Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Role Playing (Games)

WoW Expansion Sells 2.4 Million, New MMOG Planned 161

Posted by Zonk
from the that-is-a-lot-of-nerds dept.
Computer and Videogames is reporting that 2.4 Million copies of Burning Crusade were sold on the first day of retail sales. Those numbers are just for North American and the EU, too, which totally discounts any sales the box may have had in Asian markets. Even without our eastern brethren, that number pretty much destroys every other launch-day sales number for a PC game. Meanwhile, the same gent that teased us with the next StarCraft game has tossed out this bone as well: Blizzard's next MMOG 'won't be another WoW'. From the article: "'When we announce our next MMORPG it's not going to be another WOW--we're not a company that tends to tread the same ground,' he told British film magazine Empire. 'It'll be something innovative and new that really brings entertainment to another level.' American Blizzard reps declined to expand on Bassat's comments, although the fact that the company began hiring real-time strategy developers last summer might offer a clue." So ... another Blizzard MMOG. Huh.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

WoW Expansion Sells 2.4 Million, New MMOG Planned

Comments Filter:
  • Innovative (Score:5, Funny)

    by 0racle (667029) on Tuesday January 23, 2007 @01:28PM (#17725340)
    "'When we announce our next MMORPG it's not going to be another WOW--we're not a company that tends to tread the same ground,' he told British film magazine Empire. 'It'll be something innovative and new that really brings entertainment to another level.'
    Innovative. Not like when they released Warcraft 2 then 3 then a MMO based on Warcraft. It will be new, innovative just like the last time they got innovative.

    It will be Universe of Starcraft. New and innovative, never been done before.
    • by fishybell (516991) <fishybell@hotmaP ... om minus painter> on Tuesday January 23, 2007 @01:30PM (#17725384) Homepage Journal
      You're missing the real innovation: One company taking in vast amounts of money from two MMO games. It's brilliant!
    • Re:Innovative (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Gothic_Walrus (692125) on Tuesday January 23, 2007 @01:35PM (#17725472) Journal
      I'd say taking a franchise from RTS to MMORPG requires at least some innovation. Innovation doesn't necessarily require an entirely new setting; if the mechanics and the game itself change significantly (as did Warcraft), that could be enough on its own.w

      Besides, "MMO" doesn't entail the same thing as "MMORPG." If Blizzard were to release a Starcraft MMORPG, I suspect that it would cannibalize subscribers from WoW more than it would bring in new players. Since we don't know anything yet, why not have a little bit of faith?
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by NeutronCowboy (896098)
        Uh? All they did was take the Warcraft setting, slap on Diablo 2 mechanics, put up a persistent world, and presto - Wow! There was zero innovation in Wow. Though that was rarely Blizzard's claim to fame. Their strength is in very polished, very well thought out game mechanics with oodles of built-in variety.
    • I sincerely hope that the next Starcraft game is not a MMO. Starcraft is still my favorite Blizzard game because it was a delicious union of sci-fi coolness with three wildly unique races. Blizzard has talented designers, but I hate to see them ignore those of us who prefer real time strategy games. If they want to chase the money pot of another MMO, they should make one from Diablo since I don't care if they whore that franchise out. (Plus I think they'll just be stealing their own customers away from
      • "If they want to chase the money pot of another MMO, they should make one from Diablo since I don't care if they whore that franchise out."
        There's a really convincing argument. Because you (1 guy on the Internet) likes Starcraft, they should push a Diablo MMOG. Yeah, don't study the market and determine what has more potential or anything - that would be crazy!
      • by Thansal (999464)
        Well, the reason you are not seeing any RTS games from blizz recently is exactly what you said, they didn't want to steal purchaces of WCIII/WCIII:FT

        I am willing to bet we will see a new RTS comming out at some point, if it will be WCIV or SCII or something compleatly different, I dono.

