Instead of giving that clown a ride in space, they should have used the money on something else like fixing bugs or creating more content. I don't think the game deserves to be saved. It was all right, but let's face it: even Auto Assault was better.
Instead of giving that clown a ride in space, they should have used the money on something else like fixing bugs or creating more content. I don't think the game deserves to be saved. It was all right, but let's face it: even Auto Assault was better.
NCSoft did not directly pay for the space trip, that came out of his pocket, which of course NCSoft filled in the first place.
Let's get not into the discussion what games are good and which are not, or you'll have a lot of people ask for closing WoW right now...
Whether a game is good or not, in the opinion of hardcore MMO players (like, say, the people reading and writing here) doesn't really matter. What matters is whether it caters to the masses. Unwashed or not. MMOs live and die by their subscriber numbers. And when I take a look past a few MMOs that flourished and perished, "quality" isn't the main deciding factor.
Let's get not into the discussion what games are good and which are not, or you'll have a lot of people ask for closing WoW right now...
Whether a game is good or not, in the opinion of hardcore MMO players (like, say, the people reading and writing here) doesn't really matter. What matters is whether it caters to the masses. Unwashed or not. MMOs live and die by their subscriber numbers. And when I take a look past a few MMOs that flourished and perished, "quality" isn't the main deciding factor.
There are reasons some games never get a lot of subscribers, quality is one. Content or lack thereof is another. Some games only appeal to a smaller number say DDO. TR was never supposed to be that. TR was supposed to be the next generation of MMOs, instead it became the next major flop of MMOs. WOW obviously has appeal that TR was never going to have and it is not fair to TR to compare it to a game it never was going to be or beat.
WoW mostly had a solid base of a well known game IP to stand on. Warcraft has been a name in the gaming world for years, over a decade if I'm not mistaken. It had a dedicated fanbase long before it was turned into a MMO. I dare say that helped it through those critical first 6 months after release.
I played WoW during beta and a short time after release, although not as a Warcraft fan, more as a fan of MMOs. Bluntly, it was by no means any better than the average MMO at release. Buggy quests, questionable balancing, threadbare endgame content, frequent and lengthy downtimes and so on, all the problems that even a well done MMO has at release, and all the problems that caused many good MMOs to go down, even MMOs that were technically or systematically superior to WoW.
WoW had a fanbase already, though. Fans of the Warcraft series that enjoyed meeting their known and loved characters again and stories being expanded to epic size, especially with them being able to participate in them.
So if anything sets WoW apart from all the other MMOs it is that it already had a gaming history long before the MMO was even in the concept stage. You can't create something like this from scratch.
TR could have been there if it wasn't TR but something like "World of Command and Conquer".
WoW mostly had a solid base of a well known game IP to stand on. Warcraft has been a name in the gaming world for years, over a decade if I'm not mistaken. It had a dedicated fanbase long before it was turned into a MMO. I dare say that helped it through those critical first 6 months after release. I played WoW during beta and a short time after release, although not as a Warcraft fan, more as a fan of MMOs. Bluntly, it was by no means any better than the average MMO at release. Buggy quests, questionable balancing, threadbare endgame content, frequent and lengthy downtimes and so on, all the problems that even a well done MMO has at release, and all the problems that caused many good MMOs to go down, even MMOs that were technically or systematically superior to WoW. WoW had a fanbase already, though. Fans of the Warcraft series that enjoyed meeting their known and loved characters again and stories being expanded to epic size, especially with them being able to participate in them. So if anything sets WoW apart from all the other MMOs it is that it already had a gaming history long before the MMO was even in the concept stage. You can't create something like this from scratch. TR could have been there if it wasn't TR but something like "World of Command and Conquer".
While this is true Warcraft was a known name I give you Dungeons and Dragons online to defeat the arguement that a premade fanbase means success. What game has a bigger name in RPG(Warcraft not really an RPG but you get the point)?
TR had RG, with the Ultima series he is as well known as Warcraft and UO is still going as an MMO long after his involvement ended. The reason these other games lived and TR died is simple. TR offered very little as an MMO. It had a small world, very limited content and was so easy to solo it lead to very little group options and no group content, in a game about a war solo is really not the best way to generate buzz. TR generated none.
While this is true Warcraft was a known name I give you Dungeons and Dragons online to defeat the arguement that a premade fanbase means success. What game has a bigger name in RPG(Warcraft not really an RPG but you get the point)?
TR had RG, with the Ultima series he is as well known as Warcraft and UO is still going as an MMO long after his involvement ended. The reason these other games lived and TR died is simple. TR offered very little as an MMO. It had a small world, very limited content and was so easy to solo it lead to very little group options and no group content, in a game about a war solo is really not the best way to generate buzz. TR generated none.
WoW had a large GAMER fanbase. Computer gamer fanbase. P&P roleplayers aren't necessarily the most avid online players. While I give you that D&D has been feeling like a Diablo like hack-and-slash item collection game since version 3.x, P&P players aren't necessarily the crowd that jumps on an MMO.
If Ultima and RG show anything then that gamers don't give too much about names. Or at least not as much as they used to. At best, a name may create some buzz and hype, but it doesn't compensate for a poor game. Not to mention that (and I know I'll get some angry replies for that) UO wouldn't succeed today. UO puts a lot of emphasis on "role playing" in the good ol' fashion sense. That's not necessarily what people playing MMOs today are looking for.
TR also has a quite dense story, for an MMO that is. I'm pretty sure RG put a lot of focus on the storyline, and it shows. Unfortunately that's not really what the majority of players are looking for in an MMO today. A contemporary MMO has to offer item hunts and high level group based content. And TR delivered neither. Barely any high level content, no compelling reason to group (actually it was pretty hard to play sensibly in a group, if anything the game hindered you to cooperate instead of faciliating it) and no item hunting whatsoever. Yes, there were "purple" items and they were superior to the normal stuff, but any of those dropped as random loot from random encounters. There was little if any "boss loot" that people are appearantly asking for today.
Still, I don't think the game failed because of its interface or its out-of-the-box controls and backdrop. It failed because, as you pointed out already, it lacked group content, it lacked high level content and a lack of item farming. Yes, I know everyone complains about the treadmill of instance running for boss items, but that's what makes MMOs successful these days.
While this is true Warcraft was a known name I give you Dungeons and Dragons online to defeat the arguement that a premade fanbase means success. What game has a bigger name in RPG(Warcraft not really an RPG but you get the point)?
TR had RG, with the Ultima series he is as well known as Warcraft and UO is still going as an MMO long after his involvement ended. The reason these other games lived and TR died is simple. TR offered very little as an MMO. It had a small world, very limited content and was so easy to solo it lead to very little group options and no group content, in a game about a war solo is really not the best way to generate buzz. TR generated none.
WoW had a large GAMER fanbase. Computer gamer fanbase. P&P roleplayers aren't necessarily the most avid online players. While I give you that D&D has been feeling like a Diablo like hack-and-slash item collection game since version 3.x, P&P players aren't necessarily the crowd that jumps on an MMO.
