Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Role Playing (Games)

MMORPGs And Franchises 70

Posted by Zonk from the not-as-catchy-as-d&d dept.
MMORPG.com has an interesting piece on major franchises and their relation to massive games. They take a look at the question of whether or not virtual worlds are appropriate venues for IPs. From the article: "It's precisely because of that 'famous world' that we run into trouble. The more famous it is, the higher the expectations that players put on it. This leads to the developers having less and less flexibility in the way that their world is built, the rules that they choose to use, and the content that makes the game interesting."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

MMORPGs And Franchises More

MMORPGs And Franchises

Comments Filter:
  • ... you might not know me but I buy your product and pay a monthly fee for accounts.

    I like your game a lot, I feel the virtual reality that you provide to be satisfying. In fact, I left reality on June 8th, 2003 when you launched your first server. Since then, I have preferred destroying for endless hours day after day and on multiple occasions have, as a result, been accused of being a scripted bot by a game master.

    I appreciate you trying to make changes to the game ... but, well, with the lat
    • "Yeah, it's farfetched. But I believe that was indicative of the outburst when Star Wars Galaxies was changed for the betterment of the game in the eyes of Sony Entertainment Online and Lucasfilm."

      Changed for the better?

      Look at all the empty servers. SWG probably doesn't even have 100K paying subs left. It had 300K a little more than a year ago.

      It doesn't matter if the game is "better" if the paying customers don't agree and quit giving them money.

      Oh, and there are at least 3 pre-CU (SWG Publish 14.1 or e
      • Thank's to Sony's creative "Station Pass" subscription system, they can fudge the statistics on all their MMORPGs and other games. With a station pass, you have access to SWG and EQ and EQ2, so depending upon the whims of their public relations department, they can attribute EQ2 customers as SWG subscribers. IOW, SWG subscriptions are growing in leaps-and-bounds*.

      • They have EQ1 and EQ2 for adult players, MXO for the Matrix fan, and SW:G for the people who loved community and crafting.

        What did they have for the kids? Nothing! So SW:G and its 'sandbox' became SWG:G-NGE, perfect for porting to Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 and Nintendo Revolution, and the kids could be Luke or Leia or Obiwan or whatever.

        The article points out that, in licensed properties, the player can at best only be a bit player in the story of the world, since whenever they and a licensed character are
      • You clearly did not even read what you quoted. Go back and read it again. Star Wars Galaxies was changed for the betterment of the game in the eyes of Sony Entertainment Online and Lucasfilm. This was clearly not him thinking it was changed for the better, but that the "change" was thought to be for the best of the game in the eye os SOE and LucasFilms.

  • MMORPGs and Franchises (Score:3, Interesting)

    by RogueyWon ( 735973 ) * on Monday January 30, 2006 @04:26PM (#14601058) Journal
    OK, this is a tricky one. On the one hand, new MMORPGs are only generally going to succeed if they can draw in an audience from outside of the existing MMORPG player pace. With the amount of investment needed to get anywhere in a MMORPG, most players tend to stay loyal to a single game for a long time and getting them to switch is hard. Franchises are a great way of doing this.

    On the other hand, a rigid franchise doesn't always sit well in an open ended context. Galaxies, in particular, suffered from being squashed into a particular spot in a particular, well developed time-line. Basic changes that were needed to make the gameplay work clashed with the requirements of the franchise.

    Personally, I think the best balance occurs when you get a reasonably open-ended franchise, which sets the scene and brings a fan-base with it, but has no particular plot committments. Final Fantasy XI and World of Warcraft are probably the best examples and are, of course, among the most successful MMORPGs around.

    • Re:MMORPGs and Franchises (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Final Fantasy XI and World of Warcraft are probably the best examples and are, of course, among the most successful MMORPGs around.

      No, WoW is a good example. FFXI is a terrible example.

      First off, WoW. It's based on a universe, in which there is a lore set up. It's been followed by a "focused" story line based on certain characters. Now, WoW has it easier than, say, Harry Potter (it was suggested in the article) because WarCraft was always designed as a game universe. However I think that WoW proves tha
      • FFXI not being successful outside of Japan is rubbish. Just one of those typical FUDs that seems to fly around on slashdot sometimes. The game has a player-base in the 500-600k range, split roughly 40/40/20 between Japan, the US and Europe. Sure, that's not on the WoW level of success, but most other MMORPGs, including Star Wars Galaxies, both Everquests, Eve Online etc would kill for that kind of player base.
      • However I think that WoW proves that it may at least be possible to create a good Star Trek MMORPG game: again, a lot of lore, single universe, many main characters so it's a relatively "unfocused" story.

