Well boobs are good, blood and gore...ya that too. I'll take the former over the latter everytime...: )-
And say what you will about point and click, but 9 million, ( ok a fraction of that in the US, considering point and click is an Eastern thing) people playing the beloved WoW and or have played it. We obviously use...Point and Click.
I am one who prefers it. I like to kick back at my desk with my feet up. I don't want to friggin baby sit my damn keyboard, fondling it like I would the aforementioned boobs...lol.
Hopefully whoever is in place of deciding and implementing character movement in these games doesn't overlook the fact there are presently a shitload of people used to point and click..liking it or not.
They should use the good sense and understanding that this feature is as potent a point as perhaps rushing there crap out the door too soon.. Bad example but true.
The true new age designers and game makers should look to enabling BOTH Point and Click and WASD.
But then again, I am the one who will continue preaching to these people we want diversity WITH options.
With AoC, well, seems like another MMO that is suffering from "endgame syndrome".
In WAR the cities reset and everything goes back to normal. How is that for an endgame? Pointless PvP with a boring combat system. I'm not saying RvR isn't fun and won't keep people, it's just that the WAR endgame isn't anything special.
I'll take siege combat where there's real consequences and rewards, and I can actually affect the game.
Read the rest of my post. I wasn't backing WAR either, in part, because of what you're talking about.
And, I might be interested in AoC if the whole game was based around the frontiers and if it wasn't class/level based.
AoC could be great but the same problems seem to plague these "next generation" games. Promising way to much and biting off more than they can chew. Vanguard is a wonderful example of the "next generation" game that has fallen flat on its' face due to trying to implement way too much into the game. So many grandiose ideas overwhelmed the developers and they ended up promising up front way more than they could have ever delivered at release. I hope AoC does not fall victim to this and doesn't live up to all that it promises. I am skeptical of games that promise so many great new features just because I have seen almost all of them not succeed.
I feel for a MMORPG to be successful, it is critical that the games foundation be very strong. This doesn't mean innovative or anything else, simply complete for release. The only promise these company's owe us is the promise of a solid game at release.
These companies need to go back to the basics and focus on game performance, solid combat systems, a useful economy and crafting system, and fun / challenging game content. These companies do not need to reinvent the wheel but simply make it great. I am in no way saying this is an easy task but i feel companies are overlooking all of the simple but extremely important items and moving on towards the "whats going to make us great" items. I feel like these new games are way over thought and built from the top, down.
Anyways, I hope AoC focuses on the core content up until release and can make good on what it promises. It seems to me that Warhammer is focusing on making a solid game for release.
I think both AoC and WAR will be good games. The difference will be performance and stability. I am sure the gameplays options will be good for both but the one that is able to perform well on a moderate priced PC will win. Also crash to desktop (CTDs) will kill one over the other. If I had to guess AoC is probably more dependent on this factor since they are using more realistic graphics and pushing DX10 and Vista. If they ride the Microsoft DX10 boat they will sink just like Vista has.
In the FPS world we see the difference between Crysis and Call of Duty 4 and Team Fortress 2. All three are good games but crysis runs like mud on most machine so it is a failure. CoD4 and TF2 have probably out sold it 2 to 1. I base this on the number of people playing each game as shown by:
Originally posted by pur3.5ync What to expect? Better lore than any other previous MMOGs Just me 2 cents.
WAR's lore will be mutilated for the sake of profits. If you think GW is picky about protecting their lore after they've signed a contract and are expecting $$$$$$$$ then you have another thing coming to you. I don't know much about AoC to make a comment on though.
I've followed both games for a while now and I can say that AoC is bringing several new gameplay features to the table. I'm not sure how anyone could say it's a WoW clone. Granted, it's not reinventing the wheel, but this wheel will be one hell of a ride. For the nay-sayers, I'll list a two examples that I feel are noteworthy.
Mounted combat - Race by your enemies letting the momentum of your mount add to the force of your weapon swing, or toss them aside with the tusks of your Mammoth. Each mount handles differently.
Formations - Rank up with other players in strategic formations. Collision is in so expect to see tank "shield walls" and cries of "Hold the Line!" (how to deal with formations? See Mounted Combat above)
These are in addition to the spellweaving, combat combos, player built villages/strongholds, ect..
I'm sure WAR will be a fine game, and the RvR will be great given Mythic's track record. However, I haven't heard much about the basic gameplay/combat system, which leads me to believe that it's more of what we have seen before in other games. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Warhammer is going to be PvP oriented which is why im focusing on it & Conan...well its Conan
My theory is that PvP is a niche feature. Although it has a large following, most people in my opinion do not play MMORPGs for PvP-focus; I think instead they play for world immersion above and beyond all else.
