The first time you start WOW after creating your character, and move around a bit, you are instantly connected with it. The smoothnes and responsiveness of the controls are just perfect. I'm sure this gives such good feelings when playing the game, which probably accounts for a big part of WOW success. Some university should study this.
I'm sure, with a good responsive character, flaws in the game are much more tolerated, while with bad responsiveness good features in the game will appear tarnished.
That is SOO true......its one of the reasons i still play wow today......the moves of the chars are accurate and smooth.
It's true. Most people play WoW because they don't know what else is out there.And if you have a bunch of friends playing WoW it can be hard to break away from the pack... but I mean, even the "WoW clones" are better than WoW so it is kinda interesting. It's a "commerical success" I suppose. Just like GTA... nothing great but appealed to the masses.
I think you're making some wild assumptions. If you were at all present on the WoW forums before AoC, WAR and Aion released you would know that the WoW players do indeed know what else is out there.
Again, the forums represent a very small minority of players. I like to use my former guild as an example here. Out of about 60 players, I was the only one who would visit the forums. I imagine that kind of ratio is pretty true for most of the playerbase.
So? Size of a sample of the playerbase has very little to do with if the accuracy of their opinions. It is the composition of the sample that matters. For example, you ever heard of official polls? Usually they poll a tiny fraction of the base but they use techniques to make sure it is a representetive fraction and that decides the accuracy of the poll.
In forums there are no such techniques being used so you could argue that based on that it MAY not be representative but the size of it has no bearing on the accuracy.
I played WoW for 3 years myself. Wow almost had everything except the fact that you can't own or rent a temporary piece of real estate because it woul ruin the "Lore".
So, me and my friends moved on to Aika where we can get a chance to be "Lord Marshal", own or temporarily rent a piece of real estate like the relics , establish guild alliance and defend our turf.
Still waiting on the "WoW Killer" MMO though. /peace
"A trembling hand does not thrust the blade true." - Artemis Enteri
I'm an old gamer who's been around since the dawn of online gaming, from UO to EQ1 to DAoC to SWG, WoW and many others. I think a post above summed it up nicely.... "only time will kill WoW." Since the begining of online gaming there has always been a game with a much higher population than the rest. It's usually only dethroned because it was time for a change. As others in the past, WoW also tried to target a much bigger audiance. I think it was the first online game to activly advertise on prime time TV.
Games come and go and always will, WoW has lasted longer as the money made from the game means the developers can keep evolving the game to keep people interested, the same could have been said of EQ1 and UO back in their day. But there comes a time when the masses simply just want a change and a different style of play. Predicting when or even what this change may be is impossible as far as I'm concerned. So many big titles have come and gone in the last few years as the fans hailed it as the next greatest thing.
I do however think the market has now changed, in that people do expect much more from an online game and at launch it has to be fairly bug free and full of content. That takes huge amounts of time and resources. How many games over the last few years made so many promises in terms of what they would deliver only for us to see cut-backs being made by the "money men," half products being released.
I think there are only a few developers left who have the capabilities to make the next "big thing". I also think WoW will eventually be dethroned...just not at the moment.
Most of the games that have come out since then have been clones of sorts.
I think think that games like EVE and Darkfall will eventually compete because with fun PVP there is no end game. When there is an end game people leave.
The funny part of this post is that Wow's PvP is 100 x more instant and active fun than the ones mentioned, because it is - among others - based on a competition and accessible 24/7 in much more varied and extreme ranked forms.
Tastes may vary. WoW PvP is meaningless and dull to me because it's not for anything. Likewise the PvE. It's a great game at doing what it does, but what it does doesn't interest me.
Saying that DisneyWorld is "better" than paintballing in the forest because 50 million people a year go there but only a couple of hundred a day go to the paintball place is meaningless. Both the paintball place and the park offer experiences that DisneyWorld inherently cant because of the nature of the place.
I want to dissect your answer on that particular PvP issue (and cutting the non issue of Disney world part and the usual made up themepark stuff because that's trivial and not even recognised theorizing on MM's).
PvP rankings in this game - among others - is based on a competition - ladder based even. Saying this kind of stuff is "meaningless" means you are not interested in ANY human competition, like the football season, soccer competition, tennis, poker,... as a matter of fact any ladder based competition of human nature would be trivial and non meaningful.
You play for the title, for the competition, for the achievements in any of these ranked forms. Be that in any activity.
You message is the CORE problem why people don't see the obvious succes.
In various forms, in various playing styles and it ... outgrew already Wow's original set up by a large margin.
These days players play with experience shut down, experience boosting, titles of accomplisment in hardest possible PVE, in e-sport mode, in arena mode, in daily 200+ players Siege modes and it just gets bigger with every patch on options.
Enter - for example - the guild PvP competition and rated BG mode with the season's PvP titles.
Ignoring the obvious is not helping to explain the success of WOW.
You can shout for 10.000 times the same phrase: " In MY view a PvP competition is meaningless", the problem is that a few billion people on this planet think a ranked personal competition is what drives sports, economics, our intrests.
Sticking the head into sand for obvious succesful formulas doesn't help one bit to understand why the game is simply succesful.