If Ultima and RG show anything then that gamers don't give too much about names. Or at least not as much as they used to. At best, a name may create some buzz and hype, but it doesn't compensate for a poor game. Not to mention that (and I know I'll get some angry replies for that) UO wouldn't succeed today. UO puts a lot of emphasis on "role playing" in the good ol' fashion sense. That's not necessarily what people playing MMOs today are looking for.
TR also has a quite dense story, for an MMO that is. I'm pretty sure RG put a lot of focus on the storyline, and it shows. Unfortunately that's not really what the majority of players are looking for in an MMO today. A contemporary MMO has to offer item hunts and high level group based content. And TR delivered neither. Barely any high level content, no compelling reason to group (actually it was pretty hard to play sensibly in a group, if anything the game hindered you to cooperate instead of faciliating it) and no item hunting whatsoever. Yes, there were "purple" items and they were superior to the normal stuff, but any of those dropped as random loot from random encounters. There was little if any "boss loot" that people are appearantly asking for today.
Still, I don't think the game failed because of its interface or its out-of-the-box controls and backdrop. It failed because, as you pointed out already, it lacked group content, it lacked high level content and a lack of item farming. Yes, I know everyone complains about the treadmill of instance running for boss items, but that's what makes MMOs successful these days.
TR really had the chance to do end of game item farming ina new and fun way. Epic battlefields with bosses and behind the line recon type missions. All the things I would hope for in a war to save humanity game were simply missing.
As for loot, again the game came down to ease of play, you did not need top end loot to defeat top end game and while that type of play annoys many people it also keeps many trying to get that next item. We are all hamsters in the wheel and when the wheel stops we leave.
Originally posted by Chlodwig WoW had a large GAMER fanbase. Computer gamer fanbase.
Oh, so then explain to me why SWG, using the most beloved franchise in all of media and having had a decade of amazing computer games come before it, only managed to scrape together just barely 300k subs at it's peak?
By your IP and built in fanbase logic SWG should have had thirty or forty million subs at it's height. And don't give me the "refined game, quality content" nonsense. It took less than six months for WoW to surpass Lineage in subs (making it the most played MMO in the world).
Anyone questioning why this game is being shut down; Have you PLAYED THIS GAME?
When I heard Richard G, was involved in this game I wanted in. I played it, and wanted out. To be HONEST I think this game needed about 5 more months of Beta, and some MAJOR game changed to work. It was a very Alkward game.
It took less than six months for WoW to surpass Lineage in subs (making it the most played MMO in the world).
um, . . it took more than a year actually before it reached Lineage numbers. You also have to account that Lineage 2, at one point, had over 15 million subscribers. Lineage -- 11 mil.
um, . . it took more than a year actually before it reached Lineage numbers. You also have to account that Lineage 2, at one point, had over 15 million subscribers. Lineage -- 11 mil.
Umm, what? Lineage 2 and Lineage never had 15 and 11 million subs. At it's peak Lineage pulled in just over 3 million and L2's best is just barely over 2 million. WoW surpassed Lineage in terms of paid subscriptions at the end of Q1 2005 when it hit 2 mil subs (at the time both L and L2 had nearly identical sub rates, just under 2 mil).
I mean, this isn't even really up for debate. Just go look at the numbers in Q1 2005 NCSoft financial report for L and L2. Take that number, convert it from WON to USD, divide it by three, then divide it by fifteen. The quotient is the amount of subs at the time and that quotient is extremely generous as all box sale revenues are being counted as paid subscriptions.
um, . . it took more than a year actually before it reached Lineage numbers. You also have to account that Lineage 2, at one point, had over 15 million subscribers. Lineage -- 11 mil.
Umm, what? Lineage 2 and Lineage never had 15 and 11 million subs. At it's peak Lineage pulled in just over 3 million and L2's best is just barely over 2 million. WoW surpassed Lineage in terms of paid subscriptions at the end of Q1 2005 when it hit 2 mil subs (at the time both L and L2 had nearly identical sub rates, just under 2 mil).
I mean, this isn't even really up for debate. Just go look at the numbers in Q1 2005 NCSoft financial report for L and L2. Take that number, convert it from WON to USD, divide it by three, then divide it by fifteen. The quotient is the amount of subs at the time and that quotient is extremely generous as all box sale revenues are being counted as paid subscriptions.
Oh evil evil math you are the bane of so many people. Like TR people who said they had 100k subs because they forgot to divide by the 3 months in a quarter. Notice Lkavadas knows his math and how to break down the reveunue into subscriptions. His math is good and that is why even though we do not always agree I know his numbers are as accurate as he can get them.
Originally posted by Chlodwig WoW had a large GAMER fanbase. Computer gamer fanbase.
Oh, so then explain to me why SWG, using the most beloved franchise in all of media and having had a decade of amazing computer games come before it, only managed to scrape together just barely 300k subs at it's peak?
By your IP and built in fanbase logic SWG should have had thirty or forty million subs at it's height. And don't give me the "refined game, quality content" nonsense. It took less than six months for WoW to surpass Lineage in subs (making it the most played MMO in the world).
SWG suffered both from a very usual mix of problems and from an inherent problem of its best known storyline. The generally (unfortunately) abundant problem: It was released way too early, as so many games that could have been the next big thing but failed due to being pushed out too quickly. Game balance was horrible, stability was unbearable, things were introduced, then removed again, generally it felt like the devs have no clue what they're doing.
The inherent problem was the Jedi class. Of course the game had to have Jedis. But this is a serious problem. First, it's, simply due to the story of the books and movies, an incredibly cool class. And there aren't many. The only class that could come close in "coolness factor" would be the Smuggler, with Han as the role model. But trader? Healer? Heck, the healers in Star Wars are friggin' droids! So the classes fans of the series will choose are from a very limited set.
Becoming a Jedi has also changed so many times it is simply not funny anymore. It was a "secret" treadmill quest (later revealed to get people onto the treadmill and keep them playing), then changed to ... I don't remember, wasn't there even something akin to permadeath for Jedis too? At any rate, every time it was changed and "made easier", it was a surefire way to piss off the dedicated fans who took it upon themselves to go through the lengths necessary to be a Jedi. And of course the balance issues inherent of the class again.
When you look at the sales numbers, SWG did initially sell a million copies. I dare say, though, that most of them were preorders that were probably never played actively when the game received reviews that basically said "if you love the series, don't play the game and ruin the fond memories you have with a game not 'worthy' of that name".
I think SWG did have the potential to reach similar heights as WoW. It had everything it needed (besides good graphics, hell, those were even already dated when it shipped). What it didn't have, and what WoW had, was enough time to actually get the basics and foundation of the game done to build on. I think the proverbial breaker was the repeated overhaul of the Jedi class. Every hardcore fan of the franchise certainly wanted to be a Jedi, and I am sure a lot of them went through the various ordeals originally necessary to become one. When it's then suddenly changed as soon as you manage to finally become one of the "chosen few" only to learn that everyone can be there simply by creating one, I can well understand that people quit in disgust.