        Admitedly what I would love to see is a combination of SC:Ghost and an MMO. My favorite type of game is MMOFPS, think Planetside, then make it not suck some how. And if any one can make an MMOFPS not suck, I am bettign it w
        • I agree that a Starcraft FPS would be awesome, but don't forget that Ghost got "indefinitely postponed". I feel like FPS fans are fewer in number than RTS fans, and they are certainly given more options to choose from. I'm also skeptical of the wisdom of moving so far from anything Blizzard has done before. However, I do think it would be interesting to see a MMORTS. No one has done that, and I think that tackling that project is something that suits Blizzard's strengths.
          • by Thansal (999464)
            Actualy there have been a few MMORTS games out there, of course I can't think of any names, and the only one I remember well never made it out of beta (it was an awsome game, baiscly you started with a plot of land on a planet, build up your resources and everything, then attempted to spread out).

            Either way, I would love to see an MMOFPS or MMORTS from Blizz. My reasoning is exactly opposite from yours. I LOVE it when Blizz gets up and does something they have never done before, hell if they stuck only wi
            • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

              by eclipser13 (839296)
              I think you're talking about 10six. It was shutdown, but revived as Project Visitor [wikipedia.org]
              • by Thansal (999464)
                My GOD you are a genius!

                My description was compleatly halfarsed and you hit the nail on the head!
            • Huh. I'd never heard of Project Visitor before or anything like it. Wikipedia has a half dozen other MMORTS games. Still, it would be sweet to see a company with the visibility of Blizzard move into the area.

              Your point about Blizzard is well made, except that I was thinking of their recent history (Diablo, Warcraft, and Starcraft.) Within these games, we see that Blizzard does real-time games extremely well, and successfully transitioned one of their most popular titles to the MMORPG context. It is
          • by JediLow (831100) *
            Here're a couple of options:

            Shattered Galaxy [shatteredgalaxy.com] - the first MMORTS (its a decent game but the lack of population has hurt it over the years).

            Society [societygame.com] - a game thats fairly early in development by Stardock

          • by walnutmon (988223)
            "I feel like FPS fans are fewer in number than RTS fans"

            And to any of you out there saying "No, that isn't true! FPSs are more popular": That is because you looked it up in a book. Next time look it up in your gut.
      • I sincerely hope that the next Starcraft game is not a MMO. Starcraft is still my favorite Blizzard game because it was a delicious union of sci-fi coolness with three wildly unique races. Blizzard has talented designers, but I hate to see them ignore those of us who prefer real time strategy games. If they want to chase the money pot of another MMO, they should make one from Diablo since I don't care if they whore that franchise out. (Plus I think they'll just be stealing their own customers away from WOW.

        • by flyingsquid (813711) on Tuesday January 23, 2007 @07:05PM (#17730138)
          True, another WOW-like game doesn't make sense from a business standpoint. Offering the same gameplay but with different character classes (Oboy! I wanna be an SCV pilot!) would just cannibalize the existing business they're getting from WOW.


          The clever thing to do would be to create a massively multiplayer online game which involves a completely different model of gameplay, so that it doesn't compete with World of Warcraft so much. The fact that they're hiring RTS people could be an indication of the direction they're going: MMORTS.

          What if your character isn't a Marine, he's a squad leader. He gets a dozen marines, half a dozen firebats, a couple of goliaths. And maybe by leveling up you can move up the tech tree and get different units, command more units, ultimately become an Admiral, and soforth. The gameplay could be like Starcraft, but unlike online Starcraft- where you face the same units over, and over, and over no matter how long you've been playing- you'd have the opportunity to acquire new technologies and face ever more challenging enemies.

          • Your concept would be even better if the game was implemented in a split-tiered leveling system. As you leveled up in the traditional sense, you could "become" better units i.e. siege tanks, high templar, defiler, etc. At the same time, you leveled up in tactical and strategic command as well. If you are a squad commander, you order your player-controlled subordinates to perform certain objectives and get bonus points for completing the task with minimal casualties. Your objects are in turn derived from
          • by jchenx (267053)

            What if your character isn't a Marine, he's a squad leader. He gets a dozen marines, half a dozen firebats, a couple of goliaths. And maybe by leveling up you can move up the tech tree and get different units, command more units, ultimately become an Admiral, and soforth. The gameplay could be like Starcraft, but unlike online Starcraft- where you face the same units over, and over, and over no matter how long you've been playing- you'd have the opportunity to acquire new technologies and face ever more cha

          • by CAIMLAS (41445)
            That's pretty much what I was thinking. Except, something more like this:

            In the mid-1990s, there was a game that took place on the far side of the moon. Its premise was that the Soviets and the Americans were fighting a covert war on the moon throughout the cold war (possibly using Nazi tech; I don't recall). The soviets had more, lesser quality ships, while the Americans had better but fewer ships.