I think AoC is the underestimated of the two. WAR's marketing has been really effective, but I am not confident the game will deliver or have a long-term sustainability with a focus on PvP. The ... fun of PvP will wane and people will get sick of getting "pwnzed" in PvP after a few months.
AoC from what I have researched in a limited way will have PvP elements and more world immersion. It will have its own weaknesses such as demanding system requirements.
----- WoW and fast food = commercial successes. I neither play WoW nor eat fast food.
Warhammer is going to be PvP oriented which is why im focusing on it & Conan...well its Conan
My theory is that PvP is a niche feature. Although it has a large following, most people in my opinion do not play MMORPGs for PvP-focus; I think instead they play for world immersion above and beyond all else.
I think AoC is the underestimated of the two. WAR's marketing has been really effective, but I am not confident the game will deliver or have a long-term sustainability with a focus on PvP. The ... fun of PvP will wane and people will get sick of getting "pwnzed" in PvP after a few months.
AoC from what I have researched in a limited way will have PvP elements and more world immersion. It will have its own weaknesses such as demanding system requirements.
You must be an Older Gamer. Judging from your signature you play Vanguard which means you must be over 30+ years old at least. No one under 30 could stand to play Vanguard. This is where the old generation of MMO Players and the new generation have a conflict. The old EQ1 peeps like and enjoy PVE more like grinding, hell levels, crafting, etc. The new generation does not want to grind. They like fun and like PvP because it gives more of a challenge over computer AI.
I do agree with you however that AoC will not be as popular due to system requirements. Not many Gamers regardless of age have a uber computer to run DX10 and Vista. One day Game Makers will understand that. I thought they would learn from looking at Vanguard and Crysis but I guess not.
You must be an Older Gamer. Judging from your signature you play Vanguard which means you must be over 30+ years old at least. No one under 30 could stand to play Vanguard. This is where the old generation of MMO Players and the new generation have a conflict. The old EQ1 peeps like and enjoy PVE more like grinding, hell levels, crafting, etc. The new generation does not want to grind. They like fun and like PvP because it gives more of a challenge over computer AI.
First, not even close on my age being 30 [I am much younger.]
Second, why do you presume older gamers play Vanguard? I think more sophisticated gamers play Vanguard, but that is not an issue in dispute and one I am not in the mood to argue.
Third, I know people under 18 in-game and in real-life that play Vanguard.
Last, I am not being mean but you presume... an awful lot.
----- WoW and fast food = commercial successes. I neither play WoW nor eat fast food.
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
All i'm going to say is I think people will find AoC upon release, complex in parts, Immersive and more of your traditional mmorpg. I have a feeling alot of people will be presently suprised.
The GvG aspect to it is FAR, far superior to the RvR that warhammer will have. And thats not saying that RvR won't be good. Its because I prefer the Guild unit to a realm one.
Why people will buy AOC: It's new Why people will buy WAR: It's new
Not because they're going to be great games. Let's face it: They're both WoW clones with slight variations.
Why kiddies play certain games: Not just the rulesets and instant-gratification aspects of them... but also because mommy and daddy don't pay for high-end computers such as that needed for VG (which has no kiddies.)
Why people are excited about games like Darkfall: It's what they want to play. There's no indication of a release date yet, and it will most likely have high-end requirements. Kiddies will not likely play this game as it will also have hardcore rulesets and kids won't feel their antics are 'risk-free.'
People were excited about POTBS for a while, until we all realized how heavily instanced it will be.
My point: Most games have nothing interesting or innovative (including WAR and AOC.) They're just new, and people buy them out of boredome. GOOD games are rare.
- Phos
AAH! A troll fire! Quick, pour some Kool-Aid on it!!!
You must be an Older Gamer. Judging from your signature you play Vanguard which means you must be over 30+ years old at least. No one under 30 could stand to play Vanguard. This is where the old generation of MMO Players and the new generation have a conflict. The old EQ1 peeps like and enjoy PVE more like grinding, hell levels, crafting, etc. The new generation does not want to grind. They like fun and like PvP because it gives more of a challenge over computer AI.
First, not even close on my age being 30 [I am much younger.]
Second, why do you presume older gamers play Vanguard? I think more sophisticated gamers play Vanguard, but that is not an issue in dispute and one I am not in the mood to argue.