SGW had it in the sales to have that critical 1 Million subs necessary to make the game take off like WoW did. They failed to have them by not delivering what was expected and changing too much. They simply didn't live up to their hype. Whether that would have been possible at all is debatable.
Maybe there is such a thing as a "too strong" IP...
Originally posted by Chlodwig WoW had a large GAMER fanbase. Computer gamer fanbase.
Oh, so then explain to me why SWG, using the most beloved franchise in all of media and having had a decade of amazing computer games come before it, only managed to scrape together just barely 300k subs at it's peak?
By your IP and built in fanbase logic SWG should have had thirty or forty million subs at it's height. And don't give me the "refined game, quality content" nonsense. It took less than six months for WoW to surpass Lineage in subs (making it the most played MMO in the world).
SWG suffered both from a very usual mix of problems and from an inherent problem of its best known storyline. The generally (unfortunately) abundant problem: It was released way too early, as so many games that could have been the next big thing but failed due to being pushed out too quickly. Game balance was horrible, stability was unbearable, things were introduced, then removed again, generally it felt like the devs have no clue what they're doing.
The inherent problem was the Jedi class. Of course the game had to have Jedis. But this is a serious problem. First, it's, simply due to the story of the books and movies, an incredibly cool class. And there aren't many. The only class that could come close in "coolness factor" would be the Smuggler, with Han as the role model. But trader? Healer? Heck, the healers in Star Wars are friggin' droids! So the classes fans of the series will choose are from a very limited set.
Becoming a Jedi has also changed so many times it is simply not funny anymore. It was a "secret" treadmill quest (later revealed to get people onto the treadmill and keep them playing), then changed to ... I don't remember, wasn't there even something akin to permadeath for Jedis too? At any rate, every time it was changed and "made easier", it was a surefire way to piss off the dedicated fans who took it upon themselves to go through the lengths necessary to be a Jedi. And of course the balance issues inherent of the class again.
When you look at the sales numbers, SWG did initially sell a million copies. I dare say, though, that most of them were preorders that were probably never played actively when the game received reviews that basically said "if you love the series, don't play the game and ruin the fond memories you have with a game not 'worthy' of that name".
I think SWG did have the potential to reach similar heights as WoW. It had everything it needed (besides good graphics, hell, those were even already dated when it shipped). What it didn't have, and what WoW had, was enough time to actually get the basics and foundation of the game done to build on. I think the proverbial breaker was the repeated overhaul of the Jedi class. Every hardcore fan of the franchise certainly wanted to be a Jedi, and I am sure a lot of them went through the various ordeals originally necessary to become one. When it's then suddenly changed as soon as you manage to finally become one of the "chosen few" only to learn that everyone can be there simply by creating one, I can well understand that people quit in disgust.
SGW had it in the sales to have that critical 1 Million subs necessary to make the game take off like WoW did. They failed to have them by not delivering what was expected and changing too much. They simply didn't live up to their hype. Whether that would have been possible at all is debatable.
Maybe there is such a thing as a "too strong" IP...
If the game fails to live up to the IP then yes you could say there is such a thing, or you could blame the company for building a lame game built on a strong IP.
I am also sure some people who spent $3,000 on Ebay to buy Jedi accounts left in a blind rage when the changes were made that allowed people to make Jedi so easily. Not that I would advocate spending that kind of money or any money for an online account or items in a game.
I think the difference in how well they performed can be put down to a few things - fans of WOW's ip were computer gamers - so all their fan base were already gamers
- Star Wars IP - is from the films and the books - so its not necessarily gamers.
- advertising - WOW did a far batter job of advertising
- release date - the fact that WOW was released a couple of years after SWG meant there was just a lot more homes with internet access.
- graphics - WOW's graphics are cartoony - which IMO suggests parents are more likely to let their young kids play a cartoony fantasy game that a more releastic (shooter type - talking about parents with no idea of gaming) game
Once WOW was out there it just exploded numberwise on word of mouth.
- strength of the I.P in the gaming industry - Warcraft were hugely successful games, whereas at the time SWG was released there had not been a good Star Wars game released.
- strength of the I.P in the gaming industry - Warcraft were hugely successful games, whereas at the time SWG was released there had not been a good Star Wars game released.
Wow, really? So the whole X-Wing and TIE Fighter series never happened? Or the original KOTOR? Or Dark Forces? Those are just the titles I can think of off the top of my head but I can guarantee you this:
Lucas Arts sold more Star Wars PC games before SWG launched than Blizzard sold Warcrafts. People tend to forget the original War Craft was f*cking terrible. It was a turn based POS and that's why Blizzard went into scramble mode to save their company in 1994 and completely ripped off Command & Conquer (itself an evolution of Westwood's previous RTS title, Dune II) with Warcraft II.
The only thing WoW had going for it is that it came hot off the heels of Warcraft III which terrible PC gaming magazines were going ape sh*t over (even though the game was completely pedestrian and still just a poorly done Westwood ripoff).
- strength of the I.P in the gaming industry - Warcraft were hugely successful games, whereas at the time SWG was released there had not been a good Star Wars game released.
Wow, really? So the whole X-Wing and TIE Fighter series never happened? Or the original KOTOR? Or Dark Forces? Those are just the titles I can think of off the top of my head but I can guarantee you this:
Lucas Arts sold more Star Wars PC games before SWG launched than Blizzard sold Warcrafts. People tend to forget the original War Craft was f*cking terrible. It was a turn based POS and that's why Blizzard went into scramble mode to save their company in 1994 and completely ripped off Command & Conquer (itself an evolution of Westwood's previous RTS title, Dune II) with Warcraft II.
I think you missed his point. It was not so much the quality of the games as their popularity which determined the strength of the IP.
First off, KOTOR was released several months AFTER the original SWG, so that doesn't count.
Secondly, X-Wing vs TIE fighter is seriously old school stuff. They may have been considered better than average games back in their day but you would be hard pressed to find many MMO players today who remember or even played those games.
Third, Dark Forces? Are you kidding me? I can walk down the street and ask people if they have heard of Warcraft and almost everyone will know what I'm talking about. Ask people if they have heard of Dark Forces and they will tell you to "ask someone else for directions to the sci-fi convention, nerd!"
As for Warcraft itself, it was not turn based. I don't know what game you played but I played the original Warcraft and I clearly remember it being an RTS game. Granted it wasn't as good as the games being made by Westwood Studios at that time but it was neither terrible nor turn based. It made logical sense for Blizzard to compare their product to what their competitors were offering at that time and make improvements based on that, thus the reason why Warcraft II may have been much more similar to what C&C was like. Its not some kind of crime to improve your game.
I think the point Shadowmage was trying to make boils down to this: Blizzard was a super popular company which was very well known for making great games, one of which was their Warcraft series of games. Compare that to Star Wars, where games were very hit and miss and much less popular overall.
