World of Warcraft

NorgeNorge Sidney, Ohio
edited November 2004 in Gaming
Some of you might of heard of Blizzard's upcoming MMORPG World of Warcraft. What is everyone thinking of it so far? Think it will flop? Think it will take off?

So far from what I have read and seen it seems as though it is going to be a pretty good game. Throw in Blizzard's excellent reputation for polish and attention to detail and you can anticipate great things. Beta test sign ups begin at the ending of the month for anyone interested. I know I am going to try and get into it. I've never played a whole lot of Warcraft but I am a big fan of the Diablo series and the game just looks too good to pass up. Anyhoo if ya wanna read more about the game here are a few links:

http://www.blizzard.com/wow/

http://www.gamespy.com/landing/wow/

Norge
«1

Comments

  • TheBaronTheBaron Austin, TX
    edited January 2004
    i'm really looking forward to it. all signs point to beta beginning signups beginning at the end of the month, and so far all hands-on reviews i've read have been positive. the only downside atm i can see to the game is that the graphics just aren't on par with the "bleeding edge" of technology. however, i've heard the game world is beautiful, and i'm not one to judge until i've tried it out. we'll see
  • LincLinc Owner Detroit Icrontian
    edited January 2004
    Norge wrote:
    Think it will flop?

    All I have to know about it is the word "Blizzard" and I can confidently say it won't flop. :)
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited January 2004
    I have a feeling that it won't enjoy any of the success it plans on.

    Sony has the MMORPG market locked tight. All other entries that are NOT sony's have fallen by the wayside.
  • TheBaronTheBaron Austin, TX
    edited January 2004
    Thrax you are absolutely right at the moment Sony has the most successful MMOGs around. however, look at games like DAOC and AO that have thousands of subscribers and came out of nowhere. I think the fact that WoW has the name Blizzard stamped on it will make it major competitor in the next round of MMOGs, EQ2 included. we'll just have to see what happens
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited January 2004
    DAoC and AO combined have about 1/5th the subscribers of EverQuest <i>alone</i>.
  • TheBaronTheBaron Austin, TX
    edited January 2004
    well i know, but consider that they came out AFTER both EQ and UO had garnered a gigantic fan base. i'm just saying they're quality games, and from no-name companies. i expect much more from blizzard, especially considering how good the game is shaping up to be
  • NorgeNorge Sidney, Ohio
    edited January 2004
    the only downside atm i can see to the game is that the graphics just aren't on par with the "bleeding edge" of technology. however, i've heard the game world is beautiful, and i'm not one to judge until i've tried it out. we'll see

    The hands on review at gamespy brought up that same point. The reviewer said that where it lacked in technology it more than made up for with artistic beauty. Personally I try not to weigh graphics too heavily when I look at a game. I mean they help but as long as there is solid game play it is fine. I can also appreciate their approach to art over technology. Of course, like you said we'll just have to see for ourselves if what they say is true. :)
    All I have to know about it is the word "Blizzard" and I can confidently say it won't flop.

    While I have a few doubts, (very few) those are basically my thoughts as well. Think about it. Has Blizzard ever missed with a title?
    I have a feeling that it won't enjoy any of the success it plans on.

    Sony has the MMORPG market locked tight. All other entries that are NOT sony's have fallen by the wayside.

    I agree that Sony has a good grip on the market but it isn't completely locked. Last week Final Fantasy XI hit 500,000 users and over 1,000,000 characters. WOW will probably never reach the popularity of EQ (created by the devil himself) but I think it will do pretty well. I doubt it will be shoved off to the side like some other online games have been. Of course that is just going by what I have read. The real test will be once it actually enters beta and players get the chance to give their opinions.

    Norge
  • drasnordrasnor Starship Operator Hawthorne, CA Icrontian
    edited January 2004
    Norge wrote:
    Last week Final Fantasy XI hit 500,000 users and over 1,000,000 characters.
    FFXI is a special case. Square-Enix isn't exactly an unknown company either. Square made all the Final Fantasy games, Xenogears, and the Secret of Mana games. Enix made all the Star Ocean games. Merged, they bring a significant playerbase just from people that traditionally buy every game those developers make (described me until I played FFX).

    Of course, Blizzard has the same thing going for them hence the Warcraft in the title and the Blizzard logo. All I have to say is that it had better not do to its fanbase what FFX did for me with Square.