        When's the last time you watched a Star Trek show? Theres at LEAST three different time periods a Star Trek MMO could take place in, each with with its own different quirks (Enterprise would have to be very strategic due to low tech and slow engines at the time, original Star Trek would be focused more on

      • FFXI's universe is NOT based on any previous universe.

        You're right. It's not based on a previous universe any more than any previous FF game is based on any other FF game.

        The common elements are fun, true. The Chocobos, Moogles, Airships, Cid, Omega Weapon, and so on, are all fun when you play a new FF game after playing an old one. But they are not what draws people back.

        It's the franchise, not the universe. FF is a known quantity, and has been known to be good for a long time. Whenever you pick up a

  • How can they totally leave out WoW? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by jchenx ( 267053 ) on Monday January 30, 2006 @04:35PM (#14601165) Journal
    Okay, I read the article, expecting them to mention World of Warcraft at some point. It's based on some very popular IP, being the whole Warcraft universe (the subject of 3 RTS games already, and a number of novels). But they didn't. That's just a huge oversight.

    Yeah, the Warcraft universe isn't comparable to Star Trek, Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, or Harry Potter, since they came from different media, but you can't argue that the Warcraft IP didn't exist or that it wasn't very popular. Yet Blizzard found a way to keep the lore intact AND build a hugely successful MMORPG at that.
    • I think you've missed the point. WoW is based on the Warcraft franchise which is wholly envisioned and developed by Blizzard. It's not a third-party interpretation, and Blizzard can do no wrong, in the minds of the fans. Mostly. Obviously, if Lucas can sh*t on _Star_Wars_, Blizzard could potentially screw over Warcraft, but the benefit of the doubt is given to Blizzard until they do something so utterly insane as to immediately cut any ties of loyalty their fans feel. But the fact remains that Blizzard
      • Okay, that makes sense then. The article just talks about "major franchies", and doesn't make the distinction between those made by the existing IP owner (like Blizzard and WoW), and those made by separate companies (Star Wars, Star Trek, etc.). Or at least I missed it while skimming the article. I can definately see the differences there.
    • The "it belongs to a third party and Lucas made us do this and that" aspect has been mentioned, but I still can't shake the feeling that Lucas made better films than Sony made a game based on it. Yes, episodes 1 to 3 included.

      For all his ever-changing visions, and all his later getting on a stupid quest to undo the very good-vs-evil foundation of his universe (the jedi weren't apparently all that good and noble, and the sith were just the other sect according to episodes 1-3), Lucas started from scratch and
  • Jon Wood: There are a number of flaws in the concept of companies developing MMORPGs based on major pre-existing franchises. I can clearly see why it is done. It creates a pre-made customer base and almost guarantees a strong launch. Unfortunately, from a gamer point of view, these games are doomed to fall short. All you have to do is look at game like "Star Wars: Galaxies", which has been on the receiving end of a never-ending barrage of criticism because the game doesn't live up to the epic expectations of either Star Wars fans, or MMORPG fans.


    I still don't understand how Star Wars got the first choice as an MMORPG. While the books create an expansive universe, only the hardcore fans are familiar with it. This guy has the right idea:

    Dana Massey: It is the responsibility of developers to pick IPs that has fans as excited about the worlds as the individual stories; which is to say appropriate worlds for development. Perpetual Entertainment's choice of Star Trek has that potential.


    Amen. All the way back in 1996 I was contemplating the idea of Star Trek combat. Nearly all the Star Trek action games to date had failed miserably, but always because they tried to simplify the controls down to a flight simulator. What you need are actual officers sitting in each position, giving the commands, firing from tactical, flying from the conn, etc. i.e. You'd need a staff of about 4 people on each ship, linked up via the Internet, and able to hear each other speak. The idea seemed sound enough.