This is probably why Bioware was chosen to make the new Star Wars MMO, because they are better known for quality and could connect their title to the popular KOTOR games by calling it "Old Republic" so people would think it was the same game. The bottom line is that it all boils down to who can make their product SOUND better on paper or in an ad on TV. I think WoW wins that contest over SWG without even breaking a sweat.
Don't get me worng, I hate WoW as much as the next guy. I'm just setting the facts straight here.
- strength of the I.P in the gaming industry - Warcraft were hugely successful games, whereas at the time SWG was released there had not been a good Star Wars game released.
Wow, really? So the whole X-Wing and TIE Fighter series never happened? Or the original KOTOR? Or Dark Forces? Those are just the titles I can think of off the top of my head but I can guarantee you this:
Lucas Arts sold more Star Wars PC games before SWG launched than Blizzard sold Warcrafts. People tend to forget the original War Craft was f*cking terrible. It was a turn based POS and that's why Blizzard went into scramble mode to save their company in 1994 and completely ripped off Command & Conquer (itself an evolution of Westwood's previous RTS title, Dune II) with Warcraft II.
I think you missed his point. It was not so much the quality of the games as their popularity which determined the strength of the IP.
First off, KOTOR was released several months AFTER the original SWG, so that doesn't count.
Secondly, X-Wing vs TIE fighter is seriously old school stuff. They may have been considered better than average games back in their day but you would be hard pressed to find many MMO players today who remember or even played those games.
Third, Dark Forces? Are you kidding me? I can walk down the street and ask people if they have heard of Warcraft and almost everyone will know what I'm talking about. Ask people if they have heard of Dark Forces and they will tell you to "ask someone else for directions to the sci-fi convention, nerd!"
As for Warcraft itself, it was not turn based. I don't know what game you played but I played the original Warcraft and I clearly remember it being an RTS game. Granted it wasn't as good as the games being made by Westwood Studios at that time but it was neither terrible nor turn based. It made logical sense for Blizzard to compare their product to what their competitors were offering at that time and make improvements based on that, thus the reason why Warcraft II may have been much more similar to what C&C was like. Its not some kind of crime to improve your game.
I think the point Shadowmage was trying to make boils down to this: Blizzard was a super popular company which was very well known for making great games, one of which was their Warcraft series of games. Compare that to Star Wars, where games were very hit and miss and much less popular overall.
This is probably why Bioware was chosen to make the new Star Wars MMO, because they are better known for quality and could connect their title to the popular KOTOR games by calling it "Old Republic" so people would think it was the same game. The bottom line is that it all boils down to who can make their product SOUND better on paper or in an ad on TV. I think WoW wins that contest over SWG without even breaking a sweat.
Don't get me worng, I hate WoW as much as the next guy. I'm just setting the facts straight here.
I bet if you walk down the street and ask about warcraft most people will not know what you are talking about, unless of course you aim for just certain age groups. If you asked about Star Wars I bet more people know what you are talking about.
I bet if you walk down the street and ask about warcraft most people will not know what you are talking about, unless of course you aim for just certain age groups. If you asked about Star Wars I bet more people know what you are talking about.
Right... do you not own a TV? Have you not noticed that every other TV ad these days is for WoW? Almost every day another major celebrity sells out and does a WoW ad for some huge sum of money. There must be dirt farmers in Africa who know what WoW is by now. People who don't know that Aeris dies at the end of disk one in FF7 must know what WoW is by now. I'll go so far as to say that anyone who hasn't heard of Warcraft by now must be completely oblivious to what is happening around them.
But ask people about "X-Wing vs TIE fighter" or "Dark Forces" and see how far you get. Most people know Star Wars as a movie but are eiter unaware or uninterested in it as a video game.
Why do people on this website love to pick apart minor details but ignore the actual POINT of a post?
Originally posted by lkavadas Wow, really? So the whole X-Wing and TIE Fighter series never happened? Or the original KOTOR? Or Dark Forces? Those are just the titles I can think of off the top of my head but I can guarantee you this: Lucas Arts sold more Star Wars PC games before SWG launched than Blizzard sold Warcrafts. People tend to forget the original War Craft was f*cking terrible.
Lucas Arts has released 71 Star Wars games - and the majority of them were crap - way to ruin an I.P. Kotor released the same year as SWG and is credited with showing it was still possible to make a good Star Wars game.
I am a big fan of Star Wars - own all 6 movies, 51 books, Kotor, Kotor 2, Battlefront 2 and Empire at War + expansion, never played WOW - but I do own Warcraft 3 and expansion.
Never mind - totally lost the plot on what we were discussing Oh yes - Warcraft 1 may have been crap, but Warcraft 2 was better and Warcraft 3 better again. So Blizzard added value to their IP as well as getting a rep for other games like Starcraft and Diablo. So yes I am arguing from a gamer point of view - Blizzard had better recognition to their name with gamers when WOW hit the streets.
On the flip - side Lucas Arts let everyman and their dog make a Star Wars game, and most tanked. So they had all but destroyed their rep with gamers before Bioware revived it with Kotor.
And whilst SWG was a hit compared to other MMO's at the time, back in 2003 the MMO market just wasnt that big. Then WOW hit the scenes and dragged so many millions more gamers into the MMO space.
Wow, really? So the whole X-Wing and TIE Fighter series never happened? Or the original KOTOR? Or Dark Forces? Those are just the titles I can think of off the top of my head but I can guarantee you this: Lucas Arts sold more Star Wars PC games before SWG launched than Blizzard sold Warcrafts. People tend to forget the original War Craft was f*cking terrible. It was a turn based POS and that's why Blizzard went into scramble mode to save their company in 1994 and completely ripped off Command & Conquer (itself an evolution of Westwood's previous RTS title, Dune II) with Warcraft II. The only thing WoW had going for it is that it came hot off the heels of Warcraft III which terrible PC gaming magazines were going ape sh*t over (even though the game was completely pedestrian and still just a poorly done Westwood ripoff).
Wow mate, a nice way to show just how ignorant you really are. As others have pointed out, Warcraft 1 was indeed an RTS, so with Warcraft 2 they just upgraded on the exisitng model.
And yes... Ignore the critical acclaim the third installment got. Forget that, with Starcraft it's THE rts game to be played competitively. Forget it brought in real hero units, an interesting campaign, complex game mechanics and one of the most powerful game editors ever(recently one modder made a simulation of evolution).
The two are so diffrent, that the only thing they probably really have in common is FUN. Yes fun. I do enjoy raping the ass out of my enemy with my blademaster. I also enjoy demolisihing anything on my path with rank 3 Apocalypse tanks and Boris. Yet for me Warcraft 3 is better, for someone else, Red Alert 2 is better. A matter of personal taste. But to say Warcraft 3 is a poorly done Westwood ripoff is blantly ignorant.
Also shame on you for not mentioning Jedi Knight and it's sequel Jedi Outcast. This game was so full of win.