Third, I know people under 18 in-game and in real-life that play Vanguard.
Last, I am not being mean but you presume... an awful lot.
My mistake. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. Personally, I can not see why anyone of any age would play Vanguard. I can not believe that game is still running.
Originally posted by DCTitan Age of Conan I will pass on. The "mature" rating will probably insure you have everyone but "mature" players and the truth of the matter is that I don't define "fun" by blood / gore or computer generated female breasts. I'm also not a huge fan of twitch based (FPS like) combat in MMO's. I'm getting older so I'm not as quick as I used to be and if I get involved in a Marathon gaming session (I don't have to many of those anymore but hey it could happen again) I think the combat system will introduce a lot of fatigue.
WAR on the other hand seem's right up my ally. It seem's to me it will have a nice blend of PvE and RvR, with there being a purpose to both. It also has the typical MMO combat which I'm used to and generally like, with enough difference to add a new twist to RvR (morale, collision detection, and the ways in which the classes/professions operate). The storyline (being Warhammer) is also something that appeals to me as I was a fan of the table top and it is a proper mix of being between WoW's cheesy wholesome goodness and AoC's "mature" blood, gore and boobs.
We shall see but there is still a lot of time left before either release.
Yeah exactly because there is a "Mature" rating, you will see allot of people under 18, there is no problem getting the CC/Debit Card from your Dad.
You know, when you are young everything that is forbidden for you, makes you want it more.
Originally posted by AmazingAvery All i'm going to say is I think people will find AoC upon release, complex in parts, Immersive and more of your traditional mmorpg. I have a feeling alot of people will be presently suprised. The GvG aspect to it is FAR, far superior to the RvR that warhammer will have. And thats not saying that RvR won't be good. Its because I prefer the Guild unit to a realm one. Conan Lore has been around 75 years.
I trust Funcom as far as i can throw them and believe me i can't throw them very far.
I expect both games at launch to have a high MMORPG.COM(useless) rating and tons of new forum posters bashing the other game back and forth repeatedly all while voting down the other game. Meanwhile people who play neither will then state the useless dropping scores mean the games are a flop. As neither game will garner over 9 million players at launch some of the WoW playerbase will then also claim the games as total pieces of shit.
Originally posted by Unicorns_Pwn I expect both games at launch to have a high MMORPG.COM(useless) rating and tons of new forum posters bashing the other game back and forth repeatedly all while voting down the other game. Meanwhile people who play neither will then state the useless dropping scores mean the games are a flop. As neither game will garner over 9 million players at launch some of the WoW playerbase will then also claim the games as total pieces of shit.
Rinse and repeat. History repeats itself.
Exactly.
And in the end, they're all WOW clones with small variations that people will claim make the game SOOOOO different.
- Phos
AAH! A troll fire! Quick, pour some Kool-Aid on it!!!
I expect both games at launch to have a high MMORPG.COM(useless) rating and tons of new forum posters bashing the other game back and forth repeatedly all while voting down the other game. Meanwhile people who play neither will then state the useless dropping scores mean the games are a flop. As neither game will garner over 9 million players at launch some of the WoW playerbase will then also claim the games as total pieces of shit.
Rinse and repeat. History repeats itself.
Exactly.
And in the end, they're all WOW clones with small variations that people will claim make the game SOOOOO different.
- Phos
OMG you're right.. in these games you can cast spells and attack monsters with weapons. WoW did that already. The internet was built solely so that World of Warcraft could exist. Same goes for credit cards so we could have a recurring payment scheme.
I expect both games at launch to have a high MMORPG.COM(useless) rating and tons of new forum posters bashing the other game back and forth repeatedly all while voting down the other game. Meanwhile people who play neither will then state the useless dropping scores mean the games are a flop. As neither game will garner over 9 million players at launch some of the WoW playerbase will then also claim the games as total pieces of shit.
Rinse and repeat. History repeats itself.
Exactly.
And in the end, they're all WOW clones with small variations that people will claim make the game SOOOOO different.
Originally posted by ghostinfinit Warcraft universe
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The background, plot, and setting, like most Blizzard games, bear notable resemblance to tabletop games such as Warhammer Fantasy Battle by Games Workshop, and Dungeons & Dragons from TSR, Inc (later bought out by Wizards of the Coast in 1997). It's said that Blizzard offered the first Warcraft game to Games Workshop as a game based on the Warhammer universe, but Games Workshop turned them down[citation needed]. The fantasy works of J. R. R. Tolkien also served as a foundation; many of the races are patterned after Tolkien's, and the Elvish languages used in the game, Thalassian [1] and Darnassian [2]) are made to sound like Sindarin and Quenya, the Elvish languages used in The Lord of the Rings. However, large portions of the setting are drawn from modern-day sources and references, ranging from Star Trek, Star Wars (Toshley's Station), to the Cthulhu Mythos, to Thundercats[3], to third-world proxy wars. Still want to talk about cloning?