    Then I considered the matter of away team missions. Why not add in an FPS mode where you could explore a planet, fight with a Gorn, or wage all-out-war with the Dominion. At the time this seemed like an unrealistic idea. But as the idea of MMORPGs started to take off, the idea seemed more and more appealing. I think the technology would now be able to make it happen. You'd need some sort of command structure, but such a game could recreate the experience of being in the Star Trek Universe. It seems so obvious, that I'm surprised that no one has picked up on it until now.

    Another game that needs a chance was the failed Wing Commander: Privateer MMORPG that was being worked on. If there was ever a more perfect Universe for a SciFi MMORPG, I haven't seen it. It's got dog-fights, trading, sub-plots, factions, everything! In fact, if you add multiplayer to the original game, you've pretty much got an awesome MMORPG! Unfortunately, EA pulled the plug on it after they screwed up the Wing Commander series with their lackluster Prophecy. With the renewed interest in the Privateer Remake [solsector.net], you would think that EA would be chomping at the bit to get back into the market. Go figure.

    • I've seen suggestions along these lines a couple of times now from a variety of sources. The one thing that leaps to mind for me is that, while the theory of MMORPGs allows for bridge crew, federation command, and away teams, the reality of the masses of ORPG players tends to not work quite so well.

      I played Anarchy Online as a paying customer for about 2.5 years. The org I was in was great and had people who'd played from the begining, but we routinely ran into problems when trying to get teams set up t

      • I partly addressed your concerns here [slashdot.org], but yeah, there's a lot of issues that need to be worked out. Crew rotations could help significantly (i.e. your team is larger than you need for a mission, allowing you to pull from who's available), but you need to make sure that everyone always has something to *do*. It wouldn't be easy to pull off, but it is possible. :-)

      • I think the best way to handle a MMORPG of this sort is to keep the crew-size to a handful, such as in Joss Whedon's Firefly. Gameplay should be mission-based with facilities to help put together a crew (pilot, medic, engineer, grunt, trader) appropriate to an available mission (salvage, delivery, bounty, exploration, etc).

        Player's could eventually own their own ships, but to start out they would be requisitioned one for a one-time use with each mission, similiar to how some truck drivers earn a living.

      • Well, here's a couple of thoughts:

        RE: playing different positions (engineering, tactical, helm), that could be covered by classes. You're a commander, you're an engineer, you're a pilot, etc. Per character, you'd be locked into a given role (just like traditional MMO's), and your pilot character couldn't take over the medical duties.

        RE: Who's in charge, if you're the commander class, you can captain a ship.

        The class of ship you can work on is dependant on your level, and perhaps on specific skills within
    • You'd need some sort of command structure, but such a game could recreate the experience of being in the Star Trek Universe. It seems so obvious, that I'm surprised that no one has picked up on it until now.

      In order to have some sort of command structure, you've got to make it an earned game mechanic, which means spending time progressing through the ranks. I don't think anyone wants to play Ensign Wesley Crusher in their spare time.
      • Why not? You don't actually have to play old whiz kid, just the guy manning the conn. I think it would be a lot of fun. :-)

        Of course, bitslinger_42 makes a good point that everyone will want to be a captain. Thus the only thing I can see is:

        1) Start everyone on ground-assault duty.
        2) Everyone vies for Starship duty as more and more ships are added to the game.
        3) Work your way up as Lieutenant on Conn or Ops, Lieutenant-Commander on Tactical, and finally Commander or Captain to run a ship or starbase.
        4) If y

        • Don't get me wrong, I like the sounds of the game, particularly the pseudo-reality of it, if there can be such a thing.

          Even with starting everyone on ground crew, there can be issues. First, and foremost, is the chicken/egg problem: if everyone's ground crew, who's the captain? If the captain is pre-seeded, then how do you remove him from such a post?

          The other problem is longevity. For the events to be useful and fun to the people who put the time, effort, and money into being promoted, the underling

          • Even with starting everyone on ground crew, there can be issues. First, and foremost, is the chicken/egg problem: if everyone's ground crew, who's the captain?

            No one. You start with no real ships online. People are just magically transported to planets where they have to earn their rank. Promotions would be quick in the early days as the Admiralty (i.e. the guys running the game behind the scenes) begin bringing ships online (i.e. adding new units to the game) and handing out promotions.

            If the captain is pr

            • The solution is Guilds.