            Gameplay worked like this: It was a FPS/RTS hybrid. In essence (and IIRC - I barely played it, but it was my b
      • Well the guy said they were hiring RTS developers too. I'm thinking it's going to be a Starcraft MMO-RTS. Try googling Shattered Galaxies if you're wondering what a MMO/RTS is like. I actaully don't think this is a horrible idea. If they just made a Starcraft 2, it simply won't be good as the first Stacraft for two reasons:

        A. Starcraft was an amazingly great and fun game, and it would be hard for the developers to improve on such a success
        B. Many the people and talent who worked on Starcraft no longer
    • Re:Innovative (Score:4, Interesting)

      by CarnivoreMan (827905) on Tuesday January 23, 2007 @02:01PM (#17725930)
      Innovative. Not like when they released Warcraft 2 then 3 then a MMO based on Warcraft. It will be new, innovative just like the last time they got innovative.
      There was a Warcraft 1 as well... ya know, just FYI. =)
      .. but anyway, each of those games were innovative(Actually I cant really comment on WC1 vs WC2. I dont know WC1 worth beans). They each take place in the same universe and follow a storyline, but still, the changes from one to the next were not trivial.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by MBGMorden (803437)
        Warcraft 1 played much like 2, but with much worse graphics and a clunkier feeling interface. Warcraft 2 also introduced naval units and I think flying units (I know WC2 had flying units but can't remember for sure whether or not WC1 had them).

        Overall though, WC1 wasn't that bad. I got the Warcraft 1 demo version on a huge CD I bought with all sorts of sample games (I loved when I first got a CD drive and could buy shareware CD's with hundreds of demos for $10. For a kid whose only online access was a 24
    • by warmgun (669556)
      Innovative. Not like when they released Warcraft 2 then 3 then a MMO based on Warcraft.

      That's like saying there was no innovation from Super Mario Bros. to Super Mario World to Super Mario 64. Have you even played the Warcraft games? From 2 to 3 there was a major leap in the mechanics of the RTS. From 3 to WoW was a complete change of genre!

    • by TobyWong (168498)
      So let me get this straight. Any time a company uses content from their library of IP in a new product that has already seen the light of the marketplace, that product is automatically "non-innovative"?

      That would mean it would be impossible to make an innovative game that had any characters/content from existing books, movies, music, etc.

      Sorry, I'm not buying it.
    • by jandrese (485)
      It will be funny if life imitates Penny Arcade [penny-arcade.com].
    • by brkello (642429)
      You can create something of the same genre and still have innovation. Even if it is a sequel. But if you don't think WoW is innovative, then you are a moron. It has nothing to do with Warcraft 2 or 3 other than it being in the same universe. Blizzard takes popular genres and adds innovations that make them better. Innovation doesn't have to be Katamari Damacy (which of course has a sequel). People on here whine too much about lack of innovation when they have no idea what they are talking about. You
    • by Jesterboy (106813)
      I think it may well be a MMO Diablo game; it shares more in common with World of Warcraft than Starcraft does, and it seems that Sci-Fi based MMOs as a whole haven't gone over as well as Fantasy based ones.

      Of course, you could be right, it could be a Universe of Starcraft and possibly Planetside-esque. Everquest->WoW, Planetside->UoS; another chance to beat SOE at their own game, no pun intended. ^_^ It would also explain the whole Starcraft:Ghost fiasco; UoS wouldn't look nearly so innovative if th
    • by murdocj (543661)
      Let's see, they did a great RTS, then an RTS with 3 well balanced yet completely different sides, then a hero-based RTS, then an MMO. And did them all brilliantly. Yeah, sure sounds like they don't know how to innovate.
  • by Samus (1382)
    we're not a company that tends to tread the same ground

    This from the company that brought us Diablo, Diablo 2, Warcraft, Warcraft 2, Warcraft 3, Starcraft and World of Warcraft?
    • by Enselic (933809)
      If you define "same ground" as "same name and same concept" then yeah.

