I agree with everything you're saying. There was not enough end level content, simple as that.Rooster Cogburn said:
I also agree with you about Dulcinea. An impressive troll. Very entertaining. And I like his blue shirt.
Why did Warhammer mmo 'W.A.R.' never become big?
- Thread starter ayuri
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I also agree with you about Dulcinea. An impressive troll. Very entertaining. And I like his blue shirt.
Because its Warhammer, and not Warhammer 40k. Which is a lot more popular, and while Warhammer would be betetr suited (fantasy openworld), its a lot less popular, and overall seemed to be a WOW clone.
Pretty it failed because of the lack of support when it was most needed, a.k.a, in the END-GAME when thousands of players were duking it out for control of the fortresses only to get booted multiple times because the server couldn't handle all the action that were occurring in the game world.
Then WoW released it's new x-pack, and all the people unimpressed by Mythic's behavior left in doves.
Then WoW released it's new x-pack, and all the people unimpressed by Mythic's behavior left in doves.
I believe the man was just trying to make a point here, man where ever you go there is always someone ready to jump down anyones throat for bringing up WoW.Dulcinea said:
Yes we know wow was based off everquest shesh...
OT: It was an unfinished and uninspired MMO with a dwindling fanbase.
I'm not sure how many posts in this thread called Dulc a troll, but it was a lot. That breaks the first fucking rule of the forums. Someone even called him a c***. I mention punching my monitor and am the only one to get warned. To say nothing of the fact that the 'T' word himself was not warned.
Is it asking too much for the rules to be applied consistently?
Is it asking too much for the rules to be applied consistently?
To be fair the only person here being rude and immature actually seems to be you, are you intentionally trolling to gain a reaction or are you actually being serious on this subject? Either way World of Warcraft is king of the MMO's and whether you like it or not doesn't change the fact that it dominates the market.Dulcinea said:
And as far as industry standards go, Blizzard pretty much dominate that as well, the servers are well maintained, the customer support tends to be pretty fast and with good responses, the game itself is regularly patched to fix bugs and errors and of course the community is always kept up to date on what's happenening and they get a say before anything goes ahead, so really slate it all you want because you're entitled to, that's your opinion. But saying that it is not the bar for MMO's is really a foolish comment to make.
*looks at first page of the thread*
People are really arguing that WoW isn't the industry standard, and even going so far as to say, "Well, just because it's the most popular doesn't mean it's the standard." They're really arguing that. Wow.
Well, good job on patting yourself on the back for being "different" and not liking the things other people like. Here's a Sticky Note of +3 Coolness, you earned it. Now here's a hard dose of reality. If you play almost any MMO, the similarity between it and WoW should be immediately obvious, and WAR is no exception. I know because I briefly played it myself. Do you think there might be a reason why WAR, EA's "big" MMO, might play like WoW? Hint: Industry standard.
Granted, even the MMO's that follow the WoW template will generally not play exactly like WoW, and there are a few rebels that go completely against the grain (EVE) but the truth is that when all the suits running publishers sit down and discuss how they're going to make an MMO that is going to make a ton of money, they're going to look first at the guys who already managed to do that and copy their notes. That's how it is, and it's happened in every genre in videogame history. Unfortunately, the suits are often too short-sighted and come up with something that doesn't break from the mold enough. That's WAR to a T.
For my part, one thing that annoyed me--besides feeling too familiar--was that the graphics were also barely better than WoW's. And considering WAR came out about four years after WoW, well, that's just not acceptable. I have a good video card and I don't want to see a bunch of brightly colored marshmellows walking around. I want reasonably detailed characters and cool graphical effects. You can say that graphics don't really matter, and maybe they don't--to you. They do to me, because high quality textures, models, and effects can help to draw me in to a world and make it seem more real. The afore-mentioned marshmellows, however, served only to reinforce how artificial the world was to me.
People are really arguing that WoW isn't the industry standard, and even going so far as to say, "Well, just because it's the most popular doesn't mean it's the standard." They're really arguing that. Wow.
Well, good job on patting yourself on the back for being "different" and not liking the things other people like. Here's a Sticky Note of +3 Coolness, you earned it. Now here's a hard dose of reality. If you play almost any MMO, the similarity between it and WoW should be immediately obvious, and WAR is no exception. I know because I briefly played it myself. Do you think there might be a reason why WAR, EA's "big" MMO, might play like WoW? Hint: Industry standard.
