are better then the rest at the endgame situation.


      poor to no PvP

      This is not a problem unless you want PvP. It might not suit your tastes, but it seems that based upon past games, most people want nothing to do with full-time PvP. Sure, you can say "well just no games done PvP right". But I'm sick of hearing that. Just admit, no game will ever get it right. It just isn't natural in a MMORPG. How many times did Frodo die in the trilogy? Thats right, none. In PvP player death rates are always 50%, where as in PvM, they more fit the genre since the player dies probably on average less then 95% of the times.
      Also just isn't a twitch game, so PvP outcomes are based on luck and pre-determined characteristics (level, items, class, etc) instead of skill.

      You're more then entitles to want PvP of course, but I don't see their version of PvP as a problem, infact I see their system as a strength. I'd hate it to be another game that tried to shove the concept of PvP down our throats. PvM, thats where the the focus is and should be.

    2. Re:Another new mmporg by KDan · · Score: 3, Interesting

      PvP can make the game significantly more interesting, so long as it's done right. An implementation similar to real life is actually probably the best. ie:

      - if you attack another player, you're "flagged" for a period of time (say 30 minutes) so that for that time you have to stay in the game, and if you quit or get disconnected it's as if you'd just got killed (with whatever losses of equipment or xp as usual), and if you get hunted down by your victim or their friends in that time they can kill you.
      - if you attack someone who's flagged you don't get flagged, even if they were flagged by someone else.
      - if you walk into a regulated area while flagged (eg into town), the local militia will come after your ass.

      A lot of areas don't need to be the 'deserted by the law' type - enough to ensure that those who do get to such deserted places actually know that they could get attacked by some random lunatic and take their precautions (keep an eye out, ready to recall if a suspicious character just happens to wander by, or a strong enough party to be able to handle such an event). The pkiller flag, especially if it's visible (eg by a dark halo around your head or something) makes it quite an investment to attack someone - because if anyone else sees you in the next, say, half an hour, they know they can attack you and kill you without getting a flag, if they think they're stronger than you.

      The trick is, basically, to make it an expensive action to attack someone. Just like in real life, it should not be something you do casually, it should cost you - in this case, no visit to regulated areas for a while, and shiny "hit me" target aroudn your head - so that basically you don't want to be meeting anyone stronger than you whom you can't trust.

      The only times such a system gets out of hand is if there are a significant number of very high-level players who band together and decide to exploit it. Enter horror scenes like the evil clan taking over the fountain in the middle of the city, slaughtering all the guards, and requiring newbies to pay to get water from the fountain! But those should be rare enough to warrant intervention from the game moderators (and with an appropriate punishment the first time - eg demotion of all the involved characters to half their level and loss of all eq), it probably won't happen a second time.

      So the result of such a system for the non-pker (like me) is that you know when you're safe, and you know when you're not, and when you're not safe you always have this little edge thinking "what if a bastard walks here and attacks me" and you're on the edge of your seat a little more. It makes the game more interesting.

      Daniel

      --
      Carpe Diem
    3. Re:Another new mmporg by Dachannien · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Just admit, no game will ever get it right.

      DAoC got pretty damn close.

    4. Re:Another new mmporg by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There should also be a penalty for attacking somebody vastly weaker than yourself. To modify your example, make the length of time the pkiller flag stays on you proportional to the differences in your rank. Then, make them consecutive, rather than concurrent.

      Then, possibly, remove penalties for being killed by somebody vastly stronger than yourself. If a level 30 decides to go newbie hunting, don't punish the poor newbies. Or, just require a certain parity in relative power to even have the option of attacking another player.

      Or, make a 'sanctioned' PvP arena, where you can challenge somebody to combat to the death; if they accept, a time and duelling rules are agreed upon, and the two people (or all the combatants; make team capabilities) are transported to the arena, and can safely kill one another.

      As long as you keep track of duels, you can easily identify 'professional duellers,' (hell, make some bloodsports, at that point) and flag somebody to refuses to duel for a while, just for fun. Part of the agreed upon rules would be the penalties for losing the duel; anything from forfiture of certain items, level reductions, or even a 'I whupped SoAndSo in a duel' souvenier item.

      A duel can be postponed once, for no more than 48 hours, without penalty, or disconnected during, once. When the duel is agreed upon, an alternate time is agreed upon; if you disconnect from the first duel, you'd better show at the second one, or you automatically lose.