      But the differences between those titles are quite major if you see to the differences in features.
    • by MeanderingMind (884641) on Tuesday January 23, 2007 @01:52PM (#17725778) Homepage Journal
      Contrary to popular belief, you can make a game within the same world and context without treading the same ground.

      This isn't Team Ninja where they keep rereleasing Ninja Gaiden in new, prettier forms. The differences between Diablo 1 and 2, between WarCraft 2 and 3, and between WoW and anything else Blizzard has done are huge.

      Most companies would have taken Diablo and stuck exactly to the formula. Diablo 2 would have had the same three classes, the same book system with a few new skills, some reason to revisit tristram and kill Diablo again, and maybe prettier graphics. Instead we got 5 new classes (and none of the old ones, unless you count killing them), a completely different skill system, socketed items, an expansive world across multiple acts, waypoints, and even more in the expansion. The only thing that remained the same was the clickfest.

      While Lord of the Clans died, and StarCraft: Ghost may never see the light, Blizzard is known to tread new ground in familiar worlds. Simply listing off game titles without the context of how different each was is disingenuous.
      • The only thing that remained the same was the clickfest.

        Since both games have Tristram, it is possible with Diablo and Diablo 2 literally to tread the same ground, albeit virtual.

        Just nitpicking ;)

        • by node 3 (115640)
          it is possible with Diablo and Diablo 2 literally to tread the same ground, albeit virtual.
          You can't literally tread virtual ground, by definition.

          Just nitpicking ;)
          Yeah, me too ;)
      • Exactly - like the Nintendo Wii, which while a nice evolution of existing motion sensitive controllers, is going to be completely dependant on Mario and friends in the future. What was one of the first big games? Zelda? Of course the franchise is borrowed but the game is a rather new one.

        Anyway don't forget the Horadric cube. I sure hope they implement one of those in WoW, the possibilities could be remarkable, and it would be great to watch highbie raiders trashing piles of epic items and getting minor h
  • by Gothic_Walrus (692125) on Tuesday January 23, 2007 @01:31PM (#17725402) Journal
    Between the hiring of RTS developers, the constant hints about Starcraft, and the fact that the game's tenth anniversary is coming up...well, it's just a hunch, really, but it's starting to sound more and more likely that this project is some kind of Starcraft MMOG, however that would work.

    I know that I'm not the only one considering this, and that there have been thousands - if not millions - of wrong predictions about gaming. That said, considering how popular Starcraft still is today, if Blizzard doesn't bring the franchise back in some form in the future it would be a horrendously bad business decision. As long as the game isn't terrible (and Blizzard's track record is still very solid, lest we forget), it'd sell like hotcakes and would help to bring in money from the crowd that's not up for the time commitment and fees that MMORPGs require.
    • I could see an MMORPG a la Planetside, but I doubt they'd do that.

      A way to do an MMO that would be cool would be to flesh out the scope of the conflict and expand it to a wider scale, while holding on to the RTS nature of it...Think Rise of Empires but with planets...There is a zone you want to invade, so you start an attack there against either a computer opponent or a real opponent...Other people who are cruising your game "universe" see that there is a fight kicking up there and join in.

      Win the battle, a
      • by ajs (35943)
        There are many things that Blizzard needs to do in a new MMO:
        • Distinguish it from WoW (an RTS MMO would certainly do that)
        • Remove the "realms" or "servers" division while not throwing 8 million players into one virtual room (hard problem, but whoever solves it first pretty much wins the market)
        • Remove the "I'd like to play with my friends, but I'd have to level for 2 months first" problem without trivializing the value of leveling (another hard problem, but City of Heroes had what sounds like a passable sol
    • Also don't fail to consider that Blizzard has traditionally built upon the work of previous endeavors from other companies. It's not as though they invented the RTS or MMORPG, they just polished the concept and as a result popularized them. In to the realm of Sci-Fi genre MMO's, Eve Online has a role playing foundation with many RTS resource objective, star-system control aspects thrown in to the mix. Not hard to imagine a new Starcraft title that leverages that hybridized concept with a less time-intensiv
    • Of course, we know Blizzard is not afraid to stick the knife into any projects that don't work out - so we can be assured of two things

      1) We won't get a bad product
      2) We may not get a product at all (Ghost, anyone?)
  • TFA doesn't actually say anything about them releasing another MMO. It's just saying that their next game isn't going to be in the Warcraft universe. Also, the guy just said the next MMO they make (he didn't say if they're going to make another one or not) won't be another WoW. Duh. That would be foolish. WoW 1 attracted more than 8 million players, WoW 2 will only bring back the people that canceled their accounts after playing the game for 5 years.. maybe.
  • Making something "new and innovative" is not enough sometimes. History shows many cases of companies that have changed a winning formula for some "new fresh ideas" with catastrophic results.

    That said, WoW is a great game. Million of people (including me) love it, so the expectations for the "next big thing" from Blizzard will be just too big, I think.... Changing the winning formula could be a big misstake. Look at Heroes of Might and Magic IV. It changed the way a HoMM game should have been with the resul

    • HoMMIV I thought was better myself.
    • How right you are. Heroes V is nice, but it is so slow that playing it is an exercise in frustration. I'm again back to Heroes III with the awesome WOG patch basically because 1) the graphics are incredibly well done: vivid, clear, stylish, and 2) the gameplay is lightning fast! I can't believe how important the second point is, but once I came back to it it was like jumping out of a pool of molasses or having a heavy, stupefying alcohol fog lift off my brain.

      That and the hot-seat multi-player model is a
    • Making something "new and innovative" is not enough sometimes. History shows many cases of companies that have changed a winning formula for some "new fresh ideas" with catastrophic results.


      Am I the only one who liked New Coke?
  • "'When we announce our next MMORPG it's not going to be another WOW--we're not a company that tends to tread the same ground,'

    Heh, no, "we" just did WoW after the third Warcraft game... Which is now followed by an expansion.

    I personally feel that Blizzard need to clarify this these days, as it's far from obvious. Unfortunately. :-(
    • by plalonde2 (527372)
      Sure, because as a company, when I have a license to print money, I just throw it away in the name of "innovation".

      Blizzard are doing everything right as far as cashing in on their IP. They should continue. If that means another expansion, or another revision of a hugely popular, best-selling game, then they should do it.

      I hate these whiners who would have you believe that Blizzard is doing it wrong because it's not tickling their particular itch.

      • by nomadic (141991)
        Sure, because as a company, when I have a license to print money, I just throw it away in the name of "innovation". Blizzard are doing everything right as far as cashing in on their IP. They should continue. If that means another expansion, or another revision of a hugely popular, best-selling game, then they should do it.

        Yep, they're doing everything right, but I think the one issue people have here is they're being a bit dishonest about the "treading new ground" thing, that's all. They should just be
  • Good job Blizzard! I was at my local Best Buy (Richfield, MN near their HQ) for their midnight release and even though it was a blistering 1 degree (F) out, they managed to draw approximately 250 people standing in line for over an hour and probably 400-500 people that arrived near midnight. I was there for 2 hours or so personally since I wasn't aware of the number of collector's edition copies they'd have. (I later learned they had about 300.)

    I wished they would have at least given me a choice in CE pet
    • by andy9701 (112808)

      My distaste for 40 man raids aside, I have very little I can gripe about EXCEPT the f___ing collectable card game garnering in-game rewards. It's bad enough that it exists in any capacity, but for Christ, leave me out of it, and stop nickel-and-diming these kids whom you KNOW are spending a lot of money on this CCG. The insult to it all is having to stare at that awesome baby hippogryph every time I visit Booty Bay. Of course it has no benefit beyond cosmetics, but come on. It's both awesome and unattainabl

    • by PingSpike (947548)
      Wow, I didn't actually release they were you getting you guys that bad. I guess I can't blame them, but I understand your complaint.

      I've often wondered, with all the effort blizzard puts into stopping gold farmers from selling gold...why doesn't blizzard just start selling it themselves and undercut the competition? Sure, it would piss everyone off a bit, but its not like they've eliminated the practice of gold being sold by going the other way.
    • by Gerad (86818)
      FYI, Starcity Games (a relatively reputable store that sells Magic: The Gathering and similar cards) is selling the Hippogryph pet for $40 here [starcitygames.com]. $200 sounds completely out of line.
    • by Evangelion (2145)

      If you find 40 man raids distasteful, then the expansion should be good news. The largest raid instance is capped at 25.

      Blizzard actually *gasp!* listened to their customers (in aggregate) and tried to find ways to reduce the "contiguous time block" and "guild member herding" requirements for end-game raids.

      I ended getting sucked back into playing when the expansion came out. Fortunately, I was able to walk into a best buy at random and pick up a CE. My BE Paladin (named Netherwhelp) likes his pet very m
  • by RyanFenton (230700) on Tuesday January 23, 2007 @01:43PM (#17725604)
    Currently Embargoed Press Release for late 2007:

    -------------------

    New from Blizzard! Starcraft Idol!

    Primp your Protoss! Fire up your firebat's singing voice! Practice your zerglings' choreography! It'll all be worth it when your peers decide who is the new...

    STARCRAFT IDOL!

    Tired of resolving ancient animosities, genetic imperatives, and vital resource conflicts through a bloody battlefield? Change those horrific screams to cheers of joy, as the new name of the game is style! Choose from over 40 dance moves, 15 voice styles, and 5 sets of 'attitudes' to make your perfect performance. Win contests, and earn accessories. Learn crafting skills and dress to impress! You'll be amazed what a little makeup and elbow-grease will do for an ultralisk.

    Bring out the beautiful alien in you!

    ----------------

    You *don't* want to see the screenshots.

    Ryan Fenton
  • Yeah... (Score:2, Funny)

    by j0nkatz (315168)

    Those numbers are just for North American and the EU, too, which totally discounts any sales the box may have had in Asian markets. Even without our eastern brethren, that number pretty much destroys every other launch-day sales number for a PC game.
    Yeah can't leave out the Asians. How else am I supposed to buy my in-game gold?
  • I think this is what they've got planned. If you don't know what Tabula Rasa is, go here: http://www.playtr.com/index.html [playtr.com] Sort of FPS, sort of MMORPG... The battlegrounds inside WOW have proved hugely popular, and with the new release have hinted at some possibilities of actually having seige weapons and tanks and such in future expansion battlegrounds. If they can beta test that system in stages now, then they can pop off an announcement next year about a Starcraft MMO for xmas 2008, soon to be delayed
  • by fyrie (604735)
    They turned a RTS into a MMORPG, so why not take an RPG and turn it into a MMORTS?
  • So here's the thing: I play WoW casually but it's really not holding my interest, not because the game mechanics aren't interesting, they are (although there's a certain repetitiveness to the whole thing that's getting to me, but I guess every computer game can be reduced to pressing a limited series of buttons over and over) it's because I'm not that big a fan of the game world. I like fantasy, but I love hard sci-fi, with bigass guns and technology and, you know, Outer Space. IF Blizzard came out with a

  • Imagine an MMOG where once you get to the end game level you start to command troops and units. Engage in real time, world scale warfare. Build up so that a guild is a "nation" where each playing in the guild is commander of a squad/battalion/battlegroup. Set up towns and fortifications with Player directed NPC AI for defenses when the players weren't around.

    The worlds would have to be far FAR larger to accommodate the same number of players per server if each were commanding a squad.

    Pretty much Wow/Starc
    • As awesome as that sounds, and I would definitely buy it, Blizzard will never make a game that cool. The reason I say this is blizzard will want to pander to the lowest common denominator (good business really) and hardcore pvp and actual lose is not what the majority wants. I mean, in wow, pvp is almost entirely locked in a little box and kept away from anyone who doesn't want to see it. They even make the pvp servers carebearish compared to shadowbane and Dark Age of Cammy.

      An awesome server idea for WoW w
      • Yeah, and with an average 70%-30% population in favour of alliance on WoW, that would be a nightmare (if you're over 15, aka, horde) or pointless (if you're under 15, aka alliance).