Oh.
That doesn't change anything.
They're still clones.
- Phos
AAH! A troll fire! Quick, pour some Kool-Aid on it!!!
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The background, plot, and setting, like most Blizzard games, bear notable resemblance to tabletop games such as Warhammer Fantasy Battle by Games Workshop, and Dungeons & Dragons from TSR, Inc (later bought out by Wizards of the Coast in 1997). It's said that Blizzard offered the first Warcraft game to Games Workshop as a game based on the Warhammer universe, but Games Workshop turned them down[citation needed]. The fantasy works of J. R. R. Tolkien also served as a foundation; many of the races are patterned after Tolkien's, and the Elvish languages used in the game, Thalassian [1] and Darnassian [2]) are made to sound like Sindarin and Quenya, the Elvish languages used in The Lord of the Rings. However, large portions of the setting are drawn from modern-day sources and references, ranging from Star Trek, Star Wars (Toshley's Station), to the Cthulhu Mythos, to Thundercats[3], to third-world proxy wars.
Still want to talk about cloning?
Oh.
That doesn't change anything.
They're still clones.
- Phos
You wouldn't happen to work for the Bush Administration would you?
I wouldn't technically want to call anything a clone as much as I would call it a derivative work. This has happened for many years on nearly all markets. Tires are still round, shirts still have 2 sleeves and jeans still generally have zippers.
Sometimes just a bit of redirection is all that is needed. Hell it worked for WoW.
I dont know how you people can still stand the elves, orcs, and fairies...
crappy quests, boring auto attack combat, and a boring world is all War is gonna be. Pointless mashing of the number pad is all pvp will be, and somehow its the high point of the game? figure that one out.
My biggest problem with AoC Has to be The lack of Dwarfs Elfs Goblins Orcs and the hole gang. Since WAR will have many diffrent races im Going to look into it.
Let me assure you that the players of AoC will not miss you or your thoughts on playable races.
If you have the time, please start a thread about his on the official AoC forums, and you will fully understand what I mean.
Comments
And say what you will about point and click, but 9 million, ( ok a fraction of that in the US, considering point and click is an Eastern thing) people playing the beloved WoW and or have played it. We obviously use...Point and Click.
I am one who prefers it. I like to kick back at my desk with my feet up. I don't want to friggin baby sit my damn keyboard, fondling it like I would the aforementioned boobs...lol.
Hopefully whoever is in place of deciding and implementing character movement in these games doesn't overlook the fact there are presently a shitload of people used to point and click..liking it or not.
They should use the good sense and understanding that this feature is as potent a point as perhaps rushing there crap out the door too soon.. Bad example but true.
The true new age designers and game makers should look to enabling BOTH Point and Click and WASD.
But then again, I am the one who will continue preaching to these people we want diversity WITH options.
In WAR the cities reset and everything goes back to normal. How is that for an endgame? Pointless PvP with a boring combat system. I'm not saying RvR isn't fun and won't keep people, it's just that the WAR endgame isn't anything special.
I'll take siege combat where there's real consequences and rewards, and I can actually affect the game.
Read the rest of my post. I wasn't backing WAR either, in part, because of what you're talking about.
And, I might be interested in AoC if the whole game was based around the frontiers and if it wasn't class/level based.
AoC could be great but the same problems seem to plague these "next generation" games. Promising way to much and biting off more than they can chew. Vanguard is a wonderful example of the "next generation" game that has fallen flat on its' face due to trying to implement way too much into the game. So many grandiose ideas overwhelmed the developers and they ended up promising up front way more than they could have ever delivered at release. I hope AoC does not fall victim to this and doesn't live up to all that it promises. I am skeptical of games that promise so many great new features just because I have seen almost all of them not succeed.
I feel for a MMORPG to be successful, it is critical that the games foundation be very strong. This doesn't mean innovative or anything else, simply complete for release. The only promise these company's owe us is the promise of a solid game at release.