No matter how many catchy and non defined words are brought into the discussion like MacDonalds, Themepark, sandbox, etc ...
And last comment: the bottom line it does all this with the most responsive controls of any MMO out there (yes that includes jumping over hedges ...).
WoW is a game that runs on almost any PC. People play WoW on dial up. 'dial up' is where you have a modem. . WoW has content for most play styles, casual play, raiding, pvp, etc. . WoW paid attention to the fun aspects of MMOs like combat. The head dev at the time said, 'combat has to be fun'. . SWTOR has a good chance to unseat WoW. With almost 3 times the budget WoW had and a studio that is famous for delivering the best solo RPGs in the world. .
I think WoW is successfull for the following reasons.
WoW had a large fanbase from those who loved games like Diabalo Warcraft and of course Starcraft 1. Giving it a good starting sub base.
WoW was simplified graphically meaning most PC's at the time could handle it.
Back then Brand awarness of MMO's was less prevailant in the target audiance giving Blizzard an advantage.
WoW has honoured the lore or Warcraft giving a very familuar world unlike say Warhammer which was just a RvR game with a Warhammer skin and a hint of lore.
WoW has kept to the same formula of its creation of a clear path of progression with easy to predict Quests and hidden them benieth the exelent lore and the many "easter eggs" such as hidden references to past games and real world things. One recent example of this practice by blizzard i noticed was in Starcraft 2 with the Dwarf as an Engineer and the ingame TV advert showing a Taurian in Marine armour advertising a music CD.
By not innovating too much and only introducing stuff if it is really needed [such as PvP] they insure the game isant broken by a new feature that is poorly thought out.
Also most new subscribers thanks to the advertising dont realise there are other games like it [or they just dont care as they are comfortable with WoW].
So to sum it up WoW works because it has years behind it creating a very ballanced game that occasionally innovates with a new feature that is confirmed is wanted by the fans, and it has a lot of media advertising creating awareness in the real world.
Of course to add my personall biassed thoughts.
Is WoW the most popular? Yes its the most popular Western MMO
Is it the best Designed MMO? That is dependent on the likes of each person as i dont like games with a fixed progression. I hate loot that you must have that takes [in some cases] over a month to get legitamatly. I prefer that there are no instances. I love to trade and craft in a meaningfull fashion also i like a open unrestricted world that fits the lore.
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
My question is why? What is wrong here? Six years, which have seen some of the greatest advances in video gaming since the field began. Six years of stupendous amounts of money. Six years of expectation, goodwill, desire, backing, technical capacity - everything you could possibly have wanted. Everything. And yet, nothing touches on WoW, by now an old game. It is a fascinating phenomenon. Worthy of a PhD. What on earth is so hard about making a good MMO; and why are Blizzard the only wizards who have been able really to capitalise on the genre's awesome potential? All I can say is, gad. I don't want to be 60 before the next one comes along. I had really thought we would have seen a new contender by now. Get a move on people! Get a move on!
When it was released, it had poor content, was terribly buggy and totally uncapable of handling any decent amount of people (think of the 6-hours long queues, crash-on-demand each time you tried to assault a major city, etc etc), pretty much as every other MMO.
There were no giants though. Other MMOs had either low population, were terribly hard, enforced a team-oriented gameplay, weren't designed with casual play in mind, or simply had painful graphics. WoW was an easy-going family-oriented game with appealing cartoony graphics and guided, mostly soloable content, built on a famous IP. A kind of "revolution" at the exact time (late '90s and early 2000) when more powerful consoles with impressive graphics made videogames a less "nerdy" and more popular thing.
In other words, timing was perfect. a couple years too early and WoW would be one of those decent games of the past and not much more. a couple years too late and today there would probably be another game in its position. Then, the huge amount of players funded its development, a major reason of failure of other games after WoW: in 2004 we were ready to pay for an unfinished, buggy and poorly coded and supported game. Because there wasn't a "better" game in its category. Today, very few of us would do that again (hey, why should i pay $15 a month for an unfinished WoW-like game when i can pay the same and play the original WoW with years worth of content?). And you can't really blame anyone for that.
Another one of those posts that don’t put the finger on the success of WOW.
Let’s see where Blizzard did innovate…
Before WOW, MMO’s were known for their unresponsive and lacking controls of the avatars, after WOW was published, MMO’s were known for the unresponsive and lacking controls…
As these are … video games you play for thousands of hours. Imagine the value of this innovation.
Before WOW MMO’s had to be played with other people on line for hours and hours … waiting for something “fun” to happen. Glued before your monitor and waiting for that monster to spawn, waiting for hours to find a decent group of a “humble” number of 72 like minded dudes to even start a challenge.
As these are video games you play for thousands of hours. Cutting on the time losses and time drains of someone’s (short) life was innovative.
WOW includes play with a gradual difficulty. Very hard modes both in PvE and PvP are in the same world as very soft modes. Your grandmother can play and have success … on her level. She’ll never get to Wrathful Gladiator but perhaps even she can be crucial and heal a warrior in a BG and find some honor boots after a win at he age of 67.
Itemisation and fine tuning up to and beyond 0.1 % of the stats after EVERY patch. I still remember playing AoC at launch and finding boots at level 7 that were better than level 58’s had. You saw players running around with the same gear for 40+ levels. Even Dungeon Siege on the PSP had better itemisation tables than AOC at launch.
A standard patch and expansion plan: No other MMO to have a perfected 6 months upgrade plan throughout all playing styles. The lull between 3.3 and 4.0 is a real exception to this and I even think they do it on purpose: CATA is really a restart of things.
A PvP that doesn’t endanger the PVE experience and still offers a challenging competition for those wanting a rated/achievement personal status with titles and bragging rights. Conquering a besieged fortress and having access to a resultant Raid content every 2.5 hours is a brilliant idea … because 4-5 hours is the absolute max of present day attention spans. PvP battles last 30 minutes max. because the losing side quits after this time (if not earlier)… Blizzard is the only one thinking about the losers in PvP.
I could go on. But the above are innovative game mechanics and not shown in other products on the same scale and level.
No it was not a question of timing, lore, luck or marketing.
It is a question of pure fun "game" design. Something MMO's simply lack in general. They concentrate far too much on time drains (be that monster kills or spawns) without fun elements.
Blizzard, unlike almost every other game company on the market, keeps returning to old aspects of the game, aspects that other game companies consider 'done and dusted' and keeps refining, adjusting and improving them. Yes, the game has many flaws but neglect of existing assets is not one of them.
The Designers: Some of which were MMO players themselves. They saw how the competition worked and were it could be refined. In other words, unlike the later competition, they took note of were the others failed and exploited it.
The IP: Owned by Blizzard and created by Blizzard. Chris Metzen has been a the helm of writing lore since War3 (maybe earlier). Those who have played War 3 will understand just how close WoW stuck to War3 lore. The locations on the map may have changed but the events and details from War 3 were all transferred into WoW. Even "Timmy" the undead mob you see in War3 is in WoW. The point is, they didn't have an outside influence telling them how to make a game based on the IP.
The Game: Polish, attention to detail that matters, good foundation on which to build, gentle leveling curve, enough content to encourage subs beyond the first 30 days, variety in gamestyles.
WoW has been on somewhat of a steady decline in terms of how "great" a game it once was, sure it's still popular but that's just because it's easy.
After 6 years they have managed to kill off world PvP, make it so both sides have all the same classes, and have blended those classes so much together that other then a few "pure" classes each one can just about do all the others roles.
Scope and profesionalism? They released a polished game that still had some bugs but were quick to work on them. Yes that's a profesional release and more companies should stop trying to be greedy and strive to be more like Blizzard in that way but I don't know what you mean by scope. In that they spoon feed you gear and bread crumb you to your next zone only to spoon feed you more gear. Well that's not one of their selling points if you ask me.
They made a fun game that has taken all the fun parts about the genre and mixed then together for sucess. I just hope that they haven't killed off the genre in the process.
Wow.. (not the game) talk about a TROLLING thread if I ever read one.. First sentence starts off inviting people to respond in a confrontational way.. There was nothing constructive in this thread whatsoever, other then insight a tug of war argument and start a fanboy type of bonfire.. Everyone likes what they like.. I for one and I lil tired of the McDonalds crowd running around Aspen's Food and Wine festival wearing their oversized sponge hands chanting "we're number 1"..
When are people going to realize that NUMBERs does not equal QUALITY.. my god.. Does examples of McDonalds, Walmart and GM not teach you anything?
Edit PS.. If pure sub numbers is what you use to "rate" a game.. Farmville has WoW destroyed hands down.. right? LOL
I find it hilarious that someone would even dare say WOW is not about quality. Just shows how biased they are. Hate the game all you want but do it on basis of facts not personal hate and prejudice.
90% of haters are begging for love. 10% just want a little attention -- Paulo Coelho
I find it hilarious that someone would even dare say WOW is not about quality. Just shows how biased they are. Hate the game all you want but do it on basis of facts not personal hate and prejudice.
Well it's not depending on your own points of interest and view.. In my view and opinion sandbox type features like player and guild housing is almost a must.. having a true complex player economy is a must.. having meaningful PvP is a must.. having OPEN raids is a must.....
WOW has NONE of those features, so in my opinion WoW is EPIC FAIL for end game purposes.. You like McD's.. I prefer Wendy's.. to each their own
I find it hilarious that someone would even dare say WOW is not about quality. Just shows how biased they are. Hate the game all you want but do it on basis of facts not personal hate and prejudice.
Well it's not depending on your own points of interest and view.. In my view and opinion sandbox type features like player and guild housing is almost a must.. having a true complex player economy is a must.. having meaningful PvP is a must.. having OPEN raids is a must.....
WOW has NONE of those features, so in my opinion WoW is EPIC FAIL for end game purposes.. You like McD's.. I prefer Wendy's.. to each their own
But whatever you mentioned has nothing to with being quality product. All those sandbox features does not automatically make a game full of quality. I think you are misunderstanding the term 'quality' here. Also all these Mcdonald refrences are un original and boring. Doesn't add much depth to your argument or reasoning. Just shows that you are just biased.
90% of haters are begging for love. 10% just want a little attention -- Paulo Coelho
Wow.. (not the game) talk about a TROLLING thread if I ever read one.. First sentence starts off inviting people to respond in a confrontational way.. There was nothing constructive in this thread whatsoever, other then insight a tug of war argument and start a fanboy type of bonfire.. Everyone likes what they like.. I for one and I lil tired of the McDonalds crowd running around Aspen's Food and Wine festival wearing their oversized sponge hands chanting "we're number 1"..
When are people going to realize that NUMBERs does not equal QUALITY.. my god.. Does examples of McDonalds, Walmart and GM not teach you anything?
Your analogy is horrible. McDonald's, Wal-Mart and GM are all popular because they are cheap yet effective. Explain to me how you could apply this metaphorically to this situation. There are no MMOs that cost more than each other due to quality or service. You pay a streamlined price for a variety of attributes, including community, service, quality and content.
Eating at McDonald's for two will cost you $15 CAD. Eating at a real restaurant, where quality and servoce is assured, will cost you anywhere from $40-$80. By paying more, you receive a mature community, good service, proper quality and varied content.
World of Warcraft is $14.99 a month. Aion is $14.99 a month. SW:TOR will be $14.99 a month.
World of Warcraft has the best service and is most polished game on the market. It has been for a very long time. You are a shining example of someone who has underdog syndrome. You simply dislike the game personally but fail to provide factual evidence as to why it should be compared to something that is viewed as cheap, narrow and unhealthy. If you think you are in bad hands with Blizzard's serivce, then prepare to be disappointed everywhere else because there is no other MMO company that will help you the way Blizzard currently does.
Games have risen and fallen to World of Warcraft. There is no Burger King equivalent. I refute your point. Every MMO on the market since World of Warcraft has declined. Aion is terrible. Warhammer is terrible. Vanguard was terrible. Final Fantasy XIV is going so far off in the wrong direction to attempt innovation to de-throne World of Wacraft that it may as well be in it's own genre.
Care to explain which MMO holds the title of "Aspen's Food" and "Wine Festival" if World of Warcraft is McDonald's?
World of Wacraft's popularity can be attributed to different terms of it's lifetime and why. Previously, it was challenging and meaningful. Currently, it is challengeless and a husk of it's former self. Yet still rewarding to those who are less skilled or who have less time to play.
Yes, the game is too easy, mindless and now it sucks in many people's eyes, including mine. However, to compare World of Warcraft to McDonalds in terms of popularity without properly citing your claims (you have none), you look like an idiot.
Choose a different angle. World of Warcraft is quality. To be able to look at a game and say, "This game is good, but it's not my kind of game" grants you an unbiased tone. Unfortunately, you have been unable to provide that.
Wow.. (not the game) talk about a TROLLING thread if I ever read one.. First sentence starts off inviting people to respond in a confrontational way.. There was nothing constructive in this thread whatsoever, other then insight a tug of war argument and start a fanboy type of bonfire.. Everyone likes what they like.. I for one and I lil tired of the McDonalds crowd running around Aspen's Food and Wine festival wearing their oversized sponge hands chanting "we're number 1"..
When are people going to realize that NUMBERs does not equal QUALITY.. my god.. Does examples of McDonalds, Walmart and GM not teach you anything?
Your analogy is horrible. McDonald's, Wal-Mart and GM are all popular because they are cheap yet effective. Explain to me how you could apply this metaphorically to this situation. There are no MMOs that cost more than each other due to quality or service. You pay a streamlined price for a variety of attributes, including community, service, quality and content.
Eating at McDonald's for two will cost you $15 CAD. Eating at a real restaurant, where quality and servoce is assured, will cost you anywhere from $40-$80. By paying more, you receive a mature community, good service, proper quality and varied content.
World of Warcraft is $14.99 a month. Aion is $14.99 a month. SW:TOR will be $14.99 a month.
World of Warcraft has the best service and is most polished game on the market. It has been for a very long time. You are a shining example of someone who has underdog syndrome. You simply dislike the game personally but fail to provide factual evidence as to why it should be compared to something that is viewed as cheap, narrow and unhealthy. If you think you are in bad hands with Blizzard's serivce, then prepare to be disappointed everywhere else because there is no other MMO company that will help you the way Blizzard currently does.
Games have risen and fallen to World of Warcraft. There is no Burger King equivalent. I refute your point. Every MMO on the market since World of Warcraft has declined. Aion is terrible. Warhammer is terrible. Vanguard was terrible. Final Fantasy XIV is going so far off in the wrong direction to attempt innovation to de-throne World of Wacraft that it may as well be in it's own genre.
Care to explain which MMO holds the title of "Aspen's Food" and "Wine Festival" if World of Warcraft is McDonald's?
World of Wacraft's popularity can be attributed to different terms of it's lifetime and why. Previously, it was challenging and meaningful. Currently, it is challengeless and a husk of it's former self. Yet still rewarding to those who are less skilled or who have less time to play.
Yes, the game is too easy, mindless and now it sucks in many people's eyes, including mine. However, to compare World of Warcraft to McDonalds in terms of popularity without properly citing your claims (you have none), you look like an idiot.
Choose a different angle. World of Warcraft is quality. To be able to look at a game and say, "This game is good, but it's not my kind of game" grants you an unbiased tone. Unfortunately, you have been unable to provide that.
Talk about a "troll" reply if I ever read one.
Best reply ever. Thank you for elabortaing on what i was trying to say in few words. I am sure Rydeson will reply back with more boring Mcdonald refrences
90% of haters are begging for love. 10% just want a little attention -- Paulo Coelho
Wow.. (not the game) talk about a TROLLING thread if I ever read one.. First sentence starts off inviting people to respond in a confrontational way.. There was nothing constructive in this thread whatsoever, other then insight a tug of war argument and start a fanboy type of bonfire.. Everyone likes what they like.. I for one and I lil tired of the McDonalds crowd running around Aspen's Food and Wine festival wearing their oversized sponge hands chanting "we're number 1"..
When are people going to realize that NUMBERs does not equal QUALITY.. my god.. Does examples of McDonalds, Walmart and GM not teach you anything?
Your analogy is horrible. McDonald's, Wal-Mart and GM are all popular because they are cheap yet effective. Explain to me how you could apply this metaphorically to this situation. There are no MMOs that cost more than each other due to quality or service. You pay a streamlined price for a variety of attributes, including community, service, quality and content.
Eating at McDonald's for two will cost you $15 CAD. Eating at a real restaurant, where quality and servoce is assured, will cost you anywhere from $40-$80. By paying more, you receive a mature community, good service, proper quality and varied content.
World of Warcraft is $14.99 a month. Aion is $14.99 a month. SW:TOR will be $14.99 a month.
World of Warcraft has the best service and is most polished game on the market. It has been for a very long time. You are a shining example of someone who has underdog syndrome. You simply dislike the game personally but fail to provide factual evidence as to why it should be compared to something that is viewed as cheap, narrow and unhealthy. If you think you are in bad hands with Blizzard's serivce, then prepare to be disappointed everywhere else because there is no other MMO company that will help you the way Blizzard currently does.
Games have risen and fallen to World of Warcraft. There is no Burger King equivalent. I refute your point. Every MMO on the market since World of Warcraft has declined. Aion is terrible. Warhammer is terrible. Vanguard was terrible. Final Fantasy XIV is going so far off in the wrong direction to attempt innovation to de-throne World of Wacraft that it may as well be in it's own genre.
Care to explain which MMO holds the title of "Aspen's Food" and "Wine Festival" if World of Warcraft is McDonald's?
World of Wacraft's popularity can be attributed to different terms of it's lifetime and why. Previously, it was challenging and meaningful. Currently, it is challengeless and a husk of it's former self. Yet still rewarding to those who are less skilled or who have less time to play.
Yes, the game is too easy, mindless and now it sucks in many people's eyes, including mine. However, to compare World of Warcraft to McDonalds in terms of popularity without properly citing your claims (you have none), you look like an idiot.
Choose a different angle. World of Warcraft is quality. To be able to look at a game and say, "This game is good, but it's not my kind of game" grants you an unbiased tone. Unfortunately, you have been unable to provide that.
Talk about a "troll" reply if I ever read one.
You raise your objections well, but you neglect to define what your paramaters of "quality" are, by my own paramaters WoW is shit, because my definition of quality is something that provides entertainment but also a sense of accomplishment, the latter being something WoW is very much lacking.
Because at its time of release the MMO bubble didnt exist, MMOs were not seen as a major cash cow to be milked, they were just seen as a genre. WoW changed all that by gaining a huge following which lit up $ signs in the eyes of executives everywhere, causing them to rush out any old crap in the hope of gaining a piece of the pie. Cue 100s of clones of wow of varying poor quality with no substance which were all doomed to fail.
Opinions Opinions and more Opinions.. LOL In my opinion WoW is a "B" quality game.. Just like GM is a "B" quality vehicle.. Features are features and are part of EVERY rating process of consumer products and service.. Tell me how you would rate a car if it came with NO radio, NO power steering, NO power windows, NO Air Conditioning.. Those are only features, and regardless how well it runs, it will take a HIT in ratings because it lacks basic features we all expect in our vehicles.. WoW = McDonalds .. accept it and love it.. It is what it is...
Comments
That is SOO true......its one of the reasons i still play wow today......the moves of the chars are accurate and smooth.
Blizzard has always been good at quality and proffesionalism. However what they have in those areas they seriously lack in innovation and creativity.
My gaming blog
So? Size of a sample of the playerbase has very little to do with if the accuracy of their opinions. It is the composition of the sample that matters. For example, you ever heard of official polls? Usually they poll a tiny fraction of the base but they use techniques to make sure it is a representetive fraction and that decides the accuracy of the poll.
In forums there are no such techniques being used so you could argue that based on that it MAY not be representative but the size of it has no bearing on the accuracy.
My gaming blog
I played WoW for 3 years myself. Wow almost had everything except the fact that you can't own or rent a temporary piece of real estate because it woul ruin the "Lore".
So, me and my friends moved on to Aika where we can get a chance to be "Lord Marshal", own or temporarily rent a piece of real estate like the relics , establish guild alliance and defend our turf.
Still waiting on the "WoW Killer" MMO though. /peace
"A trembling hand does not thrust the blade true." - Artemis Enteri
I'm an old gamer who's been around since the dawn of online gaming, from UO to EQ1 to DAoC to SWG, WoW and many others. I think a post above summed it up nicely.... "only time will kill WoW." Since the begining of online gaming there has always been a game with a much higher population than the rest. It's usually only dethroned because it was time for a change. As others in the past, WoW also tried to target a much bigger audiance. I think it was the first online game to activly advertise on prime time TV.
Games come and go and always will, WoW has lasted longer as the money made from the game means the developers can keep evolving the game to keep people interested, the same could have been said of EQ1 and UO back in their day. But there comes a time when the masses simply just want a change and a different style of play. Predicting when or even what this change may be is impossible as far as I'm concerned. So many big titles have come and gone in the last few years as the fans hailed it as the next greatest thing.
I do however think the market has now changed, in that people do expect much more from an online game and at launch it has to be fairly bug free and full of content. That takes huge amounts of time and resources. How many games over the last few years made so many promises in terms of what they would deliver only for us to see cut-backs being made by the "money men," half products being released.
I think there are only a few developers left who have the capabilities to make the next "big thing". I also think WoW will eventually be dethroned...just not at the moment.
Shivian
I want to dissect your answer on that particular PvP issue (and cutting the non issue of Disney world part and the usual made up themepark stuff because that's trivial and not even recognised theorizing on MM's).
PvP rankings in this game - among others - is based on a competition - ladder based even. Saying this kind of stuff is "meaningless" means you are not interested in ANY human competition, like the football season, soccer competition, tennis, poker,... as a matter of fact any ladder based competition of human nature would be trivial and non meaningful.
You play for the title, for the competition, for the achievements in any of these ranked forms. Be that in any activity.
You message is the CORE problem why people don't see the obvious succes.
In various forms, in various playing styles and it ... outgrew already Wow's original set up by a large margin.
These days players play with experience shut down, experience boosting, titles of accomplisment in hardest possible PVE, in e-sport mode, in arena mode, in daily 200+ players Siege modes and it just gets bigger with every patch on options.
Enter - for example - the guild PvP competition and rated BG mode with the season's PvP titles.
Ignoring the obvious is not helping to explain the success of WOW.
You can shout for 10.000 times the same phrase: " In MY view a PvP competition is meaningless", the problem is that a few billion people on this planet think a ranked personal competition is what drives sports, economics, our intrests.
Sticking the head into sand for obvious succesful formulas doesn't help one bit to understand why the game is simply succesful.
No matter how many catchy and non defined words are brought into the discussion like MacDonalds, Themepark, sandbox, etc ...
And last comment: the bottom line it does all this with the most responsive controls of any MMO out there (yes that includes jumping over hedges ...).
WoW is a game that runs on almost any PC. People play WoW on dial up. 'dial up' is where you have a modem.
.
WoW has content for most play styles, casual play, raiding, pvp, etc.
.
WoW paid attention to the fun aspects of MMOs like combat. The head dev at the time said, 'combat has to be fun'.
.
SWTOR has a good chance to unseat WoW. With almost 3 times the budget WoW had and a studio that is famous for delivering the best solo RPGs in the world.
.
Well shave my back and call me an elf! -- Oghren
I think WoW is successfull for the following reasons.
WoW had a large fanbase from those who loved games like Diabalo Warcraft and of course Starcraft 1. Giving it a good starting sub base.
WoW was simplified graphically meaning most PC's at the time could handle it.
Back then Brand awarness of MMO's was less prevailant in the target audiance giving Blizzard an advantage.
WoW has honoured the lore or Warcraft giving a very familuar world unlike say Warhammer which was just a RvR game with a Warhammer skin and a hint of lore.
WoW has kept to the same formula of its creation of a clear path of progression with easy to predict Quests and hidden them benieth the exelent lore and the many "easter eggs" such as hidden references to past games and real world things. One recent example of this practice by blizzard i noticed was in Starcraft 2 with the Dwarf as an Engineer and the ingame TV advert showing a Taurian in Marine armour advertising a music CD.
By not innovating too much and only introducing stuff if it is really needed [such as PvP] they insure the game isant broken by a new feature that is poorly thought out.
Also most new subscribers thanks to the advertising dont realise there are other games like it [or they just dont care as they are comfortable with WoW].
So to sum it up WoW works because it has years behind it creating a very ballanced game that occasionally innovates with a new feature that is confirmed is wanted by the fans, and it has a lot of media advertising creating awareness in the real world.
Of course to add my personall biassed thoughts.
Is WoW the most popular? Yes its the most popular Western MMO
Is it the best Designed MMO? That is dependent on the likes of each person as i dont like games with a fixed progression. I hate loot that you must have that takes [in some cases] over a month to get legitamatly. I prefer that there are no instances. I love to trade and craft in a meaningfull fashion also i like a open unrestricted world that fits the lore.
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
When it was released, it had poor content, was terribly buggy and totally uncapable of handling any decent amount of people (think of the 6-hours long queues, crash-on-demand each time you tried to assault a major city, etc etc), pretty much as every other MMO.
There were no giants though. Other MMOs had either low population, were terribly hard, enforced a team-oriented gameplay, weren't designed with casual play in mind, or simply had painful graphics. WoW was an easy-going family-oriented game with appealing cartoony graphics and guided, mostly soloable content, built on a famous IP. A kind of "revolution" at the exact time (late '90s and early 2000) when more powerful consoles with impressive graphics made videogames a less "nerdy" and more popular thing.
In other words, timing was perfect. a couple years too early and WoW would be one of those decent games of the past and not much more. a couple years too late and today there would probably be another game in its position. Then, the huge amount of players funded its development, a major reason of failure of other games after WoW: in 2004 we were ready to pay for an unfinished, buggy and poorly coded and supported game. Because there wasn't a "better" game in its category. Today, very few of us would do that again (hey, why should i pay $15 a month for an unfinished WoW-like game when i can pay the same and play the original WoW with years worth of content?). And you can't really blame anyone for that.
“Not innovative.”
Another one of those posts that don’t put the finger on the success of WOW.
Let’s see where Blizzard did innovate…
Before WOW, MMO’s were known for their unresponsive and lacking controls of the avatars, after WOW was published, MMO’s were known for the unresponsive and lacking controls…
As these are … video games you play for thousands of hours. Imagine the value of this innovation.
Before WOW MMO’s had to be played with other people on line for hours and hours … waiting for something “fun” to happen. Glued before your monitor and waiting for that monster to spawn, waiting for hours to find a decent group of a “humble” number of 72 like minded dudes to even start a challenge.
As these are video games you play for thousands of hours. Cutting on the time losses and time drains of someone’s (short) life was innovative.
WOW includes play with a gradual difficulty. Very hard modes both in PvE and PvP are in the same world as very soft modes. Your grandmother can play and have success … on her level. She’ll never get to Wrathful Gladiator but perhaps even she can be crucial and heal a warrior in a BG and find some honor boots after a win at he age of 67.
Itemisation and fine tuning up to and beyond 0.1 % of the stats after EVERY patch. I still remember playing AoC at launch and finding boots at level 7 that were better than level 58’s had. You saw players running around with the same gear for 40+ levels. Even Dungeon Siege on the PSP had better itemisation tables than AOC at launch.
A standard patch and expansion plan: No other MMO to have a perfected 6 months upgrade plan throughout all playing styles. The lull between 3.3 and 4.0 is a real exception to this and I even think they do it on purpose: CATA is really a restart of things.
A PvP that doesn’t endanger the PVE experience and still offers a challenging competition for those wanting a rated/achievement personal status with titles and bragging rights. Conquering a besieged fortress and having access to a resultant Raid content every 2.5 hours is a brilliant idea … because 4-5 hours is the absolute max of present day attention spans. PvP battles last 30 minutes max. because the losing side quits after this time (if not earlier)… Blizzard is the only one thinking about the losers in PvP.
I could go on. But the above are innovative game mechanics and not shown in other products on the same scale and level.
No it was not a question of timing, lore, luck or marketing.
It is a question of pure fun "game" design. Something MMO's simply lack in general. They concentrate far too much on time drains (be that monster kills or spawns) without fun elements.
Polish
... and continuous balancing and rebalancing.
Blizzard, unlike almost every other game company on the market, keeps returning to old aspects of the game, aspects that other game companies consider 'done and dusted' and keeps refining, adjusting and improving them. Yes, the game has many flaws but neglect of existing assets is not one of them.
The Designers: Some of which were MMO players themselves. They saw how the competition worked and were it could be refined. In other words, unlike the later competition, they took note of were the others failed and exploited it.
The IP: Owned by Blizzard and created by Blizzard. Chris Metzen has been a the helm of writing lore since War3 (maybe earlier). Those who have played War 3 will understand just how close WoW stuck to War3 lore. The locations on the map may have changed but the events and details from War 3 were all transferred into WoW. Even "Timmy" the undead mob you see in War3 is in WoW. The point is, they didn't have an outside influence telling them how to make a game based on the IP.
The Game: Polish, attention to detail that matters, good foundation on which to build, gentle leveling curve, enough content to encourage subs beyond the first 30 days, variety in gamestyles.
Top 10 Most Misused Words in MMO's
WoW has been on somewhat of a steady decline in terms of how "great" a game it once was, sure it's still popular but that's just because it's easy.
After 6 years they have managed to kill off world PvP, make it so both sides have all the same classes, and have blended those classes so much together that other then a few "pure" classes each one can just about do all the others roles.
Scope and profesionalism? They released a polished game that still had some bugs but were quick to work on them. Yes that's a profesional release and more companies should stop trying to be greedy and strive to be more like Blizzard in that way but I don't know what you mean by scope. In that they spoon feed you gear and bread crumb you to your next zone only to spoon feed you more gear. Well that's not one of their selling points if you ask me.
They made a fun game that has taken all the fun parts about the genre and mixed then together for sucess. I just hope that they haven't killed off the genre in the process.
Wow.. (not the game) talk about a TROLLING thread if I ever read one.. First sentence starts off inviting people to respond in a confrontational way.. There was nothing constructive in this thread whatsoever, other then insight a tug of war argument and start a fanboy type of bonfire.. Everyone likes what they like.. I for one and I lil tired of the McDonalds crowd running around Aspen's Food and Wine festival wearing their oversized sponge hands chanting "we're number 1"..
When are people going to realize that NUMBERs does not equal QUALITY.. my god.. Does examples of McDonalds, Walmart and GM not teach you anything?
Edit PS.. If pure sub numbers is what you use to "rate" a game.. Farmville has WoW destroyed hands down.. right? LOL
I find it hilarious that someone would even dare say WOW is not about quality. Just shows how biased they are. Hate the game all you want but do it on basis of facts not personal hate and prejudice.
90% of haters are begging for love. 10% just want a little attention -- Paulo Coelho
Well it's not depending on your own points of interest and view.. In my view and opinion sandbox type features like player and guild housing is almost a must.. having a true complex player economy is a must.. having meaningful PvP is a must.. having OPEN raids is a must.....
WOW has NONE of those features, so in my opinion WoW is EPIC FAIL for end game purposes.. You like McD's.. I prefer Wendy's.. to each their own
But whatever you mentioned has nothing to with being quality product. All those sandbox features does not automatically make a game full of quality. I think you are misunderstanding the term 'quality' here. Also all these Mcdonald refrences are un original and boring. Doesn't add much depth to your argument or reasoning. Just shows that you are just biased.
90% of haters are begging for love. 10% just want a little attention -- Paulo Coelho
Your analogy is horrible. McDonald's, Wal-Mart and GM are all popular because they are cheap yet effective. Explain to me how you could apply this metaphorically to this situation. There are no MMOs that cost more than each other due to quality or service. You pay a streamlined price for a variety of attributes, including community, service, quality and content.
Eating at McDonald's for two will cost you $15 CAD. Eating at a real restaurant, where quality and servoce is assured, will cost you anywhere from $40-$80. By paying more, you receive a mature community, good service, proper quality and varied content.
World of Warcraft is $14.99 a month. Aion is $14.99 a month. SW:TOR will be $14.99 a month.
World of Warcraft has the best service and is most polished game on the market. It has been for a very long time. You are a shining example of someone who has underdog syndrome. You simply dislike the game personally but fail to provide factual evidence as to why it should be compared to something that is viewed as cheap, narrow and unhealthy. If you think you are in bad hands with Blizzard's serivce, then prepare to be disappointed everywhere else because there is no other MMO company that will help you the way Blizzard currently does.
Games have risen and fallen to World of Warcraft. There is no Burger King equivalent. I refute your point. Every MMO on the market since World of Warcraft has declined. Aion is terrible. Warhammer is terrible. Vanguard was terrible. Final Fantasy XIV is going so far off in the wrong direction to attempt innovation to de-throne World of Wacraft that it may as well be in it's own genre.
Care to explain which MMO holds the title of "Aspen's Food" and "Wine Festival" if World of Warcraft is McDonald's?
World of Wacraft's popularity can be attributed to different terms of it's lifetime and why. Previously, it was challenging and meaningful. Currently, it is challengeless and a husk of it's former self. Yet still rewarding to those who are less skilled or who have less time to play.
Yes, the game is too easy, mindless and now it sucks in many people's eyes, including mine. However, to compare World of Warcraft to McDonalds in terms of popularity without properly citing your claims (you have none), you look like an idiot.
Choose a different angle. World of Warcraft is quality. To be able to look at a game and say, "This game is good, but it's not my kind of game" grants you an unbiased tone. Unfortunately, you have been unable to provide that.
Talk about a "troll" reply if I ever read one.
Best reply ever. Thank you for elabortaing on what i was trying to say in few words. I am sure Rydeson will reply back with more boring Mcdonald refrences
90% of haters are begging for love. 10% just want a little attention -- Paulo Coelho
You raise your objections well, but you neglect to define what your paramaters of "quality" are, by my own paramaters WoW is shit, because my definition of quality is something that provides entertainment but also a sense of accomplishment, the latter being something WoW is very much lacking.
Quality is relative.
Since when quality is relative? if you say fun is relative i agree but quality is relative? nope sorry i disagree.
90% of haters are begging for love. 10% just want a little attention -- Paulo Coelho
Because at its time of release the MMO bubble didnt exist, MMOs were not seen as a major cash cow to be milked, they were just seen as a genre. WoW changed all that by gaining a huge following which lit up $ signs in the eyes of executives everywhere, causing them to rush out any old crap in the hope of gaining a piece of the pie. Cue 100s of clones of wow of varying poor quality with no substance which were all doomed to fail.
Opinions Opinions and more Opinions.. LOL In my opinion WoW is a "B" quality game.. Just like GM is a "B" quality vehicle.. Features are features and are part of EVERY rating process of consumer products and service.. Tell me how you would rate a car if it came with NO radio, NO power steering, NO power windows, NO Air Conditioning.. Those are only features, and regardless how well it runs, it will take a HIT in ratings because it lacks basic features we all expect in our vehicles.. WoW = McDonalds .. accept it and love it.. It is what it is...
Yeah just like i expected, such an engaging and thoughtful, original reply..WOW=mcdonalds, yes sir you convinced us all.
90% of haters are begging for love. 10% just want a little attention -- Paulo Coelho