Why did Warhmmer Online "fail"?
- Thread starter Mechanix
- Start date
Recommended Videos
- Apr 1, 2009
- 15,526
- 4,295
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
one other problem with it was that its mostly pvp based, which means that once you start losing ppl it gets harder to do alot of things or you can only do them at certain times and it can make for some very unbalanced fights, those arnt insurmountable problems but they can really attribute to the rise or fall of an mmo, thats really the reason I stopped playing war, there was lots to do with my maxed out lvl char but during the day it was really hard to get any scens or anything with a low lvl charwasalp said:
It was over hyped, and launched too soon. It had some really solid ideas, and if they had taken their time they would have been able to snap up much of the PvP crowd from WoW - for example if city sieges were actually city sieges, not instances for the first 40 people that could zone in.
Also, the PvE in the game was just awful. Again they had some really great ideas, PQ's, the Tome of Knowledge, but I have never been so bored while questing...ever
Also, the PvE in the game was just awful. Again they had some really great ideas, PQ's, the Tome of Knowledge, but I have never been so bored while questing...ever
WoW almost has a monopoly on the MMO genre. The other games are constantly compared to it, come up short, and lose subscriptions. To top it all off, games start to try to copy WoW, resulting in much of the same and even less reason for anyone to play anything but the already established World of Warcraft.
1) I guess this one is my bad but when i bought it i didn't realize the world was separated into isolated Tiers. That took out the majority of the fun for me, knowing that it wasn't an actual world. Just a couple of levels.
2)The animations and graphics were... well... Bad. I had the game pumped to the max graphics and it looked like WoW on the lowest setting. I mean, i normally give games shit for always demanding to push the bar on graphical power on computers, aion for example, but to push it so far down that the game on max looks worse then WoW on low...
3)Uninteresting trade skills.
4)PvE was bad. The worst cases were PQ. While great idea in theory they forget the inherent laziness of players. Most people just stood and watched as me and one other person tried to do the public quest. Only helping once we were almost done the last phase to get free loot.
5)Class only gear. I know i know, stupid complaint, but it bugs the shit out of me. I like the idea of light, medium, heavy. Where the armor is in tiers and classes can only wear up to a certain point in the tier. I can't really explain WHY i like it, it just seems more interesting to me.
2)The animations and graphics were... well... Bad. I had the game pumped to the max graphics and it looked like WoW on the lowest setting. I mean, i normally give games shit for always demanding to push the bar on graphical power on computers, aion for example, but to push it so far down that the game on max looks worse then WoW on low...
3)Uninteresting trade skills.
4)PvE was bad. The worst cases were PQ. While great idea in theory they forget the inherent laziness of players. Most people just stood and watched as me and one other person tried to do the public quest. Only helping once we were almost done the last phase to get free loot.
5)Class only gear. I know i know, stupid complaint, but it bugs the shit out of me. I like the idea of light, medium, heavy. Where the armor is in tiers and classes can only wear up to a certain point in the tier. I can't really explain WHY i like it, it just seems more interesting to me.
[Wall of text]
Failed?
At 300,000 Subscribers paying £15 a month? That's £450,0000 a month. £540,000,00 a year. Not counting the original sales of the game or any micro transactions it might have. Warhammer Online has definately not failed. Just because an MMO doesn't beat Wow doesn't mean it has failed.
Did Bioshock fail because it didn't sell as many copies as Halo 3 or Modern Warfare 2?
I'm pretty sure Bladerunner made less money than Avatar, does that mean Bladerunner is a failed film?
Just because Warhammer hasn't been as successful as WoW, the best-selling example of it's kind in the history of the entire world ever doesn't mean it failed.
There are games developers out there laying awake at night to the thought of 300,000 players. They can't even imagine fifty four million pounds a year in profit. Trust me, all of the "Wow killers" that failed to kill WoW are making much more money than we could imagine, WoW just happens to be making slightly more.
[/Wall of text]
Failed?
At 300,000 Subscribers paying £15 a month? That's £450,0000 a month. £540,000,00 a year. Not counting the original sales of the game or any micro transactions it might have. Warhammer Online has definately not failed. Just because an MMO doesn't beat Wow doesn't mean it has failed.
Did Bioshock fail because it didn't sell as many copies as Halo 3 or Modern Warfare 2?
I'm pretty sure Bladerunner made less money than Avatar, does that mean Bladerunner is a failed film?
Just because Warhammer hasn't been as successful as WoW, the best-selling example of it's kind in the history of the entire world ever doesn't mean it failed.
There are games developers out there laying awake at night to the thought of 300,000 players. They can't even imagine fifty four million pounds a year in profit. Trust me, all of the "Wow killers" that failed to kill WoW are making much more money than we could imagine, WoW just happens to be making slightly more.
[/Wall of text]