These companies need to go back to the basics and focus on game performance, solid combat systems, a useful economy and crafting system, and fun / challenging game content. These companies do not need to reinvent the wheel but simply make it great. I am in no way saying this is an easy task but i feel companies are overlooking all of the simple but extremely important items and moving on towards the "whats going to make us great" items. I feel like these new games are way over thought and built from the top, down.
Anyways, I hope AoC focuses on the core content up until release and can make good on what it promises. It seems to me that Warhammer is focusing on making a solid game for release.
I think both AoC and WAR will be good games. The difference will be performance and stability. I am sure the gameplays options will be good for both but the one that is able to perform well on a moderate priced PC will win. Also crash to desktop (CTDs) will kill one over the other. If I had to guess AoC is probably more dependent on this factor since they are using more realistic graphics and pushing DX10 and Vista. If they ride the Microsoft DX10 boat they will sink just like Vista has.
In the FPS world we see the difference between Crysis and Call of Duty 4 and Team Fortress 2. All three are good games but crysis runs like mud on most machine so it is a failure. CoD4 and TF2 have probably out sold it 2 to 1. I base this on the number of people playing each game as shown by:
http://www.serverspy.net/site/stats/
WAR's lore will be mutilated for the sake of profits. If you think GW is picky about protecting their lore after they've signed a contract and are expecting $$$$$$$$ then you have another thing coming to you. I don't know much about AoC to make a comment on though.
I've followed both games for a while now and I can say that AoC is bringing several new gameplay features to the table. I'm not sure how anyone could say it's a WoW clone. Granted, it's not reinventing the wheel, but this wheel will be one hell of a ride. For the nay-sayers, I'll list a two examples that I feel are noteworthy.
Mounted combat - Race by your enemies letting the momentum of your mount add to the force of your weapon swing, or toss them aside with the tusks of your Mammoth. Each mount handles differently.
Formations - Rank up with other players in strategic formations. Collision is in so expect to see tank "shield walls" and cries of "Hold the Line!" (how to deal with formations? See Mounted Combat above)
These are in addition to the spellweaving, combat combos, player built villages/strongholds, ect..
I'm sure WAR will be a fine game, and the RvR will be great given Mythic's track record. However, I haven't heard much about the basic gameplay/combat system, which leads me to believe that it's more of what we have seen before in other games. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
I think AoC is the underestimated of the two. WAR's marketing has been really effective, but I am not confident the game will deliver or have a long-term sustainability with a focus on PvP. The ... fun of PvP will wane and people will get sick of getting "pwnzed" in PvP after a few months.
AoC from what I have researched in a limited way will have PvP elements and more world immersion. It will have its own weaknesses such as demanding system requirements.
-----
WoW and fast food = commercial successes.
I neither play WoW nor eat fast food.
My theory is that PvP is a niche feature. Although it has a large following, most people in my opinion do not play MMORPGs for PvP-focus; I think instead they play for world immersion above and beyond all else.I think AoC is the underestimated of the two. WAR's marketing has been really effective, but I am not confident the game will deliver or have a long-term sustainability with a focus on PvP. The ... fun of PvP will wane and people will get sick of getting "pwnzed" in PvP after a few months.
AoC from what I have researched in a limited way will have PvP elements and more world immersion. It will have its own weaknesses such as demanding system requirements.
You must be an Older Gamer. Judging from your signature you play Vanguard which means you must be over 30+ years old at least. No one under 30 could stand to play Vanguard. This is where the old generation of MMO Players and the new generation have a conflict. The old EQ1 peeps like and enjoy PVE more like grinding, hell levels, crafting, etc. The new generation does not want to grind. They like fun and like PvP because it gives more of a challenge over computer AI.
I do agree with you however that AoC will not be as popular due to system requirements. Not many Gamers regardless of age have a uber computer to run DX10 and Vista. One day Game Makers will understand that. I thought they would learn from looking at Vanguard and Crysis but I guess not.
Second, why do you presume older gamers play Vanguard? I think more sophisticated gamers play Vanguard, but that is not an issue in dispute and one I am not in the mood to argue.
Third, I know people under 18 in-game and in real-life that play Vanguard.
Last, I am not being mean but you presume... an awful lot.
-----
WoW and fast food = commercial successes.
I neither play WoW nor eat fast food.
All i'm going to say is I think people will find AoC upon release, complex in parts, Immersive and more of your traditional mmorpg. I have a feeling alot of people will be presently suprised.
The GvG aspect to it is FAR, far superior to the RvR that warhammer will have. And thats not saying that RvR won't be good. Its because I prefer the Guild unit to a realm one.
Conan Lore has been around 75 years.
Why people will buy AOC: It's new
Why people will buy WAR: It's new
Not because they're going to be great games. Let's face it: They're both WoW clones with slight variations.
Why kiddies play certain games: Not just the rulesets and instant-gratification aspects of them... but also because mommy and daddy don't pay for high-end computers such as that needed for VG (which has no kiddies.)
Why people are excited about games like Darkfall: It's what they want to play. There's no indication of a release date yet, and it will most likely have high-end requirements. Kiddies will not likely play this game as it will also have hardcore rulesets and kids won't feel their antics are 'risk-free.'
People were excited about POTBS for a while, until we all realized how heavily instanced it will be.
My point: Most games have nothing interesting or innovative (including WAR and AOC.) They're just new, and people buy them out of boredome. GOOD games are rare.
- Phos
Second, why do you presume older gamers play Vanguard? I think more sophisticated gamers play Vanguard, but that is not an issue in dispute and one I am not in the mood to argue.
Third, I know people under 18 in-game and in real-life that play Vanguard.
Last, I am not being mean but you presume... an awful lot.
My mistake. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. Personally, I can not see why anyone of any age would play Vanguard. I can not believe that game is still running.
Yeah exactly because there is a "Mature" rating, you will see allot of people under 18, there is no problem getting the CC/Debit Card from your Dad.
You know, when you are young everything that is forbidden for you, makes you want it more.
I trust Funcom as far as i can throw them and believe me i can't throw them very far.
I expect both games at launch to have a high MMORPG.COM(useless) rating and tons of new forum posters bashing the other game back and forth repeatedly all while voting down the other game. Meanwhile people who play neither will then state the useless dropping scores mean the games are a flop. As neither game will garner over 9 million players at launch some of the WoW playerbase will then also claim the games as total pieces of shit.
Rinse and repeat. History repeats itself.
Exactly.
And in the end, they're all WOW clones with small variations that people will claim make the game SOOOOO different.
- Phos
My biggest problem with AoC Has to be The lack of Dwarfs Elfs Goblins Orcs and the hole gang.
Since WAR will have many diffrent races im Going to look into it.
If WAR keeps my attention for more then 3 Months id have to say its a success.
I just dont get into games the way I use to.
Exactly.
And in the end, they're all WOW clones with small variations that people will claim make the game SOOOOO different.
- Phos
OMG you're right.. in these games you can cast spells and attack monsters with weapons. WoW did that already. The internet was built solely so that World of Warcraft could exist. Same goes for credit cards so we could have a recurring payment scheme.
Exactly.
And in the end, they're all WOW clones with small variations that people will claim make the game SOOOOO different.
- Phos
Warcraft universe
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The background, plot, and setting, like most Blizzard games, bear notable resemblance to tabletop games such as Warhammer Fantasy Battle by Games Workshop, and Dungeons & Dragons from TSR, Inc (later bought out by Wizards of the Coast in 1997). It's said that Blizzard offered the first Warcraft game to Games Workshop as a game based on the Warhammer universe, but Games Workshop turned them down[citation needed]. The fantasy works of J. R. R. Tolkien also served as a foundation; many of the races are patterned after Tolkien's, and the Elvish languages used in the game, Thalassian [1] and Darnassian [2]) are made to sound like Sindarin and Quenya, the Elvish languages used in The Lord of the Rings. However, large portions of the setting are drawn from modern-day sources and references, ranging from Star Trek, Star Wars (Toshley's Station), to the Cthulhu Mythos, to Thundercats[3], to third-world proxy wars.
Still want to talk about cloning?
Oh.
That doesn't change anything.
They're still clones.
- Phos
Oh.
That doesn't change anything.
They're still clones.
- Phos
You wouldn't happen to work for the Bush Administration would you?
I wouldn't technically want to call anything a clone as much as I would call it a derivative work. This has happened for many years on nearly all markets. Tires are still round, shirts still have 2 sleeves and jeans still generally have zippers.
Sometimes just a bit of redirection is all that is needed. Hell it worked for WoW.
I dont know how you people can still stand the elves, orcs, and fairies...
crappy quests, boring auto attack combat, and a boring world is all War is gonna be. Pointless mashing of the number pad is all pvp will be, and somehow its the high point of the game? figure that one out.
Let me assure you that the players of AoC will not miss you or your thoughts on playable races.If you have the time, please start a thread about his on the official AoC forums, and you will fully understand what I mean.
I'll be playing AoC...
Open PvP > RvR