      Killing somebody in a duel, of course, doesn't get you an automatically negative flag.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    5. Re:Another new mmporg by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      The only times such a system gets out of hand is if there are a significant number of very high-level players who band together and decide to exploit it. Enter horror scenes like the evil clan taking over the fountain in the middle of the city, slaughtering all the guards, and requiring newbies to pay to get water from the fountain! But those should be rare enough to warrant intervention from the game moderators (and with an appropriate punishment the first time - eg demotion of all the involved characters to half their level and loss of all eq), it probably won't happen a second time.

      Actually, the best way to handle something like that is for the mods to send an in-game response--a new quest to kill the perp's characters, some powerful NPCs, or a new "angel" type monster to come and kill those who upset the balance.

      The biggest bug I've got about MMORPGs is that they don't allow for player expansion.

    6. Re:Another new mmporg by Liquidrage · · Score: 1

      DAoC is RvR which is actually pretty much what WoW is doing.

      As I mentioned, virtually no one wants full-time PvP.

      My problem with DAoC is they went too far, making to much of the end game meant to revolve around the RvR conflicts as opposed to better PvM end game content.

      My hope for WoW is that the end game still revolves around PvM, but the RvR gameplay is there as a mid/end-game option for when you want a change of pace.

    7. Re:Another new mmporg by Imperial+Tacohead · · Score: 1

      To me, it seems like such an event wouldn't warrant DM intervention at all, with the possible exception of creating a new quest to bring back the skulls of the perps. I mean, c'mon, this is supposed to be roleplaying (at least in theory) -- let the guys who want to be thugs be thugs, and the guys who want to be heroes be heroes! So often these games are devoid of meaningful character interaction, and yet the rules always seem to be set up specifically to prevent this sort of thing from happening.

    8. Re:Another new mmporg by Colazar · · Score: 3, Informative
      In my opinion, this is one of the things that Shadowbane got right. There is a small newbie area with no PvP, and 3 safehold cities with no PvP. Everywhere else, anyone can kill anyone. At any time, for any reason.

      But...

      The penalties for dying are few. And you get full information on the person who killed you, and their guild.

      So if you've been griefed you just round up your guild (and maybe some others) and go after them. Maybe right then, maybe later. Pretty soon, respectable guilds don't put up with loose cannons. And PK guilds end up seeing a lot of combat...which is what they wanted anyway.

      For the first several months, there were some things that got out of hand, but now there are some real community "norms" set up. Guilds that go beyond those eventually get slapped down. The self-policing aspect actually works. (However, you *have* to join a guild. Otherwise you have no one to police on your behalf. But there's plenty of choice there.)

      There are plenty of things about Shadowbane that are broken. It's sad to me that this part of things, which actually works well, will probably be ignored by future designers, because of all the other things that went wrong with the game.

      --
      He decided to just watch the government, and kind of scale it down to size, and run his life that way. --Laurie Anderson
    9. Re:Another new mmporg by d3kk · · Score: 1
      This is not a problem unless you want PvP. It might not suit your tastes, but it seems that based upon past games, most people want nothing to do with full-time PvP. Sure, you can say "well just no games done PvP right". But I'm sick of hearing that. Just admit, no game will ever get it right. It just isn't natural in a MMORPG.

      Right. I played on a PvP server in Everquest for two years, and there's no way I would have been there that long without it. Having to worry about being attacked when traveling through hostile areas, or having to compete with other guilds makes the game interesting. I can't imagine playing a MMORPG for longer than a few months when the only thing to do is kill NPCs.

    10. Re:Another new mmporg by Trillan · · Score: 1

      The latest expansion, Trials of Atlantis, adds a lot of other higher level content.

  3. Restricted Zones are not a Issue by Bruha · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Trust me in a few weeks SWG is going to have a Imperial Crackdown and us Rebels will be in a bit of a hurt... Do I care? Not really gives me more imps to kill. And there has been no uproar from the Rebel playerbase or neutrals about it as it's really a part of the game.

    GameSpy needs to understand that irresponsible reviews like this really are not helpful to the players or the company. I would not expect a alpha build (I have played alphas and betas of many MMO's) to have much in the way of custom modifications of characters becuase alpha's are focused on gameplay which is far harder to debug than putting a beard on a dwarf.

    Futhermore if anyone reads books about Dwarves and Elf's then they might understand that the two races that once were welcome as friends are much more wary of eachother in many of those books. Even Legolas and Gimli were not overly fond of eachother at their first meeting.

    And Blizzard please keep up the hard work. If you want a proper review of your game there are a few dozen of us that are waiting over at Wow Warcry.

    Lewt
    Warcry News Network
    http://www.warcry.com
    http://wow.warcry. com

    1. Re:Restricted Zones are not a Issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Futhermore if anyone reads books about Dwarves and Elf's then they might understand that the two races that once were welcome as friends are much more wary of eachother in many of those books. Even Legolas and Gimli were not overly fond of eachother at their first meeting.

      Actually, a much better example from Middle Earth would probably be Thranduil versus Thorin and the "Erebor reclamation squad". Thorin had no love whatsoever for the Mirkwood elves, and the elves felt the same way about the dwarves - They threw them in prison first chance they got. There was practically open war between them after the defeat of Smaug, which is why Thorin threatened to (and did) send for reinforcements from Iron Hills.

    2. Re:Restricted Zones are not a Issue by antin · · Score: 1

      I don't think it was an irresponsible review at all - reading it actually got me more psyched about the game than I was before.

      I agree that the character customization gripe is fairly minor, however regarding the racially restricted zones gamespy merely indicated that it could be a source of frustration. I tend to agree. I will be playing with other friends in the game (real world friends) and I will get very annoyed if I am prevented from grouping with them due to these restricted zones.

      I am guessing that the restricted zones will be fairly limited, but I can certainly understand why gamespy thinks it could be an issue. In any case I am glad that Blizzard will have the concern brought to their attention at this point, rather than after release.

  4. Hrmm by acehole · · Score: 1

    I wonder if this will be the same as everquest, fondly referred to as "evercrack" because of its addictive nature.

    I can see this most likely is, I've even had some interest in this game and I know the evils that everquest hides... like the whole unwashing and staying up for 24 hrs or longer to get an item.

    Do these things come with a warning about the addictiveness?

    --
    Be you Admins? nay, we are but lusers!
    1. Re:Hrmm by Rallion · · Score: 1

      I do that in single player games.

      I am doomed.

  5. You Gotta Breeze Pretty Fast by Bruha · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Blizzard has claimed that WoW will have more content than Asheron's Call (original) at launch than AC has today. I've played AC for 2 years and never touched on 10% of the content there was just that much.

    Considering that AC vs Warcraft though you have to understand that Warcraft's world has been around since the late 90's and has plenty of lore and history to build on. AC they're still building the story on a monthly basis. This was one strenght of Galaxies also being that the story has been around in this case for ages and thus they can spend more time on content than working on the timelines.

    More history always makes it easier to put in more content.

    Still have to see what content they do put in vs what should be there already.

  6. yet another leak? by Dreadlord · · Score: 2, Funny

    any plans of sending this alpha build to ATI for testing? I really want to play the game now :/

    --
    The IT section color scheme sucks.
    1. Re:yet another leak? by DrxLecter · · Score: 1

      The alpha has been leaked.

  7. I rather like the *lack* of customization options by Liquidrage · · Score: 5, Interesting

    EQ was like this as well early on. You got the ability to "stand out" and look different by earning it. You got different weapons, different armor. Standing out was an accomplishment in itself.

    There is nothing wrong with this approach, and I hope they don't submit to the "we want everything handed to us" crowd.

    Too many games of late hand you this early on. Easily dyed armor, zillions of look combinations (that get covered up by armors anyways).

    I remember in EQ beta seeing the people from earlier beta's and they stood out. They had chain or plate armor. They had robes who's origins I could only guess at. Weapons I dreamed about. It made me want to level, to go to new areas, so I could look "cool" too.
    I'm not some mad powerleveler or Ebay-er of items. But I am a big item-collector. It's a huge part of the game for me. And when games minimalize an items ability to make you stand out, they are taking away a large part of the fun for me.

    Months from now, when a vast array of items flood the world, they can add more customization options. But from the get go, let us have the fun of exploring a new world and let us have the fun of earning our place in that world.

  8. Multi Drops by calebtucker · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I don't think I like this:

    The best example of this smart looting system was what Kaplan called the "Melvin's head" system. One of the most awkward moments in any MMO is players waiting for a spawn because each of them are on the same quest ("Bring me Melvin's head!") Players in that situation can be reluctant to group because only one of them will be able to get Melvin's head. World of Warcraft, though, supports multi-drops. This basically means that every member of the group on the quest will be able to pick up one copy of Melvin's head once he's dead. This encourages social interaction and grouping since nobody's worried about having to fight over the rewards.

    Competition is good for a MMOG. Sure, it got ridiculous in EQ, but there's got to be a balance somewhere.. it's not good to just give everyone in the group the drop.
    --
    My sig can beat up your sig.
    1. Re:Multi Drops by Rallion · · Score: 1

      Well, you need to look at the worst case scenario. Three people need Melvin's head. One gets it, runs off. Ten minutes later, another gets it, runs off. Somebody else comes along, gets it, runs off. Three fays later guy #3 is still trying to get the damn head.

      Maybe he's just slow, maybe he has a bad connection or system. That doesn't sound fun to me.

      When you're playing Diablo II in a group and never ever get a single damn item in 5 Baal runs, you understand how much of a problem these things can be.

    2. Re:Multi Drops by calebtucker · · Score: 1

      Hm, now that I think about it, it wouldn't be too bad for everyone in the group to get Melvin's head iff it's sufficiently difficult to get Melvin's head. I'm just worried about everyone in WoW having items such as these.

      Anyone play shadowbane? It was a bit too easy to get "rare" items. There was a timed spawn (~3 hours?) and the guys would *always* drop the item. People would say "mob X is dropping rune Y in 45 minutes... I better got over to the spawn.".

      --
      My sig can beat up your sig.
    3. Re:Multi Drops by Rallion · · Score: 1

      The multi drops are ONLY for quest items. Not great items you want to keep.

    4. Re:Multi Drops by Dachannien · · Score: 1

      This is similar to doing quests in DAoC, where if multiple people have started a quest, then they can group up and complete the quest at the same time by performing the required task once.

      So, it's really nothing new.

    5. Re:Multi Drops by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      You missed the point of shadowbane then. The point wasn't to make an impossibly long PvE cycle- it was to encourage PvP. The timed spawns means if you wanted that rune, you better be prepared to fight for it. It added fun to the game.

      Personally, I think 3 hour spawns for anything in an MMO is way too long. Killing a guy once is fine. Having to kill him 50 times to get a rare is fucking boring.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
  9. Something about beta? by JVert · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm a big blizzard fanboy but this quote is quite unnerving."We do not anticipate that our player housing system will ship with the initial product."
    Golly I renember we were talking about what constitutes beta? Maybe not having all the features?
    At the very least i'm going to wait for at least this feature to be added before I buy in. Dangit blizzard come on you've taken along time with this and we've all said "OK, your pacing yourself so you get everything done right? not like these other guys?" 'sure sure'.

    1. Re:Something about beta? by Rallion · · Score: 1

      If you're a big Blizzard fanboy, you should be used to it, honestly. They're very ambitious with their games, which is fantastic. But even for them it gets to a point where it's better to just release the game, and add in new things later. StarCraft had a major patch that added tons of things. Diablo II just had one too. Fan complainsts about announced features not making it into release is the main reason they've gotten more tight-lipped over the years.

    2. Re:Something about beta? by truffle · · Score: 1

      MMOs are not like traditional design and ship games. With a design and ship game, you generally aim for having all content done, so the game will sell as many copies as possible.

      With an MMO, you plan to release a complete enjoyable game, and continually add new content. This content takes many forms, including new game features, like player housing.

      It's perfectly reasonable for Blizzard to release a non-core feature, like player housing, after the initial release. It would be unreasonable to release a core feature, like the zones for hunting from levels 25-35, after release.

      --

      ---
      I support spreading santorum
  10. Sad, but true... by midifarm · · Score: 1
    I personally know a guy that sold his company, left his wife and plays EQ all day long! I managed to meet him at a Vikings pregame party where he was pasty and kinda resembled Gollum. His whole life is online. There's a company here in the twin cities that delivers groceries to your house (even produce) and he takes full advantage of it all. I am rather scared that one can exist like this.

    Peace

  11. Arena by midifarm · · Score: 1
    Or perhaps a Colliseum? Or maybe jousting festivals or something? I think a really cool idea, though probably tough to do, would be to set some sort of trigger once you start killing other players. For example, once you kill a few people, the townspeople begin to talk and lore about that specific character grows and possibly into legend status. This way the game storyline can grow exponentially as far as lore and myth.

    Hey how about this? The local magistrates can post bounties and those killed can post rewards for returned items etc. It might make those uber characters that feel it necessary to champion the weak, to become bounty hunters and new quests can develop out of that. Nothing like good old vengence and vigilante justice!

    Besides the failsafe would be built into the game itself in that triggers would be tripped to allow the killing of these rogue players. Ah the fun that can be had!

    Peace