Warhammer Online Information by the Truckload
Last week Massively.com got the chance to head over to EA Mythic's Virginia lab to clock some hands-on time with Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning . As a result they were pumping out loads of review content, everything from hardcore PvP info to dungeon crawling to crafting. The culmination of all this hard work was a summary post with clickable navigation to all of their review resources. Definitely worth a look if you are at all curious about this upcoming behemoth.
the players have real agency. What's the point of being online with lots of people if everybody's quests are identical and no player's actions really impact the world at all? Maybe Warhammer will be the one to do that. Time will tell.
WoW hit the sweet spot for MMO's in that they made it challenging enough to keep hardcore types interested but easy enough for their casual friends to get into and experience quite a bit of the content with them. I'm hoping WAR can do the same thing and perhaps improve the experience a bit. WoW is starting to feel a bit long in the tooth and seems to have lost it's focus a bit. If WAR can deliver what WoW is missing before Blizzard gets out the next expansion, they could have the makings of a very successful launch.
Amen. It was a slap in the face when mythic made crafting easier and let everyone craft everything on the same character. It just said to the hardcore players who started playing in the beginning that we do not care about you anymore. Atlantis... well i have mixed feelings on that. It went from very hard and needing large groups to complete to needing only a 4-8 man group, or just RvRing the whole thing.
I smoked pot once. But I DID NOT inhale. Will you hire me?
They should first concentrate on what WOW did right. Looking for mistakes in WOW is going to devolve into being saddled down with personal nits. In other words if they look for what WOW did wrong they will not get a good picture simply because what was done wrong is so overshadowed by what went right.
I have nothing wrong with trying to make a better WOW, but you don't do that by trying to find out what is wrong with it. The only thing really wrong with WOW is that its size hobbles other companies trying to compete in the fantasy genre. If anything that size stifles others as VC money is more likely going to examine what happened to recent offerings like LOTRO and DDO and say "if they couldn't make a dent or sizable population what could?"
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
So, basically, they're trying to avoid what made WoW so successful? I'm sure they can ask the fine developers of Vanguard how well the plan went to avoid everything that made WoW fun.
:P
I mean, seriously, even Sony had to grudgingly give up and demote most NPCs from heroic (think "elite" in WoW lingo) to make it more soloable, plus give all classes enough firepower (e.g., via "heroic opportunities") to solo.
Now I'm not commenting on Warcraft Online specifically, since I don't have enough info for that. I don't know whether it will rule or suck.
But trying to avoid solo-MMO at this point is really a way to say, "nah, we're not giving the vast majority of players what they want." I just have to question why would anyone sane do that? Did they (and their publisher) take a vow of poverty? Or are they trying to not compete too hard with Blizzard? Or what?
Or it could be that they're smarter than that, after all, and just give a wrong impression.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
Personally I dunno where people got that definition that you must need a group to even go to the toilet, to be a "real" MMO.
The name just says "massively multiplayer", which strictly speaking means lots and lots of players on the same server.
The first "real" MMO was UO, so basically it means whatever Origin wanted it to mean. It had no such restriction.
Some people would argue that MMOs are really a continuation of MUDs, only this time with a graphical interface. And while I would personally call it a new genre anyway, or a convergence of two former genre, I see their point too: the first ones played a lot like a DIKU with graphics. MUDs had no such restriction either.
Basically I'm not disagreeing with anything you said. Quite the contrary. Just wondering where people got that idea.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.