              I can easily see guilds following a command structure. Yes, your average every day game player wouldn't follow orders unless he got some reward out of it, but guilds would definitely have the organization needed to pilot large ships. Captains would be guild leaders or else have some authority in the guild, while lower ranks would have little.

              The only problem you run into is solo players who like playing in a dynamic environment that a MMORPG allows, but aren't social enough to

        • I like it - nice idea.

          One interesting thing about your idea is that it provides a natural way to split the game down into what Blizzard would call "realms": one per ship or planet. There is never a situation where a realm needs to be in contact with more than a small number of other realms (when ships dock, for instance). Thus, the game universe will scale to any number of players just by adding more servers. I don't think WoW does this very well.. ideally, you want all players to be in the same universe, n

      • I don't think that a ranked military themed MMORPG (Star Trek or otherwise) would work. For one, I wouldn't want to play a game where I had to take orders from some 13 year old suburban idiot. I could see a multiplayer game where one person was the chief engineer, another was helmsman, etc. were you had short rounds of combat, that would actually be unique and fun. But how do you handle a game were people log on and log off all the time? What if the helmsman's girlfriend is demanding he spend time with her,

  • Well, of course (Score:3, Insightful)

    by muertos ( 570792 ) <jbeasley75.gmail@com> on Monday January 30, 2006 @04:41PM (#14601220) Journal
    Making a game in order to attract the fans of a particular offering, such as Jordan's _Wheel_of_Time_, say, has to follow the conventions as laid out in the source material or else the risk of alienating those same potential users becomes almost 100%. On the other hand, if you're looking to attract the fanbase of, say, _Star_Trek_, you have a lot more freedom. You either need a large enough space to work in, or a large enough timeline.

  • WoW (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Bonewalker ( 631203 ) on Monday January 30, 2006 @04:46PM (#14601264)
    Some good points about WoW have been made already. But, there is one reason and one reason only that WoW is huge: no pre-released, rush-to-meet-it launch deadline. And as far as I know, Blizzard has never done this. What do they do instead? They say "It'll be out when it is done. Not a day before." This attitude is what makes their games so fun. They actually make it good before they release it.

    Now some will argue that WoW was far from "done" when they released it, but that would be an asinine statement. All MMORPG's go through an initial struggle at launch because that is the first time real players, not the beta testers, get involved, and with millions more people checking it out, the glitches are bound to show up.

    But, I played WoW in beta, and am still playing it today, and while I do not agree with every change, or even necessarily their pace for patches and updates, I am quite satisfied with the game and happy to pay for it.

    • Re:WoW (Score:3, Interesting)

      by aredubya74 ( 266988 )
      Some good points about WoW have been made already. But, there is one reason and one reason only that WoW is huge: no pre-released, rush-to-meet-it launch deadline. And as far as I know, Blizzard has never done this. What do they do instead? They say "It'll be out when it is done. Not a day before." This attitude is what makes their games so fun. They actually make it good before they release it.

      Welllll, I wouldn't say never :) WoW itself had good base mechanics upon release, but only a small number of class
      • I'd venture to say that a good deal of this would have been avoided with a longer beta test cycle involving much more stress testing.

        As you point out yourself, they knew problems were there from the beta. The issue wasn't so much lack of testing-- they knew it would asplode-- but a lack of fixing. :)
    • Diablo 2 wasn't done when it was shipped, they had to create a patch so quickly after it went gold that the box had a note in it saying "please patch this game before you play it" Blizzard does take a long time on their games, but even they are not immune to releasing a game before it's ready.

  • Star Wars Franchise Notwithstanding (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mabu ( 178417 ) on Monday January 30, 2006 @05:11PM (#14601561)
    So this is the excuse that's being spread around the industry relating to the failure of SWG? That it was such a well-known franchise that customers had unrealistically high expectations and this led to its failure?

    Oh yea, very high expectations of a MMORPG that wasn't fundamentally changed and nerfed every few months. It's undoubtedly because of Star Wars' fame that players such as myself had such high expectations from the game: that it WORK; that it make sense to play it.

    Puleaze.

    It's all about the gameplay. The big companies still haven't figured out yet that most players really don't give a shit about derivative work. Granted, if you stick "The Matrix" on some title, there is a set amount of dingleberry-brained consumers who will buy it, but a MMORPG doesn't live by those rules in the long run.
    • It's all about the gameplay.

