Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Reviewers Pile On World Of Warcraft Beta

Posted by simoniker on from the best-game-evah dept.

Thanks to GameSpy for its 'Pile On!' feature discussing Beta impressions so far on Blizzard's long-awaited MMO title, World Of Warcraft. Reactions range from the effusive ("I'm more convinced than ever that this game may finally be the first truly mass-market MMO") through the delighted ("I'm... completely in love with World of Warcraft"), to the ecstatic ("World of Warcraft delivers just what people are expecting: a tight, fun MMOG from a trusted developer.") Elsewhere, a WorldOfWarcraft.com forum discussion has a Blizzard representative mentioning release estimates of early this summer are likely wrong: "Definitely not July. As you know, we never set release dates, but you can expect the beta to run for another 5+ months." But, more importantly, does anyone _not_ like World Of Warcraft?

12 of 104 comments (clear)

  1. I don't by sinergy · · Score: 0, Insightful

    I think there are some definite balance issues, in particular with the alliance classes.

    --
    ...
    1. Re:I don't by mog · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Insightful? The game is in beta phase. One of the main purposes of beta is to balance. Now admittedly, Blizzard has a history of having balance issues in the release version of its games, but that remains to be seen for World of Warcraft.

    2. Re:I don't by Godeke · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not even "old school" pen and paper RPGs are balanced when you look at distinct classes. Frankly, the issue of balance is usually an overreaction by the players. Having coded for Muds for many years, everyone wants the advantages of their class *plus* what everyone else has.

      Running a mud for some time, our technique for determining balance was pretty simple: capture the "time between levels" of the players. Simply log the play time between each level for each player, and number of player deaths during that time. Sort them out by level achived, race and class. A little bit of statistics will show any unbalanced classes pretty quickly. It will also show your better players: they will level any class faster than average.

      After doing this for a few years, we could calculate the level rates like clockwork. Yet, even with this "level playing field" the whining continued. My final realization: there is a level of "background whining" which reflects upon the players personality, not upon your game. Learn what this level is, and you only have to worry when the whining breaks that level.

      --
      Sig under construction since 1998.
  2. Where's OMM? by jvmatthe · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Someone need to kick Old Man Murray out of retirement. The video game world needs that hot, steaming cup of bile to wake it up from its gross, self-congratulatory stupor.

    Then we'd know if World of Warcraft was really worth its salt. And be entertained at the same time.

    --
    Curmudgeon Gamer: Not happy
  3. On the topic of balance... by Enrico+Pulatzo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I hope that Blizzard doesn't try to "balance" the game. Back in the day, if you chose to play a wizard in an RPG, you knew the road was gonna be tough, but you'd eventually get to throw fireballs. Nowadays, people complain day and night about the lack of balance in a game. Live isn't balanced, we're not all Zen masters, deal with it.

    1. Re:On the topic of balance... by (trb001) · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, there's tough and then there's downright, no fun to play, bad ideas in character balance. The first rule of game making is that anything that makes the game unfun or unplayable shouldn't be added. If there's a long road to an eventual goal that makes that long road well worth it, that's okay. If it's just tough and long because the game is based on strength and leprechauns are just naturally weak (no +15 str Leprechaun Biosuits), that's an issue.

      Off the top of my head, because I'm playing it now, look at the necromancer in Diablo 2. He starts off bloody weak and stays that way most of the way through the game. But the ability to summon oodles and oodles of minions as his stats go up, and the ability for those minions to become serious badasses is pretty cool. So you have a long road of watching your back and being careful, with the reward of being able to clear rooms full of baddies easily. Maybe not the best example, but certainly in the ballpark.

      --trb

    2. Re:On the topic of balance... by Planesdragon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I hope that Blizzard doesn't try to "balance" the game. ...

      The situation you described isn't unbalanced. It's just "time-balanced."

      "Game Balance" means "all of the players have roughly equal ammounts of fun." Usually, this translates to "all player choices mean roughly the same ammount of total 'power.'"

      Leaving MMORPGs and CRPGs aside, and getting back to pen & paper, imagine the game that doens't care about balance--five friends pick fighters, rogues, or wizards, which are all moderately balanced with each other, and then friend number six picks "uber cleric of d00m!", which lets him outclass everyone else.

      The game is unbalnaced, not because the cleric can do a lot or has the most power, but because it lets the player with the "uber cleric of d00m" do everything--and that means that he often will, meaning that he'll do more than anyone else--and he'll probably have more fun than anyone else.

  4. The flaws will not be in the game by SpittingTrashcan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Blizzard is very good at making games that are rock-solid, highly balanced, and immensely fun to play... alone. And the Beta is going to be a blast, at least at first, because everybody on it is overjoyed to be playing this lovely game with everyone else. Once the general public gets their hands on it, things may not be so pretty.

    How does Blizzard plan to handle griefing? Has anyone in the Beta tested the degree to which they can make other players miserable? This is where Old Man Murray's review of Asheron's Call was so helpful - it pointed out, with dramatic effectiveness, that it was quite possible to follow the rules of the game, not attack anyone, and still bug the hell out of other players. Until the general public - including the hackers, griefers, scammers, spammers, trolls, and general scum of the Internet - get in on this game, it won't be possible to truly evaluate the gameplay experience.

  5. Five Months of Beta? by Tofino · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Five months of beta mean a first-day-of-retail populace that includes two groups. First, the lucky, small percentage of people who will proceed to form cliques and keep their super-secret-squirrel knowledge of the best places to hunt, trade recipes, etc. to themselves, gaining levels and wealth in a very short period of time. And the vast majority that will enter the game, see these people, see all the content being solved by them on day two, and give up.

    Happened to a lot of people when FFXI went live in NA. Several people from the Vault boards quit the game because they felt it was impossible to establish any sort of level playing field. Sure, not everyone is going to feel competetive, but it's like taking someone who's just learned to play chess, and throwing him in a tournament. That person's hopes are going to be crushed, and it's unlikely they're going to see the better players as something to strive towards.

  6. Re:An Online game that allows breaks. by realdpk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You misread me, or I wasn't clear. I don't expect to be at the same level. I'd like to be able to play with my friends, regardless of the level difference.

    I understand I won't be as effective. In most games, you can play alongside higher level players, but you won't get any experience or any loot. There's no incentive to play with your friends if they're way up there in levels.

    In some games, like FFXI, the "penalty" for having different levels is extreme once you get 3 or 4 levels out. You could play 4 hours a day, but if your friend plays 5, you won't be able to play alongside them (unless you don't mind letting the gap widen even further). I think that is the problem.

  7. Re:Why some people turn away by JavaLord · · Score: 2, Insightful

    One of the largest point that seems to stick against people who I game with is that there doesn't seem to be any PVP. I can see it being implemented, but it's just not the competitive game that most people I game with want. Of course, the people I game with are in no case any type of standard or majority, so our opinions don't really count.

    You and your friends might not be the standard majority of people playing MMO's now, but the majority of regular video game players would want PvP in an MMO if they were to play them. MMO's are a niche market right now, filled with players who would rather socialize and play PvE than PvP. The vast majority of online games, and games in general have player vs player modes rather than 2 player co-op.

    The first MMO that crosses over into "mainstream" will have PvP.

  8. Re:One thing I hate about Blizzard games... by jcoleman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Where does the staircase of other games end? Nirvana? Complete happiness? All-knowing-ness? Did Jesus come back to Earth when you finished Super Mario? Did fireworks go off when you beat Legend of Zelda? Was world peace achieved when you finished GTA3?

    Games are all about the fun you have while you're playing them. When they're not fun anymore, stop playing them and give them to me. :)