- strength of the I.P in the gaming industry - Warcraft were hugely successful games, whereas at the time SWG was released there had not been a good Star Wars game released.
Lucas Arts sold more Star Wars PC games before SWG launched than Blizzard sold Warcrafts. People tend to forget the original War Craft was f*cking terrible. It was a turn based POS and that's why Blizzard went into scramble mode to save their company in 1994 and completely ripped off Command & Conquer (itself an evolution of Westwood's previous RTS title, Dune II) with Warcraft II.
The only thing WoW had going for it is that it came hot off the heels of Warcraft III which terrible PC gaming magazines were going ape sh*t over (even though the game was completely pedestrian and still just a poorly done Westwood ripoff).
Wow, quit bitching, everyone grabs ideas from each other in every industry. It's who succeeds with it wins. I believe Blizzard succeeded more than Westwood in the RTS market only by popularity, granted I love both companies; but I never found a similarity between any of the Warcrafts and Starcraft when compared to Command & Conquer (you cuold be bitching about the normal RTS formula, which is quite retarded if I might say so). They were completely different and that is why I played them all. Blizzard won the popularity contest by their Battle.net, Westwood had something similar I believe at the time, but it was completely no match for either Warcraft II or Starcraft's battle.net. Warcraft III took the battle.net system to the next level and just made online gaming a delight, granted I'm not sure of the recent online changes to the newest Command & Conquers, but that is where it's at.. the online. Blizzard is just simply better at it. Their battle.net also has experience from their Diablo franchise. Guess what? It was all free and that was a big ass deal at the time of Warcraft II & Starcraft.
I'd argue how Blizzard redefined the RTS genre by implementing RPG elements correctly into Warcraft III, but it'll be useless because I'm sure someone in the distant universe already had invented it completly shitty and unresponsive (which is your arguement). Else, they would've gotten the same satisfaction, correct?
Comments
Instead of giving that clown a ride in space, they should have used the money on something else like fixing bugs or creating more content. I don't think the game deserves to be saved. It was all right, but let's face it: even Auto Assault was better.
NCSoft did not directly pay for the space trip, that came out of his pocket, which of course NCSoft filled in the first place.
Let's get not into the discussion what games are good and which are not, or you'll have a lot of people ask for closing WoW right now...
Whether a game is good or not, in the opinion of hardcore MMO players (like, say, the people reading and writing here) doesn't really matter. What matters is whether it caters to the masses. Unwashed or not. MMOs live and die by their subscriber numbers. And when I take a look past a few MMOs that flourished and perished, "quality" isn't the main deciding factor.
Let's get not into the discussion what games are good and which are not, or you'll have a lot of people ask for closing WoW right now...
Whether a game is good or not, in the opinion of hardcore MMO players (like, say, the people reading and writing here) doesn't really matter. What matters is whether it caters to the masses. Unwashed or not. MMOs live and die by their subscriber numbers. And when I take a look past a few MMOs that flourished and perished, "quality" isn't the main deciding factor.
There are reasons some games never get a lot of subscribers, quality is one. Content or lack thereof is another. Some games only appeal to a smaller number say DDO. TR was never supposed to be that. TR was supposed to be the next generation of MMOs, instead it became the next major flop of MMOs. WOW obviously has appeal that TR was never going to have and it is not fair to TR to compare it to a game it never was going to be or beat.
WoW mostly had a solid base of a well known game IP to stand on. Warcraft has been a name in the gaming world for years, over a decade if I'm not mistaken. It had a dedicated fanbase long before it was turned into a MMO. I dare say that helped it through those critical first 6 months after release.
I played WoW during beta and a short time after release, although not as a Warcraft fan, more as a fan of MMOs. Bluntly, it was by no means any better than the average MMO at release. Buggy quests, questionable balancing, threadbare endgame content, frequent and lengthy downtimes and so on, all the problems that even a well done MMO has at release, and all the problems that caused many good MMOs to go down, even MMOs that were technically or systematically superior to WoW.
WoW had a fanbase already, though. Fans of the Warcraft series that enjoyed meeting their known and loved characters again and stories being expanded to epic size, especially with them being able to participate in them.
So if anything sets WoW apart from all the other MMOs it is that it already had a gaming history long before the MMO was even in the concept stage. You can't create something like this from scratch.
TR could have been there if it wasn't TR but something like "World of Command and Conquer".
While this is true Warcraft was a known name I give you Dungeons and Dragons online to defeat the arguement that a premade fanbase means success. What game has a bigger name in RPG(Warcraft not really an RPG but you get the point)?
TR had RG, with the Ultima series he is as well known as Warcraft and UO is still going as an MMO long after his involvement ended. The reason these other games lived and TR died is simple. TR offered very little as an MMO. It had a small world, very limited content and was so easy to solo it lead to very little group options and no group content, in a game about a war solo is really not the best way to generate buzz. TR generated none.
While this is true Warcraft was a known name I give you Dungeons and Dragons online to defeat the arguement that a premade fanbase means success. What game has a bigger name in RPG(Warcraft not really an RPG but you get the point)?
TR had RG, with the Ultima series he is as well known as Warcraft and UO is still going as an MMO long after his involvement ended. The reason these other games lived and TR died is simple. TR offered very little as an MMO. It had a small world, very limited content and was so easy to solo it lead to very little group options and no group content, in a game about a war solo is really not the best way to generate buzz. TR generated none.
WoW had a large GAMER fanbase. Computer gamer fanbase. P&P roleplayers aren't necessarily the most avid online players. While I give you that D&D has been feeling like a Diablo like hack-and-slash item collection game since version 3.x, P&P players aren't necessarily the crowd that jumps on an MMO.
If Ultima and RG show anything then that gamers don't give too much about names. Or at least not as much as they used to. At best, a name may create some buzz and hype, but it doesn't compensate for a poor game. Not to mention that (and I know I'll get some angry replies for that) UO wouldn't succeed today. UO puts a lot of emphasis on "role playing" in the good ol' fashion sense. That's not necessarily what people playing MMOs today are looking for.
TR also has a quite dense story, for an MMO that is. I'm pretty sure RG put a lot of focus on the storyline, and it shows. Unfortunately that's not really what the majority of players are looking for in an MMO today. A contemporary MMO has to offer item hunts and high level group based content. And TR delivered neither. Barely any high level content, no compelling reason to group (actually it was pretty hard to play sensibly in a group, if anything the game hindered you to cooperate instead of faciliating it) and no item hunting whatsoever. Yes, there were "purple" items and they were superior to the normal stuff, but any of those dropped as random loot from random encounters. There was little if any "boss loot" that people are appearantly asking for today.
Still, I don't think the game failed because of its interface or its out-of-the-box controls and backdrop. It failed because, as you pointed out already, it lacked group content, it lacked high level content and a lack of item farming. Yes, I know everyone complains about the treadmill of instance running for boss items, but that's what makes MMOs successful these days.
While this is true Warcraft was a known name I give you Dungeons and Dragons online to defeat the arguement that a premade fanbase means success. What game has a bigger name in RPG(Warcraft not really an RPG but you get the point)?
TR had RG, with the Ultima series he is as well known as Warcraft and UO is still going as an MMO long after his involvement ended. The reason these other games lived and TR died is simple. TR offered very little as an MMO. It had a small world, very limited content and was so easy to solo it lead to very little group options and no group content, in a game about a war solo is really not the best way to generate buzz. TR generated none.
WoW had a large GAMER fanbase. Computer gamer fanbase. P&P roleplayers aren't necessarily the most avid online players. While I give you that D&D has been feeling like a Diablo like hack-and-slash item collection game since version 3.x, P&P players aren't necessarily the crowd that jumps on an MMO.
If Ultima and RG show anything then that gamers don't give too much about names. Or at least not as much as they used to. At best, a name may create some buzz and hype, but it doesn't compensate for a poor game. Not to mention that (and I know I'll get some angry replies for that) UO wouldn't succeed today. UO puts a lot of emphasis on "role playing" in the good ol' fashion sense. That's not necessarily what people playing MMOs today are looking for.
TR also has a quite dense story, for an MMO that is. I'm pretty sure RG put a lot of focus on the storyline, and it shows. Unfortunately that's not really what the majority of players are looking for in an MMO today. A contemporary MMO has to offer item hunts and high level group based content. And TR delivered neither. Barely any high level content, no compelling reason to group (actually it was pretty hard to play sensibly in a group, if anything the game hindered you to cooperate instead of faciliating it) and no item hunting whatsoever. Yes, there were "purple" items and they were superior to the normal stuff, but any of those dropped as random loot from random encounters. There was little if any "boss loot" that people are appearantly asking for today.
Still, I don't think the game failed because of its interface or its out-of-the-box controls and backdrop. It failed because, as you pointed out already, it lacked group content, it lacked high level content and a lack of item farming. Yes, I know everyone complains about the treadmill of instance running for boss items, but that's what makes MMOs successful these days.
TR really had the chance to do end of game item farming ina new and fun way. Epic battlefields with bosses and behind the line recon type missions. All the things I would hope for in a war to save humanity game were simply missing.
As for loot, again the game came down to ease of play, you did not need top end loot to defeat top end game and while that type of play annoys many people it also keeps many trying to get that next item. We are all hamsters in the wheel and when the wheel stops we leave.
Oh, so then explain to me why SWG, using the most beloved franchise in all of media and having had a decade of amazing computer games come before it, only managed to scrape together just barely 300k subs at it's peak?
By your IP and built in fanbase logic SWG should have had thirty or forty million subs at it's height. And don't give me the "refined game, quality content" nonsense. It took less than six months for WoW to surpass Lineage in subs (making it the most played MMO in the world).
Anyone questioning why this game is being shut down; Have you PLAYED THIS GAME?
When I heard Richard G, was involved in this game I wanted in. I played it, and wanted out. To be HONEST I think this game needed about 5 more months of Beta, and some MAJOR game changed to work. It was a very Alkward game.
um, . . it took more than a year actually before it reached Lineage numbers. You also have to account that Lineage 2, at one point, had over 15 million subscribers. Lineage -- 11 mil.
Don't save Tabula Rasa, bad games deserve to burn.
Umm, what? Lineage 2 and Lineage never had 15 and 11 million subs. At it's peak Lineage pulled in just over 3 million and L2's best is just barely over 2 million. WoW surpassed Lineage in terms of paid subscriptions at the end of Q1 2005 when it hit 2 mil subs (at the time both L and L2 had nearly identical sub rates, just under 2 mil).
I mean, this isn't even really up for debate. Just go look at the numbers in Q1 2005 NCSoft financial report for L and L2. Take that number, convert it from WON to USD, divide it by three, then divide it by fifteen. The quotient is the amount of subs at the time and that quotient is extremely generous as all box sale revenues are being counted as paid subscriptions.
Umm, what? Lineage 2 and Lineage never had 15 and 11 million subs. At it's peak Lineage pulled in just over 3 million and L2's best is just barely over 2 million. WoW surpassed Lineage in terms of paid subscriptions at the end of Q1 2005 when it hit 2 mil subs (at the time both L and L2 had nearly identical sub rates, just under 2 mil).
I mean, this isn't even really up for debate. Just go look at the numbers in Q1 2005 NCSoft financial report for L and L2. Take that number, convert it from WON to USD, divide it by three, then divide it by fifteen. The quotient is the amount of subs at the time and that quotient is extremely generous as all box sale revenues are being counted as paid subscriptions.
Oh evil evil math you are the bane of so many people. Like TR people who said they had 100k subs because they forgot to divide by the 3 months in a quarter. Notice Lkavadas knows his math and how to break down the reveunue into subscriptions. His math is good and that is why even though we do not always agree I know his numbers are as accurate as he can get them.
Oh, so then explain to me why SWG, using the most beloved franchise in all of media and having had a decade of amazing computer games come before it, only managed to scrape together just barely 300k subs at it's peak?
By your IP and built in fanbase logic SWG should have had thirty or forty million subs at it's height. And don't give me the "refined game, quality content" nonsense. It took less than six months for WoW to surpass Lineage in subs (making it the most played MMO in the world).
SWG suffered both from a very usual mix of problems and from an inherent problem of its best known storyline. The generally (unfortunately) abundant problem: It was released way too early, as so many games that could have been the next big thing but failed due to being pushed out too quickly. Game balance was horrible, stability was unbearable, things were introduced, then removed again, generally it felt like the devs have no clue what they're doing.
The inherent problem was the Jedi class. Of course the game had to have Jedis. But this is a serious problem. First, it's, simply due to the story of the books and movies, an incredibly cool class. And there aren't many. The only class that could come close in "coolness factor" would be the Smuggler, with Han as the role model. But trader? Healer? Heck, the healers in Star Wars are friggin' droids! So the classes fans of the series will choose are from a very limited set.
Becoming a Jedi has also changed so many times it is simply not funny anymore. It was a "secret" treadmill quest (later revealed to get people onto the treadmill and keep them playing), then changed to ... I don't remember, wasn't there even something akin to permadeath for Jedis too? At any rate, every time it was changed and "made easier", it was a surefire way to piss off the dedicated fans who took it upon themselves to go through the lengths necessary to be a Jedi. And of course the balance issues inherent of the class again.
When you look at the sales numbers, SWG did initially sell a million copies. I dare say, though, that most of them were preorders that were probably never played actively when the game received reviews that basically said "if you love the series, don't play the game and ruin the fond memories you have with a game not 'worthy' of that name".
I think SWG did have the potential to reach similar heights as WoW. It had everything it needed (besides good graphics, hell, those were even already dated when it shipped). What it didn't have, and what WoW had, was enough time to actually get the basics and foundation of the game done to build on. I think the proverbial breaker was the repeated overhaul of the Jedi class. Every hardcore fan of the franchise certainly wanted to be a Jedi, and I am sure a lot of them went through the various ordeals originally necessary to become one. When it's then suddenly changed as soon as you manage to finally become one of the "chosen few" only to learn that everyone can be there simply by creating one, I can well understand that people quit in disgust.
SGW had it in the sales to have that critical 1 Million subs necessary to make the game take off like WoW did. They failed to have them by not delivering what was expected and changing too much. They simply didn't live up to their hype. Whether that would have been possible at all is debatable.
Maybe there is such a thing as a "too strong" IP...
Oh, so then explain to me why SWG, using the most beloved franchise in all of media and having had a decade of amazing computer games come before it, only managed to scrape together just barely 300k subs at it's peak?
By your IP and built in fanbase logic SWG should have had thirty or forty million subs at it's height. And don't give me the "refined game, quality content" nonsense. It took less than six months for WoW to surpass Lineage in subs (making it the most played MMO in the world).
SWG suffered both from a very usual mix of problems and from an inherent problem of its best known storyline. The generally (unfortunately) abundant problem: It was released way too early, as so many games that could have been the next big thing but failed due to being pushed out too quickly. Game balance was horrible, stability was unbearable, things were introduced, then removed again, generally it felt like the devs have no clue what they're doing.
The inherent problem was the Jedi class. Of course the game had to have Jedis. But this is a serious problem. First, it's, simply due to the story of the books and movies, an incredibly cool class. And there aren't many. The only class that could come close in "coolness factor" would be the Smuggler, with Han as the role model. But trader? Healer? Heck, the healers in Star Wars are friggin' droids! So the classes fans of the series will choose are from a very limited set.
Becoming a Jedi has also changed so many times it is simply not funny anymore. It was a "secret" treadmill quest (later revealed to get people onto the treadmill and keep them playing), then changed to ... I don't remember, wasn't there even something akin to permadeath for Jedis too? At any rate, every time it was changed and "made easier", it was a surefire way to piss off the dedicated fans who took it upon themselves to go through the lengths necessary to be a Jedi. And of course the balance issues inherent of the class again.
When you look at the sales numbers, SWG did initially sell a million copies. I dare say, though, that most of them were preorders that were probably never played actively when the game received reviews that basically said "if you love the series, don't play the game and ruin the fond memories you have with a game not 'worthy' of that name".
I think SWG did have the potential to reach similar heights as WoW. It had everything it needed (besides good graphics, hell, those were even already dated when it shipped). What it didn't have, and what WoW had, was enough time to actually get the basics and foundation of the game done to build on. I think the proverbial breaker was the repeated overhaul of the Jedi class. Every hardcore fan of the franchise certainly wanted to be a Jedi, and I am sure a lot of them went through the various ordeals originally necessary to become one. When it's then suddenly changed as soon as you manage to finally become one of the "chosen few" only to learn that everyone can be there simply by creating one, I can well understand that people quit in disgust.
SGW had it in the sales to have that critical 1 Million subs necessary to make the game take off like WoW did. They failed to have them by not delivering what was expected and changing too much. They simply didn't live up to their hype. Whether that would have been possible at all is debatable.
Maybe there is such a thing as a "too strong" IP...
If the game fails to live up to the IP then yes you could say there is such a thing, or you could blame the company for building a lame game built on a strong IP.
I am also sure some people who spent $3,000 on Ebay to buy Jedi accounts left in a blind rage when the changes were made that allowed people to make Jedi so easily. Not that I would advocate spending that kind of money or any money for an online account or items in a game.
I think the difference in how well they performed can be put down to a few things
- fans of WOW's ip were computer gamers - so all their fan base were already gamers
- Star Wars IP - is from the films and the books - so its not necessarily gamers.
- advertising - WOW did a far batter job of advertising
- release date - the fact that WOW was released a couple of years after SWG meant there was just a lot more homes with internet access.
- graphics - WOW's graphics are cartoony - which IMO suggests parents are more likely to let their young kids play a cartoony fantasy game that a more releastic (shooter type - talking about parents with no idea of gaming) game
Once WOW was out there it just exploded numberwise on word of mouth.
- strength of the I.P in the gaming industry - Warcraft were hugely successful games, whereas at the time SWG was released there had not been a good Star Wars game released.
Wow, really? So the whole X-Wing and TIE Fighter series never happened? Or the original KOTOR? Or Dark Forces? Those are just the titles I can think of off the top of my head but I can guarantee you this:
Lucas Arts sold more Star Wars PC games before SWG launched than Blizzard sold Warcrafts. People tend to forget the original War Craft was f*cking terrible. It was a turn based POS and that's why Blizzard went into scramble mode to save their company in 1994 and completely ripped off Command & Conquer (itself an evolution of Westwood's previous RTS title, Dune II) with Warcraft II.
The only thing WoW had going for it is that it came hot off the heels of Warcraft III which terrible PC gaming magazines were going ape sh*t over (even though the game was completely pedestrian and still just a poorly done Westwood ripoff).
Wow, really? So the whole X-Wing and TIE Fighter series never happened? Or the original KOTOR? Or Dark Forces? Those are just the titles I can think of off the top of my head but I can guarantee you this:
Lucas Arts sold more Star Wars PC games before SWG launched than Blizzard sold Warcrafts. People tend to forget the original War Craft was f*cking terrible. It was a turn based POS and that's why Blizzard went into scramble mode to save their company in 1994 and completely ripped off Command & Conquer (itself an evolution of Westwood's previous RTS title, Dune II) with Warcraft II.
I think you missed his point. It was not so much the quality of the games as their popularity which determined the strength of the IP.
First off, KOTOR was released several months AFTER the original SWG, so that doesn't count.
Secondly, X-Wing vs TIE fighter is seriously old school stuff. They may have been considered better than average games back in their day but you would be hard pressed to find many MMO players today who remember or even played those games.
Third, Dark Forces? Are you kidding me? I can walk down the street and ask people if they have heard of Warcraft and almost everyone will know what I'm talking about. Ask people if they have heard of Dark Forces and they will tell you to "ask someone else for directions to the sci-fi convention, nerd!"
As for Warcraft itself, it was not turn based. I don't know what game you played but I played the original Warcraft and I clearly remember it being an RTS game. Granted it wasn't as good as the games being made by Westwood Studios at that time but it was neither terrible nor turn based. It made logical sense for Blizzard to compare their product to what their competitors were offering at that time and make improvements based on that, thus the reason why Warcraft II may have been much more similar to what C&C was like. Its not some kind of crime to improve your game.
I think the point Shadowmage was trying to make boils down to this: Blizzard was a super popular company which was very well known for making great games, one of which was their Warcraft series of games. Compare that to Star Wars, where games were very hit and miss and much less popular overall.
This is probably why Bioware was chosen to make the new Star Wars MMO, because they are better known for quality and could connect their title to the popular KOTOR games by calling it "Old Republic" so people would think it was the same game. The bottom line is that it all boils down to who can make their product SOUND better on paper or in an ad on TV. I think WoW wins that contest over SWG without even breaking a sweat.