      You are so right. I bought the game on launch day and only lasted 2 months. It got to the point that they where nerfing you to uselessness and the entire game was just a massive grind. I have no great urge to grind my life away and pay for the privelege.
    • If MMORPGS were all about the gameplay then a rather small one known as Shadowbane wouldn't have died off so quietly (or at all). Let me explain In Shadowbane, UbiSoft paid a guy who goes by Meridian to write lore for them. They wanted an MMO because they felt that it would make a ton of money. So he did, and they came out with the classic swords, magics, barbarians and priests etc. that a lot of games do. But he also came out with a story mostly his own, and several different religions. So this sounds lik

  • From TFA, I think that Dana Massey has it spot on and Jon Wood is completely missing the point. The changes that have happened in Star Wars Galaxies have "supposedly" happened to make the game more "Star Warzy" (their term, not mine). The result has been to force players into a very narrow range of professions apparently based on movie characters (such as my personal favorite, the medical droid who took care of Luke at the end of EpV).

    People used to be able to live out virtual lives in SWG, including takin

    • The problem with Star Wars Galaxies, (and fortuantely not with WoW), is that it's a licensed product first, and a game second... WoW, however, is a role-playing game first, and a Warcraft game 2nd...

    • Re:Living lives in an MMORPG (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Sage Gaspar ( 688563 ) on Monday January 30, 2006 @07:00PM (#14602660)
      It's because they implemented the license poorly and had no idea how to fix it. They needed to make the game more "Star Warzy" because they picked a time period where they could literally do nothing substantial with the major characters. Jabba and Han sat around chained to their theme parks all day handing out quests to retrieve power packs.

      One of their iconic classes, Bounty Hunter, had its iconic skill borked with no real PC bounties to hunt for god knows how long. Another, Smuggler, had (has) nothing to smuggle. Creature Handlers went from overpowered to useless and then to being omitted entirely. Jedi wavered between non-existent to flooding everything, trivial to kill, and then nearly impossible, and now back to trivial. I'm not even sure how the changes make things more "Star Warzy," it just prunes impotent classes and makes balancing trivial.

      Most damning of all, the "authentic" armor took a backseat to one and only one type of armor, composite, which I don't even recall seeing in the movies. Pistols and carbines took a backseat to rifles, martial arts, and mad scientists carrying bottles of disease.

      People who play a Star Wars game would want to see locations from the movies and some from the EU. Check. Exciting battles of Imperials vs. Rebels that have consequences. Failed. Exciting blaster fights, as opposed to armies of ninjas in composite chucking poison at each other. Failed. Smugglers smuggling, bounty hunters bounty hunting, creature handlers handling creatures. Failed. Exciting space battles. So-so... and implemented far too late into the development cycle.

      And this is not even discussing the incredible gameplay glitches, imbalances, and complete lack of content. None of this has to do with the Star Wars license, except the devs' poor decision about timeframe.
      • People who play a Star Wars game would want to see [...] Smugglers smuggling, bounty hunters bounty hunting, creature handlers handling creatures.

        Because after Han Solo and Boba Fett, everyone knows that the fat guy crying over the Rancor was the most awesome guy in the movies.

        • Hehe, that is the easiest example that comes to mind, but there are a lot of tamed animals in the movies. I think all six movies have someone riding exotic creatures or some sort of beast attacking (usually under someone else's direction). In my mind, Creature Handlers should be the ones taming the beasts and the only ones allowed to ride the exotic ones.

  • Star Wars Galaxies (Score:3, Interesting)

    by illuminix ( 456294 ) on Monday January 30, 2006 @05:55PM (#14602058) Homepage
    SWG was an awesome game at first. They killed it by changing the rules too many times. Shouldn't it be common sense that if you have something popular that a lot of people are enjoying, you can add to it, but don't drastically change it. SWG managed to survive one drastic change. The fanbase was up in arms, but gave them the benefit of the doubt. But then what do they do? Less than a year later they do another change that's twice as drastic. From a gameply perspective, the game isn't even hardly recognizeable. Removed all of the classes and skills and replaced them with something different, made huge changes to the combat system, then sat around wondering why everyone left. And people left. They left in droves, and it's now just a shell. The poster child of how not to run a mmorpg.

    If WoW did something similar, it would be a disaster. Thankfully, they're probably not that stupid.

  • One big problem I see with MMORPGs created from existing franchises, such as Star Wars, is that everyone wants to be Luke Skywalker, as it were. Nobody wants to be the Ugnaught who sifts thru garbage all day by a furnace in Bespin. Everyone wants to be the hero. Unfortunately, a good story only has room for a handful of them.

    • Re:One Problem (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Sage Gaspar ( 688563 ) on Monday January 30, 2006 @06:24PM (#14602358)
      That's not true. Bounty hunters, smugglers, pilots, imperial and rebel soldiers... there are a ton of professions referenced in the Star Wars universe that aren't Jedi Mastaz but would still make for exciting gameplay. Hell, the most dedicated players in the game were artisans and spent time stocking and decorating their stores.

      Had they just ruled out Jedi from the start or made them as rare as they claimed they were going to be, and then spent time fixing bugs and tweaking the other professions instead of futzing around with Force Sensitive systems, they would have had a killer game.

      Instead they had weak PvE, weak PvP, entire professions that were essentially useless, skill branches in almost every profession that were essentially useless, and horrible servers and bugs. It took them, what, over a year to fix not warping when you're in a sitting animation?

      The fact that people played the game as long as they did is a testament to the fact that a Star Wars game could definitely be a hit, if done correctly. Even if most people didn't know about the EU, it would be easy to make a game set after the movies with the weakened Imperials and the Rebels on even footing. There would be plenty of recognizable characters, uniforms, blasters, everything. Even a justification for having Jedi. As it is, they didn't even use the characters from the time period they chose. Vader, Han, Jabba... they were all just cardboard cutouts sitting in a shack in a random corner of some planet giving out missions to talk to someone and retrieve a battery. I think exploring Jabba's Palace as a hostile dungeon filled with those spider-brain monks would've been more exciting than having Jabba reduced to quest_npc_X.

      No, no, it's entirely the fault of the devs. This whining about working with existing franchises is a bunch of bullshit.
      • Bounty hunters, smugglers, pilots, imperial and rebel soldiers...

        Boba Fett, Han Solo, Wedge Antilles... more of the same problem.

        Blanking on the soldiers though. Everyone with a name was apparently an Officer or above. ;)
        • Not really. I don't see why you can't have players become as powerful as Boba Fett, Han Solo, or Wedge Antilles. None of them are superhuman, each just excel above average in their careers. Tracking a mark across planets to capture them for a bounty, maybe with a couple of the tools of the trade, would be plenty to let players capture the feel of Boba Fett. Smuggling cargo in a YT-1300 would be plenty to capture the Han Solo feel. Flying an X-Wing for the Rebellion pretty much sums up Wedge's contribution.
          • I wasn't defending the NGE (I thought it was shit before the change. Now it's just a joke), rather the problem of everyone wanting to be a hero/villain rather than a grunt being a problem with the MMO dynamic. If every smuggler is as able as Han or every Bounty Hunter can match Boba Fett, all you have are overpowered grunts, but not heroic.
    • That's not just a problem with licensed property, that's a problem with MMORPGs in general. EVERYONE wants to feel like the (or at least a) hero. That's wmy many people play escapist games in the first place. Yes, there are many people who occupy other "niches" in MMORPGs, (such as the "Crafters", for example, or others who play the game more for the social aspect than the achievement one) but by in large, when many people play games, they expect to be the hero.

      In single player games, this is not a probl
  • The mmorpg genre has great potential for creativity in story and exciting gameplay, and any restrictions are obviously a bad thing. Money, Time & Technology are already restrictions on the development of these games, franchises just add another level of creative restriction that shouldn't be needed. Marketing is an obvious boon from franchises, and the established base is enticing, but all that gives you is initial sales and doesn't indicate in the slightest if the game will prosper long term. Warcra
  • Apparently you can't even come up with something NEW and then franchise it off. EQ was popular enough to spawn it's own line of action figures, books and other assorted media. There's enough lore to fill an official Atlas, apparently! But when the franchise got it's second MMO... Well... I don't know a single person that currently plays it. And those that did at one point don't have anything positive to say.

    Is that a case of living up to the original or the "It just wasn't the same" concept that seems

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close