    -drasnor :fold:
  • NorgeNorge Sidney, Ohio
    edited January 2004
    drasnor wrote:
    All I have to say is that it had better not do to its fanbase what FFX did for me with Square.

    -drasnor :fold:

    What did FFX do for you with Square?

    Norge
  • drasnordrasnor Starship Operator Hawthorne, CA Icrontian
    edited January 2004
    Norge wrote:
    What did FFX do for you with Square?

    Norge

    Rent all their future games prior to purchase. FFX was a fantastically mediocre RPG, which is to say it was total crap for the level of quality I expect from a Final Fantasy game. It probably didn't help that I played Xenogears immediately prior to playing FFX. That sentence will only have meaning to you if you've ever played Xenogears.

    If we're going to knock FFX, lets start a new thread. I can (and have) itemized and analyzed every way FFX fell short to me. Suffice it to say I will not be playing much less purchasing FFX-2.

    -drasnor :fold:
  • NorgeNorge Sidney, Ohio
    edited January 2004
    I liked FFX and so far I've liked FFX-2 but I guess we won't get into that little war. :)

    Norge
  • XenogearedXenogeared
    edited January 2004
    Norge wrote:
    I liked FFX and so far I've liked FFX-2 but I guess we won't get into that little war. :)

    Norge

    FFX was way too short. RPGs have gone downhill since the days of FF7 and Xenogears.
  • NorgeNorge Sidney, Ohio
    edited January 2004
    Did anyone who read the gamespy articles understand the mention of regents? They said something about regents being used for spells and skills. Does this mean that all spells will require components to cast or is it just for certain spells? I am hoping that it is just for certain spells since regents would take away from their whole "minimize down time" focus. I still enjoy a system with a mana reserve for casting spells.

    Norge
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited January 2004
    If it's anything like EverQuest, and I very much assume it will be if Blizzard is to descend onto the High Fantasy MMORPG market (Something about being successful by patterning one who is successful), only a very few spells will use reagents, and generally they'll be common to acquire and cheap.
  • nekromancerusnekromancerus New
    edited January 2004
    Norge wrote:
    ...
    While I have a few doubts, (very few) those are basically my thoughts as well. Think about it. Has Blizzard ever missed with a title?
    ...

    Warcraft III
  • DisvengeanceDisvengeance
    edited January 2004
    Every single blizzard game has been a great successful hit, and im an avid fan of all blizzard games since diablo and starcraft. I think world of WarCraft will be an awesome game, only downside is i dont like the fact of having to pay monthly to play a game, unless they cut down the overall price of the game.
  • TemplarTemplar You first.
    edited January 2004
    It looks to be another skinned MMO. You've got a treadmill, yes, plus controlled PVP from what I've heard (RvR anyone?), and the generic "bash monsters" theme. Of course, I always try a game out before final judgement :D

    Who knows.. I could be playing it for months on end. I think my big problem with Galaxies and FFXI was that I could never find a hardcore group of players to group/guild with.
  • GobblesGobbles Ventura California
    edited January 2004
    i signed for the beta test... but I dont see paying for it monthly. I was a beta tester in Sony's Planetside... now there is a game that rocked.. to bad I cant justify the monthly fee's to play a game...

    Gobbles
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited January 2004
    You justify monthly fees to be entertained by cable TV. You justify monthly fees to be entertained by the internet.

    I do not see how you can justify those elements, yet be incapable of extending a monthly fee for another mode of entertainment.
  • primesuspectprimesuspect Beepin n' Boopin Detroit, MI Icrontian
    edited January 2004
    If it's anything like the boring mess that FFXI is, it will suck. FFXI is fun for about.... a month... Then it becomes just plain tedious.
  • CammanCamman NEW! England Icrontian
    edited January 2004
    nekromancerus wrote:
    Warcraft III

    Wow, you've gotta be kidding, right? Check how many units Blizzard pushed with Warcraft III
  • TheBaronTheBaron Austin, TX
    edited January 2004
    war3 owns as a strategy game. it will never be as good as starcraft in my mind, but thats only because starcraft and TA were some of my most defining games ever
  • NorgeNorge Sidney, Ohio
    edited February 2004
    Thrax wrote:
    You justify monthly fees to be entertained by cable TV. You justify monthly fees to be entertained by the internet.

    I do not see how you can justify those elements, yet be incapable of extending a monthly fee for another mode of entertainment.

    Gotta agree with Thrax on that one. A good comparison I read once compared it to going to the movies. You have the tickets which you run you at least $5. Then if you want a drink it is another $2.50. Throw in another $3.50 for popcorn and maybe $1.00 for some candy and you're up to $11.00 (assuming you went alone). This is comparable to a lot of online games. The only difference is that you are paying $11.00 for two hours as compared to $9.00 - $13.00 for an entire month. I think it balances out. It just depends on how much you like the game.

    On another note I don't think WOW will be the leveling treadmill other games are. I mean sure, killing monsters is the main thing you do but the quest system sounds like it will keep things interesting. Blizzard is going to great lengths to make sure there are tons of interesting quest that help drive the story line along. They are also trying to provide a larger variety of quest as opposed to the typical "FedEx Quest" that have you playing the roll of a delivery boy. Nothing more fearsome that a bulking warrior, running around in full armor, on his epic quest to get the ingredients for Mrs. Smiths pie to her on time for the Spring Bazaar...

    I don't think the ever popular fantasy setting will hurt the game much either. Most of us are familiar with the fantasy thing but Blizzard is trying to give it the feel of the Warcraft universe. If they can capture that feel it will definity be a worthwhile experience. Even the art style they are using for the game will be refreshing.

    Something else I read last night that I found pretty cool is that warriors and a few other classes will be able to use rifles. I knew this before but I thought it was limited to the dwarves. What is ever better is that I read something about Blizzard considering scopes for your rifles to increase the range of attack to give a sniper type feel. Granted it won't be literal sniping, and I doubt a midevil scope can do much for you, but it still sounds pretty swanky.

    Norge
  • funnyguy409funnyguy409
    edited February 2004
    Blizzard if you are lissening you lost a customer with month to month payment for online services. I truly love the warcraft series and been waiting day to day for new info about the game. But when i heard about the monthly payments i cringed and decided not to buy this game. For one thing the series seems cheapened by the payments and your are loosing half the markets players ages 8-16. I say to whatever u can to make it free whether its a 10 sec advertisment and or 2 pages of advertising before getting to main screen i seriosly do not care. Look at everquest a good game made quite a bit of money, but could of it been bigger? could of been getting more endorsments without the online pay? I forone don't want to pay $170 per year for a game that i love but some months no be able to pay as much as others. As a working student i feel i dont wanna be pressured to play this game because i pay 10 dollers a month or whatever amount needed to be payed. To some it's not even about the money to some its the uncertenty of paying online(especially parents are afraid to pay online for our "games" afraid of giving credit card away. They also want to cut down on the video game experience to do other things such as school work and will give parents the more power on regulating video games and that's defenitly not wanted in the video gamist eyes. I beleive the best part of the PC was the online gaming created and if its cheapened people would just move right along to the PS2. Xbox is charging for its online time and sure it got some people to buy in and pay, but for how long are they willing to pay for online time plus pay for internet? If the xbox online time was free it would quadrupal its online players and people who buyt the system. In a economy on its knees does anyone really have time or the money to pay online time thats already being paid for per month to use the internet? Blizzard u make the online time free and ill buy the game and make my freinds buy it to play it with me hell my whole dorm will play. ps. can someone put this up on the main forums on blizzard.com because ive seem to have lost my warcraft 3 cd key
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited February 2004
    People seem not to understand the cost of running an MMORPG.
  • NorgeNorge Sidney, Ohio
    edited February 2004
    Blizzard is going to make this game pay per month no matter what. The costs of maintaining servers and providing customer support justifies the monthly fees. The small group of people they will lose by charging this monthly fee will not be enough to make them change their mind. There are more than enough people willing to pay the monthly fee.

    Norge
  • XenogearedXenogeared
    edited February 2004
    Thrax wrote:
    People seem not to understand the cost of running an MMORPG.


    people dont understand a lot of things thrax, thats why we have places like the darwin awards.

    if people just realized how much net traffic the servers have to put up with and how much bandwidth is required to keep all the people with a fast connection then they'd realise the justification for the montly fee. I play FFXI and I dont mind paying monthly for a great game IMO
  • JengoJengo Pasco, WA | USA
    edited February 2004
    is WOW gonna cost money monthly?

    cause if it is, then forget that crap, i hate games you pay monthly for
  • ishiiiishiii Cold lake, AB, CA
    edited February 2004
    All this talk of the game costing money.
    Can anyone tell me of a true MMORPG that doesnt cost money monthly?
  • CBCB Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Der Millionendorf- Icrontian
    edited February 2004
    not a good one. It's just not feasable.
Sign In or Register to comment.