Don't get me worng, I hate WoW as much as the next guy. I'm just setting the facts straight here.
The History of the Order of The Golden Shields
Wow, really? So the whole X-Wing and TIE Fighter series never happened? Or the original KOTOR? Or Dark Forces? Those are just the titles I can think of off the top of my head but I can guarantee you this:
Lucas Arts sold more Star Wars PC games before SWG launched than Blizzard sold Warcrafts. People tend to forget the original War Craft was f*cking terrible. It was a turn based POS and that's why Blizzard went into scramble mode to save their company in 1994 and completely ripped off Command & Conquer (itself an evolution of Westwood's previous RTS title, Dune II) with Warcraft II.
I think you missed his point. It was not so much the quality of the games as their popularity which determined the strength of the IP.
First off, KOTOR was released several months AFTER the original SWG, so that doesn't count.
Secondly, X-Wing vs TIE fighter is seriously old school stuff. They may have been considered better than average games back in their day but you would be hard pressed to find many MMO players today who remember or even played those games.
Third, Dark Forces? Are you kidding me? I can walk down the street and ask people if they have heard of Warcraft and almost everyone will know what I'm talking about. Ask people if they have heard of Dark Forces and they will tell you to "ask someone else for directions to the sci-fi convention, nerd!"
As for Warcraft itself, it was not turn based. I don't know what game you played but I played the original Warcraft and I clearly remember it being an RTS game. Granted it wasn't as good as the games being made by Westwood Studios at that time but it was neither terrible nor turn based. It made logical sense for Blizzard to compare their product to what their competitors were offering at that time and make improvements based on that, thus the reason why Warcraft II may have been much more similar to what C&C was like. Its not some kind of crime to improve your game.
I think the point Shadowmage was trying to make boils down to this: Blizzard was a super popular company which was very well known for making great games, one of which was their Warcraft series of games. Compare that to Star Wars, where games were very hit and miss and much less popular overall.
This is probably why Bioware was chosen to make the new Star Wars MMO, because they are better known for quality and could connect their title to the popular KOTOR games by calling it "Old Republic" so people would think it was the same game. The bottom line is that it all boils down to who can make their product SOUND better on paper or in an ad on TV. I think WoW wins that contest over SWG without even breaking a sweat.
Don't get me worng, I hate WoW as much as the next guy. I'm just setting the facts straight here.
I bet if you walk down the street and ask about warcraft most people will not know what you are talking about, unless of course you aim for just certain age groups. If you asked about Star Wars I bet more people know what you are talking about.
Right... do you not own a TV? Have you not noticed that every other TV ad these days is for WoW? Almost every day another major celebrity sells out and does a WoW ad for some huge sum of money. There must be dirt farmers in Africa who know what WoW is by now. People who don't know that Aeris dies at the end of disk one in FF7 must know what WoW is by now. I'll go so far as to say that anyone who hasn't heard of Warcraft by now must be completely oblivious to what is happening around them.
But ask people about "X-Wing vs TIE fighter" or "Dark Forces" and see how far you get. Most people know Star Wars as a movie but are eiter unaware or uninterested in it as a video game.
Why do people on this website love to pick apart minor details but ignore the actual POINT of a post?
The History of the Order of The Golden Shields
I had to go look up
Timeline of Star Wars video games to even remember those games you mentioned - apart from Kotor.
Lucas Arts has released 71 Star Wars games - and the majority of them were crap - way to ruin an I.P. Kotor released the same year as SWG and is credited with showing it was still possible to make a good Star Wars game.
I am a big fan of Star Wars - own all 6 movies, 51 books, Kotor, Kotor 2, Battlefront 2 and Empire at War + expansion, never played WOW - but I do own Warcraft 3 and expansion.
Never mind - totally lost the plot on what we were discussing
On the flip - side Lucas Arts let everyman and their dog make a Star Wars game, and most tanked. So they had all but destroyed their rep with gamers before Bioware revived it with Kotor.
And whilst SWG was a hit compared to other MMO's at the time, back in 2003 the MMO market just wasnt that big. Then WOW hit the scenes and dragged so many millions more gamers into the MMO space.
No thanks. Let it go back to the depths from whence it came!
Wow mate, a nice way to show just how ignorant you really are. As others have pointed out, Warcraft 1 was indeed an RTS, so with Warcraft 2 they just upgraded on the exisitng model.
And yes... Ignore the critical acclaim the third installment got. Forget that, with Starcraft it's THE rts game to be played competitively. Forget it brought in real hero units, an interesting campaign, complex game mechanics and one of the most powerful game editors ever(recently one modder made a simulation of evolution).
The two are so diffrent, that the only thing they probably really have in common is FUN. Yes fun. I do enjoy raping the ass out of my enemy with my blademaster. I also enjoy demolisihing anything on my path with rank 3 Apocalypse tanks and Boris. Yet for me Warcraft 3 is better, for someone else, Red Alert 2 is better. A matter of personal taste. But to say Warcraft 3 is a poorly done Westwood ripoff is blantly ignorant.
Also shame on you for not mentioning Jedi Knight and it's sequel Jedi Outcast. This game was so full of win.
Lucas Arts sold more Star Wars PC games before SWG launched than Blizzard sold Warcrafts. People tend to forget the original War Craft was f*cking terrible. It was a turn based POS and that's why Blizzard went into scramble mode to save their company in 1994 and completely ripped off Command & Conquer (itself an evolution of Westwood's previous RTS title, Dune II) with Warcraft II.
The only thing WoW had going for it is that it came hot off the heels of Warcraft III which terrible PC gaming magazines were going ape sh*t over (even though the game was completely pedestrian and still just a poorly done Westwood ripoff).
Wow, quit bitching, everyone grabs ideas from each other in every industry. It's who succeeds with it wins. I believe Blizzard succeeded more than Westwood in the RTS market only by popularity, granted I love both companies; but I never found a similarity between any of the Warcrafts and Starcraft when compared to Command & Conquer (you cuold be bitching about the normal RTS formula, which is quite retarded if I might say so). They were completely different and that is why I played them all. Blizzard won the popularity contest by their Battle.net, Westwood had something similar I believe at the time, but it was completely no match for either Warcraft II or Starcraft's battle.net. Warcraft III took the battle.net system to the next level and just made online gaming a delight, granted I'm not sure of the recent online changes to the newest Command & Conquers, but that is where it's at.. the online. Blizzard is just simply better at it. Their battle.net also has experience from their Diablo franchise. Guess what? It was all free and that was a big ass deal at the time of Warcraft II & Starcraft.
I'd argue how Blizzard redefined the RTS genre by implementing RPG elements correctly into Warcraft III, but it'll be useless because I'm sure someone in the distant universe already had invented it completly shitty and unresponsive (which is your arguement). Else, they would've gotten the same satisfaction, correct?