        What happens when the horde don't have any towns at all? (this will occur roughly 3-4 hours after the realm opens).
        • by Churla (936633)
          First, you build in NPC and system controlled constraints. As one faction takes over more space the defenses around the remaining towns fortify. Taking all the cities of a factoun being set to "DNI" (Darn Near Impossible).

          Second, the expansion just hit, and all the servers are being flooded with nooblet kiddies making blood elves, so see, you'll have as much population as you want soon enough. Enjoy what we have been dealing with on the other side of the fence for 2 years ;)
          • "DNI" could still be surpassed, I'm pretty sure alliance players would like nothing more than to grind the opposing faction completely into the ground. If you want to understand something of the mentality of an alliance PvP player, I suggest rolling a L20 horde anything and hanging around Tarren Mill to do the quests there. Just quest. You'll be dead and corpse camped within 30 minutes. Your only hope? Horde counter-PvP. Good luck with the odds heavily tilted against you in terms of numbers.

            Let's cons
    • by tbannist (230135)
      Are you trying to sell me on the upcoming Warhammer MMOG?
  • Darkfall Online -- http://www.darkfallonline.com/ [darkfallonline.com]

    I'm tired of the level treadmill and carebear-land where nobody is attackable. It's a fantasy world, kill or be killed. Darkfall looks great for that :)
  • by hellfire (86129) <`moc.liamg' `ta' `vdalived'> on Tuesday January 23, 2007 @03:07PM (#17727030) Homepage
    I have to say the development/testing/design team is pretty good. I've had my issues with them in the past but over all they are well above most.

    That being said, I'm really sick and tired of Blizzard super media hype attitude. I'm tired of anyone in the computer industry using the word "innovative" to describe their next itteration of software. World of Starcraft will be fun, if that's what they do, but it will not be "innovative." You keep using that fucking word! I do not fucking think it means what you think it goddamn means!

    (apologies to Mandy Potenkin)

    Blizzard tries to do everything better than the next guy in terms of design, gameplay, and quality. Trying hard to make the game balance out while giving people lots of options and strategies. Trying hard to have good quality graphics that won't break machines not sold by alienware. Trying to kill as many bugs as possible. Trying to make sure the game isn't dominated by one trick ponies. Providing an background to the game so that players can feel more immersed.

    It's better, yes, but more of the same. Warcraft was their first success. They made a second one. then they tried their hand at Diablo. Good game, that was reasonably innovative. Then they made Starcraft and the innovation stopped. Starcraft was fun, but it was orcs in space, stop kidding yourself. It wasn't "all new." It was only "all new" in that "All new 2007 Toyota Camry" kind of way. Then Diablo 2, then WC3. Then they saw two of their successful francises and merged the idea of the two together and now you have WoW. Recycling old ideas with improvements, and giving people the same thing as before.

    I'm not belittling Blizzard or their games, I'm just really tired of their marketing department making sound like they are going to sell software that will give you instant multiple orgasms.
    • by brkello (642429)
      Just because it is the same genre doesn't mean it can't be innovative. Seriously, play warcraft 1 and then play startcraft and tell me it isn't innovative. But really...who pays attention to PR anyways. Wait for the game to come out, see if it gets good reviews, if so, then play it. Everything else is just noise.
  • ...is simply that an MMO carries a monthly fee whereas the traditional games like Diablo and Starcraft included free online play once you bought the game.

    Blizzard/Vivendi have gotten a taste of blood from the monthly revenue from 8 million WoW players and I predict they will not be introducing any new games that do not have a pay-per-month component.

    So I would expect Starcraft/Diablo 3 to come out as online games where you pay $5-$10/month or something and in exchange you get a more dynamic multi-player env
  • Woot! Here's hoping for a Lost Vikings MMO!

    Eric, Olaf and Baleog for the win!
  • Despite all the problems with WoW that caused me to leave, if Blizzard's new MMO is a single world, rather than 100+ realms, I might just sign up.
  • "Meanwhile, the same gent that teased us with the next StarCraft game has tossed out this bone as well: Blizzard's next MMOG 'won't be another WoW'."

    This is not WarCraft in space! It's much more sophisticated! I know it's not 3-D

Never trust a computer you can't repair yourself.

Working...