Granted, even the MMO's that follow the WoW template will generally not play exactly like WoW, and there are a few rebels that go completely against the grain (EVE) but the truth is that when all the suits running publishers sit down and discuss how they're going to make an MMO that is going to make a ton of money, they're going to look first at the guys who already managed to do that and copy their notes. That's how it is, and it's happened in every genre in videogame history. Unfortunately, the suits are often too short-sighted and come up with something that doesn't break from the mold enough. That's WAR to a T.
For my part, one thing that annoyed me--besides feeling too familiar--was that the graphics were also barely better than WoW's. And considering WAR came out about four years after WoW, well, that's just not acceptable. I have a good video card and I don't want to see a bunch of brightly colored marshmellows walking around. I want reasonably detailed characters and cool graphical effects. You can say that graphics don't really matter, and maybe they don't--to you. They do to me, because high quality textures, models, and effects can help to draw me in to a world and make it seem more real. The afore-mentioned marshmellows, however, served only to reinforce how artificial the world was to me.
Yes. WOW has had a lot of things going for it such as timing, brand awareness, funding, continuity, accessibility and creativity. It's little wonder it is the industry standard. However, I think it has been pointed out that this isn't necessarily a good thing. WOW is aging, yet it still has a strangle-hold over the industry. It's going to very interesting to see how the competition (Guild Wars, and Old Republic) try and take a cut of the action. Also, I have to wonder as to whether we will ever see the sensation that is WOW replicated again in the industry now that MMOs are arguably a more accessible venture for business and developers. EA is certainly having a crack at it.MasterV said:
And as you've mentioned, internet connectivity has improved markedly over the last few years and suddenly we're seeing a plethora of new online social gaming, created by small indie developers. I've lost track of the number of times I've seen advertisements for some second-rate MMO, seemingly developed out of nowhere.
Maybe the industry standard for the MMO has reached it's used by date? Perhaps we're seeing an evolution in online, social gaming? Or maybe you simply need to pour hundreds of millions of dollars into at product to actually have a viable return and profit?
Either way you cut it: kudos to Blizzard for creating
Seriously. Throwing insults at you is wrong, but this is no better. Take your own advice and 'drop it'.Dulcinea said:
I think if indie developers are patient and creative enough to create a sufficiently compelling MMO which appeals to a core audience, and develops it further in all the right places, the potential for a successful MMO is there. Most likely nowhere near the scale of WOW, but I think the general consensus is that the industry has come to a point where that isn't really feasible. I know I sounded harsh in my observation of 'second rate MMOs', but I think the genre has a lot of potential for small business and niche market placement, if done right. The tools for such projects are certainly there.Tim_Buoy said:
I'm not likely to get involved with an MMO, though like you, I'm excited to see what TOR does when it comes out
definitely a good example would be maple story it has a huge player base for a free to play mmo and its making tons of cash off the micro transactionsStill Life said:I think if indie developers are patient and creative enough to create a sufficiently compelling MMO which appeals to a core audience, and develops it further in all the right places, the potential for a successful MMO is there. Most likely nowhere near the scale of WOW, but I think the general consensus is that the industry has come to a point where that isn't really feasible. I know I sounded harsh in my observation of 'second rate MMOs', but I think the genre has a lot of potential for small business and niche market placement, if done right. The tools for such projects are certainly there.Tim_Buoy said:
I'm not likely to get involved with an MMO, though like you, I'm excited to see what TOR does when it comes out
Actually, the collision detection was more or less necessary in order for much of the game to work properly. When trying to take a keep (a mid level PvP activity) for example, the defenders would find this task all but impossible if the tanks couldn't "get in the way". In most cases, it simply offers a defender a useful way to slow the enemy, even for a few moments beyond the use of snares and knockbacks (which exist but have rather long cooldowns). Even with this feature it is still pretty easy to take out the flimsier members of a force through things like massed archer fire and the like.Lt. Vinciti said:
Dude. It looks exactly like World of Warcraft to me. But with less colorful landscapes. You wanna know why it isn't more popular? Because it's a WoW clone. One that charges money. (I know there's a link on the page that says "Endless Trial", but the word "Trial" there indicates to me that it's probably missing 50% of the game's features.) And from looking at the gameplay video, it looks pretty much like WoW to me. If you're going to put out an MMO that plays almost exactly like WoW, it needs two key features to have any chance of succeeding:
-It needs to look different at a glance. Not when you get into the game and really get a chance to play it, but at first glance. The interface is inevitably going to be very similar to WoW's, but at least make the environment and the characters look different. Brighter colors. Or better graphics. Or sexier girls. (That last one works wonders. Especially if the clothes are more revealing.)
-It needs to cost nothing to play. Think about this. WoW has had years upon years to develop areas, balance classes, patch glitches, add to the story, and accumulate a player base that I can pretty much guarantee will stick around for another decade or so. Your MMO cannot possibly be as polished as WoW, so if you're going to charge for it, what's the point of playing it when customers could just play WoW instead? If you absolutely have to charge for it, make it a one-time payment, like Guild Wars did. But you're crazy to charge a subscription fee, because subscription fees are an investment. And it's wiser to invest in the game with guaranteed longevity and the biggest player base.
These are both things Grand Fantasia understands. The game is a shameless WoW clone, but it's fully aware it can't be as good as WoW, so it compensates for this by looking different on the surface and not charging you to play. The game is extremely colorful, you've got cutesy pets following you around to do your bidding, even some of the enemies look adorable. And the female characters are all cutesy anime girls prancing around in tiny miniskirts. I mean TINY. The kind I'd ask my girlfriend to buy for herself if she was shopping for my birthday. (And if I had a girlfriend.) Grand Fantasia is not nearly as fun as WoW, but it observes the two key features for competing with WoW as a WoW clone. And that's why I'd bet money that it, and any other MMO that observes the key features, will last longer than Warhammer Online.
-It needs to look different at a glance. Not when you get into the game and really get a chance to play it, but at first glance. The interface is inevitably going to be very similar to WoW's, but at least make the environment and the characters look different. Brighter colors. Or better graphics. Or sexier girls. (That last one works wonders. Especially if the clothes are more revealing.)
-It needs to cost nothing to play. Think about this. WoW has had years upon years to develop areas, balance classes, patch glitches, add to the story, and accumulate a player base that I can pretty much guarantee will stick around for another decade or so. Your MMO cannot possibly be as polished as WoW, so if you're going to charge for it, what's the point of playing it when customers could just play WoW instead? If you absolutely have to charge for it, make it a one-time payment, like Guild Wars did. But you're crazy to charge a subscription fee, because subscription fees are an investment. And it's wiser to invest in the game with guaranteed longevity and the biggest player base.
These are both things Grand Fantasia understands. The game is a shameless WoW clone, but it's fully aware it can't be as good as WoW, so it compensates for this by looking different on the surface and not charging you to play. The game is extremely colorful, you've got cutesy pets following you around to do your bidding, even some of the enemies look adorable. And the female characters are all cutesy anime girls prancing around in tiny miniskirts. I mean TINY. The kind I'd ask my girlfriend to buy for herself if she was shopping for my birthday. (And if I had a girlfriend.) Grand Fantasia is not nearly as fun as WoW, but it observes the two key features for competing with WoW as a WoW clone. And that's why I'd bet money that it, and any other MMO that observes the key features, will last longer than Warhammer Online.
While W.A.R had some nice ideas (especially the healing by doing damage and the RvR), overall it felt far too linier with each section feeling isolated from everything else. Should it ever shift to a free to play model, I'd look into going back and spending some more money on it because I think its the only game where I actually enjoyed the PvP aspect.
Well there's one thing WAR gave to the MMO genre.
Public Quests!
Recently tried Rift, and the game's filled with them. Then I watched a video of GW2, and wouldn't you know it, Public Quests! I wouldn't be surprised if Blizzard already has them in WoW as well.
Public Quests!
Recently tried Rift, and the game's filled with them. Then I watched a video of GW2, and wouldn't you know it, Public Quests! I wouldn't be surprised if Blizzard already has them in WoW as well.
And that's all fine and good. But more often than not, industry leaders also DEFINE the industry standard. I'm not saying that this is why WoW is BETTER, just that why a Warhammer MMO, based off of it's fantasy setting rather than it's futuristic one, would have a hard time competing against WoW. After all, while you might be a discerning customer whose taste are not impacted by the general trends, I dare say most people's tastes ARE effected by the marketing mechanism as well as monetary strength behind the product.Dulcinea said: