See, you messed up. You did EXACTLY what people do when talking about WoW. They dumb it down. Warhammer is not a simple good vs bad just like WoW isn't. If you're going to compare the two, come prepared. Before sounding just like the ignorant fools who talk about X game and have no idea of what the lore is.
But if you think Warhammer on line is accepted by the vast majority of WH TT players, you are dead wrong. Just talk to any WH club.
WH TT is all about army identities and their performance on the table top as ONE unity and identity. Magnificent miniatures game.
Mythic just wanted the lore and screwed it up to a terrible bad Wow clone with mixed factions, and scenario play. A typical Mark Jacobs production: "I know it all". "I can beat it". Warhammer Lore couldn't be more screwed.
As for 1983 and the origins of the best TT fantasy, this has nothing to do with a computer game in a different universe of "inner corruption". It suffices to read the Army books and novels of War TT and the novels and books of the Warcraft universe.
I still love playing the TT fantasy game, but at least I see the big difference in both lores.
War to me was by far the worst MMORP published in years. Too long to explain and not relevant in this thread.
-----
But Wow has a very good indepandant Lore of its own, built up since1994 (1992 actually). A magnificent rules book just in front of me with a magnificent map of all the places we know now.
Whether it's accepted or not is irrelevant. For that matter, most of what you said is irrelevant to what my reply was.
If we're speaking lore wise, then you're dead wrong.
If we're speaking purely game wise, then you're right. Warhammer hasn't implemented any PvE that would tie in with the rest of the game universe.
Edit: And the TT for both games are totally relevant for the games. It's the basis for the lore.
Motorbikes, helicopters, aeroplanes and submarines. Amazing what greed will do to a game company.
You need to realize that warcraft lore also has a big emphasis on engineering and machinery. World of warcraft is an expansion to that warcraft lore.
Also why the hell is your sig showing hitler's supporters and trying to make it a subtle connection to world of warcraft? Dont you have any sense of decency? You are pathetic. Nobody should glorify what Hitler did and think that Blizzard even remotely is similar.
I think you're missing the point of his signature.
All he wanted to say is that Popular does not equal Good. It's an extreme and, yes, Godwin-worthy example, but that is what his signature states, and nothing more.
Glorify Hitler? Only if you think having 11 million subscribers glorifies WoW. Which is the point of this entire thing.
Just to explain this for all: the Goldwin law:
The law states: "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."[2][3]. References to Godwin's Law often actually refer to a corollary of it which determines that the person who first makes an unwarranted reference to Nazi Germany or Hitler in an argument loses that argument automatically.
The rule does not make any statement about whether any particular reference or comparison to Adolf Hitler or the Nazis might be appropriate, but only asserts that one arising is increasingly probable. It is precisely because such a comparison or reference may sometimes be appropriate, Godwin has argued[4] that overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact. ...
For example, there is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically "lost" whatever debate was in progress. This principle itself is frequently referred to as Godwin's Law. It is considered poor form to raise such a comparison arbitrarily with the motive of ending the thread.
Whether it applies to humorous use or references to oneself is open to interpretation, because although mentioning and trivializing Nazism in an online discussion, this would not be a fallacious attack against a debate opponent.
Your last sentence just confirmed the above.
---
And ... the thread was about ... why are there mechanical things in Wow Lore ....
Well, at least you didn't distort the definition of Godwin while copy-pasting it here.
However, there is some debate over whether a reference to the Nazis immediately means losing the argument. What if the comparison is valid? I'm pretty sure that there is something in the scope of human activity being done that warrants a comparison to Hitler and/or the Nazis, so I'm not a subscriber to the "mention the Nazis and you lose the argument" theory. This is what Godwin himself is referring to in the second paragraph of the definition you reproduced above, and you get a more lighthearted example here.
But more to the point: Is the comparison of WoW to the German election of November 1932 (where the Nazis obtained 11.7 million votes) warranted? To be honest, no, it isn't. Not only because of Godwin but because of historical and political factors which have nothing in common with a video game. However, we get the more apt comparisons to McDonald's or Britney Spears, and they are just ridiculed. Wasn't it to be expected that someone would bring out the Godwin card sooner or later, when every suitable point comparison had been dismissed and derided by the WoW fanboys?
But McDonald's is a valid example. Any nutritionist will tell you that it's schlock (unless you go for the salad cop-outs, but how many McD's patrons actually do that?), yet the McDonald's-WoW comparison has been ruled out a priori by the fanboys. The salient point, however, needs to be addressed: "Popular" does not mean "good", and popularity does not make a "bad" product "good" for no other reason than because it is popular. This is tyranny of the majority at its basest -- "50 million Elvis fans can't be wrong". The fact that there are 50 million of them is no guarantee that they are right -- I'm guessing that this was the point of the Hitler signature. However, I don't subscribe to the opposing elitist view that says Elvis must be bad because 50 million fans love him.
The lesson to be learned from it -- and I know that you, Zorndorf, won't bother -- is that 11.5 million players does not make a game "good"; nor does it make it "bad". Nor does it force every individual on the planet to shut up and love WoW, especially at a time when all other MMO games (save a few niche exceptions) seem to be going down the drain.
As for your accusation that I'm just trying to end the thread by pulling a Godwin: Meh. Weren't you the one who did everything in your power to lock up any sign of negativity on these forums, for instance your petty inquisitions against anyone (such as myself) who disputed the greatness of your beloved WoW, even appealing to Stradden himself by mentioning how advertisers would pull out of a site that isn't 100% positive?
Midnight-ShadowWorld of Warcraft CorrespondentMemberUncommonPosts: 88
to make a further point of vetarnias' last post, here's an example of my own. 500 years ago everybody in europe "knew" that the earth was flat and at the centre of the universe. everybody knew this therefore it was a "fact". but then it turned out they were wrong. like vetarnias said, having the majority of votes for 1 thing doesn't make it wrong, it doesn't make it right either.
to make a further point of vetarnias' last post, here's an example of my own. 500 years ago everybody in europe "knew" that the earth was flat and at the centre of the universe. everybody knew this therefore it was a "fact". but then it turned out they were wrong. like vetarnias said, having the majority of votes for 1 thing doesn't make it wrong, it doesn't make it right either.
There is a major difference, however, between the shape of the Earth and one's appreciation of WoW. The former can be proved scientifically -- and in fact that had been done by the Ancient Greeks long before the Middle Ages, with Eratosthenes giving a rather close estimate of the Earth's circumference in the 3rd century B.C. Blame religious obscurantism for what happened thereafter.
In the case of WoW, what can we say? You like it or you don't -- purely a matter of taste. It can't be proved either way. For all my saying that the quests are repetitive, you might say that you just enjoy socializing in Orgrimmar with the occasional raiding on the side. Even something as technical as game performance varies from one person to another. For all the people who said, for example, that Age of Conan crashed all the time, I can say that although it was sluggish (as my computer was actually below system requirements) it only crashed once, and this very early on.
So there is no universal standard in the case of a game by which to judge it -- no, not even popularity, or critical reception.
Originally posted by Vetarnias So there is no universal standard in the case of a game by which to judge it -- no, not even popularity, or critical reception.
I disagree.
There are plenty of examples in history of things that have been chosen as "best" by popular vote. The American system of belief is dependent almost totally on the opinion of the majority. We (among many other countries) even select our President by it, which is arguably one of the most important decisions to be made.
People have an unconscious obsession with finding the very best, by whatever definition. When there is no objective way to decide, we revert to opinion. Since individually our opinions are irrelevant to each other, a statistical analysis is used. It could be argued that the statistics are skewed since WoW has reached a "critical mass" (which is, that many of the people playing it are only playing it because it is popular) but it's the best and only method we have to decide what is "best," by any definition. Since the majority like playing WoW over other games, it's statistically the one most likely to be enjoyable to any one specific person, and therefore the "best."
It's nice to have an actual debate about this though, and see some real, intelligent responses instead of the usual "LOL PHAIL" garbage we see around here.
Originally posted by Vetarnias However, we get the more apt comparisons to McDonald's or Britney Spears, and they are just ridiculed. Wasn't it to be expected that someone would bring out the Godwin card sooner or later, when every suitable point comparison had been dismissed and derided by the WoW fanboys? But McDonald's is a valid example. Any nutritionist will tell you that it's schlock (unless you go for the salad cop-outs, but how many McD's patrons actually do that?), yet the McDonald's-WoW comparison has been ruled out a priori by the fanboys. The salient point, however, needs to be addressed: "Popular" does not mean "good", and popularity does not make a "bad" product "good" for no other reason than because it is popular. This is tyranny of the majority at its basest -- "50 million Elvis fans can't be wrong". The fact that there are 50 million of them is no guarantee that they are right -- I'm guessing that this was the point of the Hitler signature. However, I don't subscribe to the opposing elitist view that says Elvis must be bad because 50 million fans love him.
The McDonalds and Britney Spears analogy are fundementally flawed.
Answer this:
If wow = mcdonalds then what does [for exmample] Conan = ??? or any other mmo?
Fine dining? Steak dinner? Moms home cooking? Why isn't every other mmo compared to a fast food chain since they are all fundamentally the same? What makes them the nutritional sound meal of awesomeness?
Would you compare tic-tac-toe to grand theft auto and think that was a valid comparison? Both are games just like the above is both about food.
You never see the comparison treated between similar products like burger king, because as "bad" as mcdonalds is, your nutritionist would tell you BK is far worse. Now the subject is about hamburgers as if it relates to video games. See how unrelated that is?
Maybe just because 2 items share one similar feature they don't make representative comparisons to each other.
Why not just make any analogy that has the mildest similarities and pretend it has merit on a discussion of video games. Why not call wow cancer since so many people die from that.
People only use these types of analogies to associate wow to something that has a negative stigma in todays society and then act as if that stigma applies equally to wow. Mcdonald is tagged with obesity and unhealthy life styles. Briteny for her crazy dramatic blowups or people thinking she is anything more than an ENTERTAINER aimed at teenagers. It is always some comparison to something in society that has a negative aspect associated with it, like hitler.
You never see anyone compare wow to google, ipods or something else that has the same level of popularity in their respective fields, but have a cool image associated with it. It really is just plain nonsense to make such comparisons.
FUN objects in a GAME!!!??? For SHAME!!! I demand utter seriousness and consistency from my made-up-world, by Zeus!! Next thing you know OTHER game companies may focus on playability and fun, and then where will we be?
Sounds like we would be in a world with so many fun games to play we would have to invent some sort of time machine to have time to play them all.
In another thread I've proven the Britney Spears analogy with Wow fails.... Drawing out the khaki marker again. ....Simply because World of Warcraft was the FIRST mmorpg that was such a gigantic commercial succes. The King of its MMO generation in generating that massive amounts of supporters/players in the western society. Elvis is considered the King of Rock 'n Roll because of this. The Beatles are considered the Kings of 60's Pop Music. Being called the king of anything doesn't really matter. I could mention Budweiser, the "King of Beers", even though one could easily compile a list of other beers being just as good (or even better) without making a claim to such a title. If anything, I find such titles pretentious; besides, the monarchy hasn't exactly been a model for good behaviour or even enlightened rule, but it doesn't really matter to this discussion. Wow = the equivalent of 30.000.000 sold copies in the western world each year (5.000.000 X 6 bi-monthly subscriptions). That's by far the MOST succesful single game of the last 30 years in the COMPLETE video game industry. No other game "sells" the equivalent of 30.000.000 copies in the western world EACH year. Unlike other posters on this forum, I'm not going to dispute any figure you're posting regarding the number of subscribers this game has. Because, ultimately, that is of no importance. WoW outsells every MMO out there, that much is known and impossible to dispute; the closest was far distant, and it was Runescape, which you can play for free.
Britney Spears is just another commercial singer who doesn't have this impact in only one branche of the pop music. I agree with your assessment of Britney's career, but the traditional assumption is that she retains some form of popularity. However, I think that in her case, much of the criticism levelled at her regards her personal antics (because artistically she's impossible to distinguish from any other starlet with a passable voice, blond hair and D cups). It never ceases to amaze me that some so-called music connoisseurs tend to forgive Amy Winehouse for equally (or worse) reprehensible behaviour, on the grounds that her songs have artistic merit, as though her art couldn't be separated from personal attitude, and that therefore she ought to be forgiven in the name of art. Anyway, it doesn't have to be Britney; it can be any popular artist with an awful critical reputation, regardless of their personal life -- make it Celine Dion or Madonna if you want. The name doesn't really matter, as long as that singer sells while being derided by critics. --- Ignoring these facts and just speak of "pffff just another million" is being based on pure subjective personal reasons which do not bring any contribution to the explanation of that success... and so ... are IRRELEVANT. Certainly not if you haven't experienced the game at all. No Raid expreience, No BG's experience, etc. Ah, so we're back to that; I'll never be more than "Mr. Level 46" to you, eh? Well, that also is irrelevant here. The question has moved beyond that a while ago. Now it is: Does "popular" mean "good"? Your answer is apparently yes; mine is no. Could be about Britney, McDonald's, WoW, the Prime Minister of Japan, cheesecake, whatever. Stating "some" like it and "some" not,... is stretching the truth in an extremely odd way because that "some" stands for the single most "sold" video game ever for the last 30 years. And by sold it is clearly stated "value in $$" in our western cultural society. You can't start pretending that the "some" who don't like WoW are actually imaginary. I'm real allright, as are a few of the negative posters in this thread, and as have been gamers I've met in previous games who would post on those game forums how they hated WoW. Maybe we're a minority -- so what? Does it prevent you from sleeping at night to know that some people don't like WoW? Why must the victory be complete? I'm pretty sure you're gloating about Warhammer closing 2/3 of its servers, for reasons that have nothing to do with Warhammer (I stopped playing that game a long time ago, so I don't really care). And again, it's just that tyranny of the majority rearing its ugly head again every time you post about this. If that equivalent of 1 billion dollars yearly revenu means ... you can deny it by having a banner of 'lies just plain lies", It shows indeed that as a last resort Wow haters refer to ...the Goldwin law (without knowing of course) and so just loose the discussion. "Lies, damned lies, and statistics" is a quote by Mark Twain, who attributed it to the British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli (without corroboration, so it's assumed it's a Twain original). The point being that you can make statistics say anything. I'm pretty sure you have encountered opinion polls where the question (or the choice of answers) was so twisted as to allow only one reasonable result? How amazing also that you should invoke Godwin to claim a win on a technicality, instead of bothering to address the question. "You lost! You lost! Godwin said you lost!" Do you know how childish that sounds?
Originally posted by Vetarnias However, we get the more apt comparisons to McDonald's or Britney Spears, and they are just ridiculed. Wasn't it to be expected that someone would bring out the Godwin card sooner or later, when every suitable point comparison had been dismissed and derided by the WoW fanboys? But McDonald's is a valid example. Any nutritionist will tell you that it's schlock (unless you go for the salad cop-outs, but how many McD's patrons actually do that?), yet the McDonald's-WoW comparison has been ruled out a priori by the fanboys. The salient point, however, needs to be addressed: "Popular" does not mean "good", and popularity does not make a "bad" product "good" for no other reason than because it is popular. This is tyranny of the majority at its basest -- "50 million Elvis fans can't be wrong". The fact that there are 50 million of them is no guarantee that they are right -- I'm guessing that this was the point of the Hitler signature. However, I don't subscribe to the opposing elitist view that says Elvis must be bad because 50 million fans love him.
The McDonalds and Britney Spears analogy are fundementally flawed.
Answer this:
If wow = mcdonalds then what does [for exmample] Conan = ??? or any other mmo?
Fine dining? Steak dinner? Moms home cooking? Why isn't every other mmo compared to a fast food chain since they are all fundamentally the same? What makes them the nutritional sound meal of awesomeness?
Gaute Godager said steak. I once said elsewhere I'd compare AoC more to Red Lobster -- fast food that pretends it is somehow above that. At least WoW doesn't claim to be something it isn't; still doesn't excuse what it is, though.
Would you compare tic-tac-toe to grand theft auto and think that was a valid comparison? Both are games just like the above is both about food.
At least tic-tac-toe doesn't set off moral red flags in my head, like GTA does.
You never see the comparison treated between similar products like burger king, because as "bad" as mcdonalds is, your nutritionist would tell you BK is far worse. Now the subject is about hamburgers as if it relates to video games. See how unrelated that is?
I have no idea about BK versus McD. But the subject is about taste -- McDonald's isn't bad, but you don't need Morgan Spurlock to tell you that you shouldn't build your diet around it, and it's the general idea that they've sold I don't know how many gazillions of burgers that really matters.
I will refrain from saying WoW is in bad taste, although those pop-culture references in the game nearly tip it over.
Maybe just because 2 items share one similar feature they don't make representative comparisons to each other.
Why not just make any analogy that has the mildest similarities and pretend it has merit on a discussion of video games. Why not call wow cancer since so many people die from that.
People only use these types of analogies to associate wow to something that has a negative stigma in todays society and then act as if that stigma applies equally to wow. Mcdonald is tagged with obesity and unhealthy life styles. Briteny for her crazy dramatic blowups or people thinking she is anything more than an ENTERTAINER aimed at teenagers. It is always some comparison to something in society that has a negative aspect associated with it, like hitler.
For the purpose of the analogy to be effective, the comparison point HAS to be negative. Otherwise it doesn't work, for the purpose is to demonstrate that something can be popular while being bad. Hitler being the extreme example, unless someone would like to claim that anything good came out of him.
You never see anyone compare wow to google, ipods or something else that has the same level of popularity in their respective fields, but have a cool image associated with it. It really is just plain nonsense to make such comparisons.
For the record, Google's near-monopoly in the search-engine market is worrisome, and I've always been wary of anything that came out of Apple. Just saying.
Originally posted by Vetarnias So there is no universal standard in the case of a game by which to judge it -- no, not even popularity, or critical reception.
I disagree.
There are plenty of examples in history of things that have been chosen as "best" by popular vote. The American system of belief is dependent almost totally on the opinion of the majority. And in a way, that's a problem, and not a new one either. Tocqueville wrote about that in the 1830's when he visited the United States. We (among many other countries) even select our President by it, which is arguably one of the most important decisions to be made. Then what do we make of Hayes vs. Tilden, or Bush vs. Gore? Loser gets more votes, but the other guy becomes President. (And I'm coming from a country where 38% of the votes or so will get you an ironclad majority government, so we're subjected to that all the time.)
People have an unconscious obsession with finding the very best, by whatever definition. When there is no objective way to decide, we revert to opinion. Since individually our opinions are irrelevant to each other, a statistical analysis is used. It could be argued that the statistics are skewed since WoW has reached a "critical mass" (which is, that many of the people playing it are only playing it because it is popular) but it's the best and only method we have to decide what is "best," by any definition. The only critical mass I'm willing to consider, as far as a game is concerned, is the one that is required for a game to be fully functional, e.g. how many people are needed for the economy, RvR, etc. to work. Since the majority like playing WoW over other games, it's statistically the one most likely to be enjoyable to any one specific person, and therefore the "best." If popularity were the only measurement of quality, then it would be so. But it's essentially meaningless, like who wins American Idol -- such as that guy I remember reading about a few years ago, who advanced to the finals (or semifinals, not sure) because he was a soldier at the time of the Iraq war. Nothing to do with his voice -- he was reportedly mediocre -- and everything to do with his uniform. Popularity means absolutely nothing because it is affected by so many other factors; is a blockbuster film better than an indie film that only played in the arthouse circuit? That's really what we're talking about here.
It's nice to have an actual debate about this though, and see some real, intelligent responses instead of the usual "LOL PHAIL" garbage we see around here.
WoW being original, and about fighting the evil within? Fanbois even you are not that deluded. Warcraft copied WH IP and there's no arguing that. Damn, original Warhammer FRP had a campaign called The Enemy Within which i've played when i was a kid... It was about how easily corrupted humans were by evil forces like Skaven and Chaos.It took players on an epic journey through the Old World.
So saying that WoW is about fighting evil within and other bullshite is so funny...
It's about grinding gear without which you're nothing, easy quests and raids a gaming equivalent of McDonald's. Kids and trailer park people entertainment...
it is really amazing. i never knew that playing a videogame put a person in a category of maturity in comparison of a person playing another 'video game'. so basiclly under this way of thinking me and people i know in real life who play this game just because we might 'like it' are without a doubt bad, horrible people to you.
i have stopped playing wow many times from complete bordom. big surprise huh? also i find alot of the people i encounter to be totally annoying and rude...even childish. do u think for a second that makes everyone playing a child just because its not hard to find brats?
there are somany things i am unhappy about with wow that its foolish to start. because its just a game. none of them will ever be perfect. and from what ive looked at i cant find any better mmo for me and my gf and others.
i also will not play a mmo with only humans. i find that plain and not worth paying a sub for. im drawn to dark elfs and i might add Wow has the most suited dark elves for myself that ive come across in any video game. moon worship. druids. its away from the normal ' sacrafice to the dark goddes' type dark elf setting. so unfortuantly wow has that hold on me. ive loved Night elves for years since Wc3 and i only started playing Wow because of them. so here is one example of a person who isnt playing because its popular or because i thinks it perfect because i obviously dont. i dont even care for raiding not because i find the killing boring(thats the fun part) but becaue i hate hearing people in vent ramble on as if anyone really gives a %$#@ about what they are saying.
and im not trying to fight with the wow haters. just asking why its neccesary to generalize over something as trivial as a video game. also. if wow is so bad then what other fantasy setting mmo with dark elves do any of you suggest me try? and nothing older than wow i might add. ( i tried - eq2 - vangaurd - war-)
be an adult please and if u reply to this try to actually suggest something maybe.
I saw a screenshot recently of something that looked like a motorcycle... please tell me that's not a new kind of mount???
Yes. Stupiest thing I've ever seen. But I'm more of a fan of high fantasy, not the hodgepodge mess that has become Wow (ie. Blizzard has borrowed from about every fantasy/sci-fi IP out there).
I saw a screenshot recently of something that looked like a motorcycle... please tell me that's not a new kind of mount???
They implement what the 11millions kids wants, its satisfying the customer:P
Calling the Warcraft playerbase kids is real mature right?
I'm sure it statistically correct thought. Based on my 3 years of playing (on and off) the vast majority of players fall in to two categories: they are kids or they act like kids.
My reaching this conclusion has nothing to do with my level of maturity. It is what it is.
I saw a screenshot recently of something that looked like a motorcycle... please tell me that's not a new kind of mount???
This is why I hate Gnomes, Im starting up WoW again because I miss my family on there. I always seem to come back to this game, even though there are Parts I dislike about the game. But I wish there was a way to kill off all the gnomes in this game I think Azeroth would be a better place without gnomes.
I played WoW for quite sometime and enjoyed my stay there,well at least to start with,the thing that got me wasnt the endless gear grind or the cartoon graphics or indeed the follow the yellow brick road gameplay.
What got me was the community,it got worse and worse and for me at least if the community is lacking than so is the mmo,near the end of my stay I could not believe how bad it got and was quite happy to leave...I guess to the op yes it did turn out to be a freakshow.
If someone had came up to me in 1980 when I was on my Atari 2600 and said we will be playing games with thousands of people at the same time.I guess my response would have been,"but I only have 2 joysticks"
It is always nice to see that a title like : Is WoW like some kind of freak show MMO now? always brings in ... the same boring Wow hating trolls, like flies to shit vomit. Losing such a fine leitmotif would be a shame. And always the same boring laughable arguments which have nothing to do with a ... good game. I'm getting the distinct impression that you don't even bother to read them, once you've figured out where they fit in the grand "with us or against us" scheme of things. Perhaps most of these guys just deserve products like DF, WAR, AoC, TR, Hellgate,.... At least we're being offered alternatives. And for one am willing to seriously consider them. If they fail, let it be on their own merit (or lack thereof), not because their name doesn't happen to be World of Warcraft. And now I see you've been dissing EVE Online, which IS successful. Your grounds for doing so? "Oh, but you can't walk out of your cockpit." Nothing more. Is there any MMO that you would allow to co-exist with WoW, or must they all be stamped out to satisfy the WoW Moloch and its high priests such as yourself? But anyway, since you've been discussing that as well in The Pub (you know, where you said the WoW haters dwelt), I think I'll post a reply over there too. ---- To the one that still believes the 15 year old made up lie that Warcraft just copied the WH ttuniverse.... First read some novels on Warcraft Lore before spreading lies.(70.000 pages to read to make it up). A pity that Mythic fucked up with War Lore. I can't look at my painted miniatures anymore, without thinking of the clunky mess Mark Jacobs made of it. (same with Mark of Chaos btw).
It is always nice to see that a title like : Is WoW like some kind of freak show MMO now? always brings in ... the same boring Wow hating trolls, like flies to shit. And always the same boring laughable arguments which have nothing to do with a ... good game. Perhaps most of these guys just deserve products like DF, WAR, AoC, TR, Hellgate,.... ---- To the one that still believes the 15 year old made up lie that Warcraft just copied the WH ttuniverse.... First read some novels on Warcraft Lore before spreading lies.(70.000 pages to read to make it up). A pity that Mythic fucked up with War Lore. I can't look at my painted miniatures anymore, without thinking of the clunky mess Mark Jacobs made of it. (same with Mark of Chaos btw).
And like a big fly to a steaming pile of shit, Zorndorf rallies to protect the oh so precious game he adores
Like 3 topics on frontpage of MMORPG.com are replies of Zorndorf in defense to WoW. lol
But before you start your usual rant, I'm sure you're informed that Warcraft lore was a project created after things went sour between Blizzard and Games Workshop on a deal to make a game on Warhammer lore....right? :P
It's not a copycat per se, but you can't deny that it did not deviate far from the "original" lore Blizzard intended for their games...
So in fact Warhammer DID come before Warcraft no matter what you may believe. Success tho is another issue
You may like your WoW but WAR etc. ain't bad. Maybe not for you but I know several people who quit WoW for WAR and never came back.
It is always nice to see that a title like : Is WoW like some kind of freak show MMO now? always brings in ... the same boring Wow hating trolls, like flies to shit. And always the same boring laughable arguments which have nothing to do with a ... good game. Perhaps most of these guys just deserve products like DF, WAR, AoC, TR, Hellgate,.... ---- To the one that still believes the 15 year old made up lie that Warcraft just copied the WH ttuniverse.... First read some novels on Warcraft Lore before spreading lies.(70.000 pages to read to make it up). A pity that Mythic fucked up with War Lore. I can't look at my painted miniatures anymore, without thinking of the clunky mess Mark Jacobs made of it. (same with Mark of Chaos btw).
And like a big fly to a steaming pile of shit, Zorndorf rallies to protect the oh so precious game he adores
Like 3 topics on frontpage of MMORPG.com are replies of Zorndorf in defense to WoW. lol
But before you start your usual rant, I'm sure you're informed that Warcraft lore was a project created after things went sour between Blizzard and Games Workshop on a deal to make a game on Warhammer lore....right? :P
It's not a copycat per se, but you can't deny that it did not deviate far from the "original" lore Blizzard intended for their games...
So in fact Warhammer DID come before Warcraft no matter what you may believe. Success tho is another issue
You may like your WoW but WAR etc. ain't bad. Maybe not for you but I know several people who quit WoW for WAR and never came back.
To each his own right?
Wrong about the blue. Dead simply wrong. A myth. If you knew anything about pre Blizzard and early Blizzard projects you wouldn't say this.
All I know is, Warhammer came first. WoW was second and, according to some book I read through Google Books, was directly inspired by the Warhammer lore.
I will just say, however, that regardless of who came first and how much can be considered legitimate appropriation, Warhammer respects its own setting. World of Warcraft, with all its Haris Piltons, doesn't. It regards itself as one huge joke and doesn't really deserve to be taken seriously.
Ultimately, it just reminds me of an old lawsuit I used to hear about, some novelist suing the producers of Falcon Crest for allegedly plagiarizing her idea of a family saga set in a vineyard. Falcon Crest won. How? By demonstrating how everyone had been using the same cliches for years -- Falcon Crest, the novelist's book, and previous examples even. In other words, they demonstrated that what they had been doing was routine crap just to show they could have copied someone else's routine crap by accident, because everybody was writing routine crap based on the same old formulas.
Just shows that fantasy settings can pretty much be traced back to Tolkien, and that most of them are, well, routine crap.
>>>> Source and reference please. You won't find anything official on that. Not from GW, not from Blizzard.
And besides we are talking computer games here.
You may like WAR, but as seen by the 75% closing servers (which were FULL and LOCKED at the end of September), it seems you are not followed by most fellows.
The problem is ... a game needs to better than "ain't bad".
A new mmorpg needs to be EXCELLENT and a push further UP compared to WotLK. What you guys just do NOT realise is that a" new world" to play in ... is NOT a basis for a game.
And you're blaming EVE for not allowing you to step outside the cockpit... No matter what the strengths of that game are. WoW is raising the bar, true. But if you're intent on making a case of how much money one needs to put into a game to compete with WoW, I say stop this damn madness now. I want to be able to look around and find quasi-indie and niche MMO's out there that don't sell their soul to appeal to the lowest common denominator, which is what a game with WoW's price tag would have to do in order to be financially successful. That's why part of me hopes that PotBS and Darkfall, made on small budgets with skeleton crews, will be successful after all. And that's why another part of me couldn't care less about your damn flying mounts and helicopters, because it's the kind of POINTLESS eye candy that drives up the necessary budget for a game. If you want to turn such trivialities into key elements of game design that other games have to include just to compete with WoW (with you presumably declaring them failures anyway), I have no other choice but to object.
Yours is the mentality that gave us the plotless Hollywood blockbuster, all special effects and zero originality, with a brain-dead story to boot. And it's dangerous. But it's just more of the same tyranny-of-the-majority claptrap I've come to expect from you.
The game has to be BETTER than 'ain't bad". Because no one needs a 'ain't bad" copy of something we already have. Oh yes to play a bit and try it for a few sessions, but it "ain"t working that way.
Any opinion is valid. But everyone agrees War did NOT walk like the way that Paul guy talked.
And why didn't it? Barnett and Jacobs are quite low in the credibility department these days. But the real irony is that I remember reading all too often how WAR did not look enough like Dark Age of Camelot... and too much like WoW.
In other words, too much like your beloved WoW to attract and keep people. That was the big mistake Mystic made.
Comments
I am a big fan of the Warhammer Table Top game.
But if you think Warhammer on line is accepted by the vast majority of WH TT players, you are dead wrong. Just talk to any WH club.
WH TT is all about army identities and their performance on the table top as ONE unity and identity. Magnificent miniatures game.
Mythic just wanted the lore and screwed it up to a terrible bad Wow clone with mixed factions, and scenario play. A typical Mark Jacobs production: "I know it all". "I can beat it". Warhammer Lore couldn't be more screwed.
As for 1983 and the origins of the best TT fantasy, this has nothing to do with a computer game in a different universe of "inner corruption". It suffices to read the Army books and novels of War TT and the novels and books of the Warcraft universe.
I still love playing the TT fantasy game, but at least I see the big difference in both lores.
War to me was by far the worst MMORP published in years. Too long to explain and not relevant in this thread.
-----
But Wow has a very good indepandant Lore of its own, built up since1994 (1992 actually). A magnificent rules book just in front of me with a magnificent map of all the places we know now.
Whether it's accepted or not is irrelevant. For that matter, most of what you said is irrelevant to what my reply was.
If we're speaking lore wise, then you're dead wrong.
If we're speaking purely game wise, then you're right. Warhammer hasn't implemented any PvE that would tie in with the rest of the game universe.
Edit: And the TT for both games are totally relevant for the games. It's the basis for the lore.
You need to realize that warcraft lore also has a big emphasis on engineering and machinery. World of warcraft is an expansion to that warcraft lore.
Also why the hell is your sig showing hitler's supporters and trying to make it a subtle connection to world of warcraft? Dont you have any sense of decency? You are pathetic. Nobody should glorify what Hitler did and think that Blizzard even remotely is similar.
I think you're missing the point of his signature.
All he wanted to say is that Popular does not equal Good. It's an extreme and, yes, Godwin-worthy example, but that is what his signature states, and nothing more.
Glorify Hitler? Only if you think having 11 million subscribers glorifies WoW. Which is the point of this entire thing.
Just to explain this for all: the Goldwin law:
The law states: "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."[2][3]. References to Godwin's Law often actually refer to a corollary of it which determines that the person who first makes an unwarranted reference to Nazi Germany or Hitler in an argument loses that argument automatically.
The rule does not make any statement about whether any particular reference or comparison to Adolf Hitler or the Nazis might be appropriate, but only asserts that one arising is increasingly probable. It is precisely because such a comparison or reference may sometimes be appropriate, Godwin has argued[4] that overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact. ...
For example, there is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically "lost" whatever debate was in progress. This principle itself is frequently referred to as Godwin's Law. It is considered poor form to raise such a comparison arbitrarily with the motive of ending the thread.
Whether it applies to humorous use or references to oneself is open to interpretation, because although mentioning and trivializing Nazism in an online discussion, this would not be a fallacious attack against a debate opponent.
Your last sentence just confirmed the above.
---
And ... the thread was about ... why are there mechanical things in Wow Lore ....
Well, at least you didn't distort the definition of Godwin while copy-pasting it here.
However, there is some debate over whether a reference to the Nazis immediately means losing the argument. What if the comparison is valid? I'm pretty sure that there is something in the scope of human activity being done that warrants a comparison to Hitler and/or the Nazis, so I'm not a subscriber to the "mention the Nazis and you lose the argument" theory. This is what Godwin himself is referring to in the second paragraph of the definition you reproduced above, and you get a more lighthearted example here.
But more to the point: Is the comparison of WoW to the German election of November 1932 (where the Nazis obtained 11.7 million votes) warranted? To be honest, no, it isn't. Not only because of Godwin but because of historical and political factors which have nothing in common with a video game. However, we get the more apt comparisons to McDonald's or Britney Spears, and they are just ridiculed. Wasn't it to be expected that someone would bring out the Godwin card sooner or later, when every suitable point comparison had been dismissed and derided by the WoW fanboys?
But McDonald's is a valid example. Any nutritionist will tell you that it's schlock (unless you go for the salad cop-outs, but how many McD's patrons actually do that?), yet the McDonald's-WoW comparison has been ruled out a priori by the fanboys. The salient point, however, needs to be addressed: "Popular" does not mean "good", and popularity does not make a "bad" product "good" for no other reason than because it is popular. This is tyranny of the majority at its basest -- "50 million Elvis fans can't be wrong". The fact that there are 50 million of them is no guarantee that they are right -- I'm guessing that this was the point of the Hitler signature. However, I don't subscribe to the opposing elitist view that says Elvis must be bad because 50 million fans love him.
The lesson to be learned from it -- and I know that you, Zorndorf, won't bother -- is that 11.5 million players does not make a game "good"; nor does it make it "bad". Nor does it force every individual on the planet to shut up and love WoW, especially at a time when all other MMO games (save a few niche exceptions) seem to be going down the drain.
As for your accusation that I'm just trying to end the thread by pulling a Godwin: Meh. Weren't you the one who did everything in your power to lock up any sign of negativity on these forums, for instance your petty inquisitions against anyone (such as myself) who disputed the greatness of your beloved WoW, even appealing to Stradden himself by mentioning how advertisers would pull out of a site that isn't 100% positive?
to make a further point of vetarnias' last post, here's an example of my own. 500 years ago everybody in europe "knew" that the earth was flat and at the centre of the universe. everybody knew this therefore it was a "fact". but then it turned out they were wrong. like vetarnias said, having the majority of votes for 1 thing doesn't make it wrong, it doesn't make it right either.
There is a major difference, however, between the shape of the Earth and one's appreciation of WoW. The former can be proved scientifically -- and in fact that had been done by the Ancient Greeks long before the Middle Ages, with Eratosthenes giving a rather close estimate of the Earth's circumference in the 3rd century B.C. Blame religious obscurantism for what happened thereafter.
In the case of WoW, what can we say? You like it or you don't -- purely a matter of taste. It can't be proved either way. For all my saying that the quests are repetitive, you might say that you just enjoy socializing in Orgrimmar with the occasional raiding on the side. Even something as technical as game performance varies from one person to another. For all the people who said, for example, that Age of Conan crashed all the time, I can say that although it was sluggish (as my computer was actually below system requirements) it only crashed once, and this very early on.
So there is no universal standard in the case of a game by which to judge it -- no, not even popularity, or critical reception.
I disagree.
There are plenty of examples in history of things that have been chosen as "best" by popular vote. The American system of belief is dependent almost totally on the opinion of the majority. We (among many other countries) even select our President by it, which is arguably one of the most important decisions to be made.
People have an unconscious obsession with finding the very best, by whatever definition. When there is no objective way to decide, we revert to opinion. Since individually our opinions are irrelevant to each other, a statistical analysis is used. It could be argued that the statistics are skewed since WoW has reached a "critical mass" (which is, that many of the people playing it are only playing it because it is popular) but it's the best and only method we have to decide what is "best," by any definition. Since the majority like playing WoW over other games, it's statistically the one most likely to be enjoyable to any one specific person, and therefore the "best."
It's nice to have an actual debate about this though, and see some real, intelligent responses instead of the usual "LOL PHAIL" garbage we see around here.
wow is just an chat room now with something to do on the side.
The McDonalds and Britney Spears analogy are fundementally flawed.
Answer this:
If wow = mcdonalds then what does [for exmample] Conan = ??? or any other mmo?
Fine dining? Steak dinner? Moms home cooking? Why isn't every other mmo compared to a fast food chain since they are all fundamentally the same? What makes them the nutritional sound meal of awesomeness?
Would you compare tic-tac-toe to grand theft auto and think that was a valid comparison? Both are games just like the above is both about food.
You never see the comparison treated between similar products like burger king, because as "bad" as mcdonalds is, your nutritionist would tell you BK is far worse. Now the subject is about hamburgers as if it relates to video games. See how unrelated that is?
Maybe just because 2 items share one similar feature they don't make representative comparisons to each other.
Why not just make any analogy that has the mildest similarities and pretend it has merit on a discussion of video games. Why not call wow cancer since so many people die from that.
People only use these types of analogies to associate wow to something that has a negative stigma in todays society and then act as if that stigma applies equally to wow. Mcdonald is tagged with obesity and unhealthy life styles. Briteny for her crazy dramatic blowups or people thinking she is anything more than an ENTERTAINER aimed at teenagers. It is always some comparison to something in society that has a negative aspect associated with it, like hitler.
You never see anyone compare wow to google, ipods or something else that has the same level of popularity in their respective fields, but have a cool image associated with it. It really is just plain nonsense to make such comparisons.
Yes, WoW is a freak show... Mainly because of people. There's too many different twisted minded people playing it. :P
the best way to kill a troll is to FLAME ON! ...or with acid...
Sounds like we would be in a world with so many fun games to play we would have to invent some sort of time machine to have time to play them all.
The McDonalds and Britney Spears analogy are fundementally flawed.
Answer this:
If wow = mcdonalds then what does [for exmample] Conan = ??? or any other mmo?
Fine dining? Steak dinner? Moms home cooking? Why isn't every other mmo compared to a fast food chain since they are all fundamentally the same? What makes them the nutritional sound meal of awesomeness?
Gaute Godager said steak. I once said elsewhere I'd compare AoC more to Red Lobster -- fast food that pretends it is somehow above that. At least WoW doesn't claim to be something it isn't; still doesn't excuse what it is, though.
Would you compare tic-tac-toe to grand theft auto and think that was a valid comparison? Both are games just like the above is both about food.
At least tic-tac-toe doesn't set off moral red flags in my head, like GTA does.
You never see the comparison treated between similar products like burger king, because as "bad" as mcdonalds is, your nutritionist would tell you BK is far worse. Now the subject is about hamburgers as if it relates to video games. See how unrelated that is?
I have no idea about BK versus McD. But the subject is about taste -- McDonald's isn't bad, but you don't need Morgan Spurlock to tell you that you shouldn't build your diet around it, and it's the general idea that they've sold I don't know how many gazillions of burgers that really matters.
I will refrain from saying WoW is in bad taste, although those pop-culture references in the game nearly tip it over.
Maybe just because 2 items share one similar feature they don't make representative comparisons to each other.
Why not just make any analogy that has the mildest similarities and pretend it has merit on a discussion of video games. Why not call wow cancer since so many people die from that.
People only use these types of analogies to associate wow to something that has a negative stigma in todays society and then act as if that stigma applies equally to wow. Mcdonald is tagged with obesity and unhealthy life styles. Briteny for her crazy dramatic blowups or people thinking she is anything more than an ENTERTAINER aimed at teenagers. It is always some comparison to something in society that has a negative aspect associated with it, like hitler.
For the purpose of the analogy to be effective, the comparison point HAS to be negative. Otherwise it doesn't work, for the purpose is to demonstrate that something can be popular while being bad. Hitler being the extreme example, unless someone would like to claim that anything good came out of him.
You never see anyone compare wow to google, ipods or something else that has the same level of popularity in their respective fields, but have a cool image associated with it. It really is just plain nonsense to make such comparisons.
For the record, Google's near-monopoly in the search-engine market is worrisome, and I've always been wary of anything that came out of Apple. Just saying.
I disagree.
There are plenty of examples in history of things that have been chosen as "best" by popular vote. The American system of belief is dependent almost totally on the opinion of the majority. And in a way, that's a problem, and not a new one either. Tocqueville wrote about that in the 1830's when he visited the United States. We (among many other countries) even select our President by it, which is arguably one of the most important decisions to be made. Then what do we make of Hayes vs. Tilden, or Bush vs. Gore? Loser gets more votes, but the other guy becomes President. (And I'm coming from a country where 38% of the votes or so will get you an ironclad majority government, so we're subjected to that all the time.)
People have an unconscious obsession with finding the very best, by whatever definition. When there is no objective way to decide, we revert to opinion. Since individually our opinions are irrelevant to each other, a statistical analysis is used. It could be argued that the statistics are skewed since WoW has reached a "critical mass" (which is, that many of the people playing it are only playing it because it is popular) but it's the best and only method we have to decide what is "best," by any definition. The only critical mass I'm willing to consider, as far as a game is concerned, is the one that is required for a game to be fully functional, e.g. how many people are needed for the economy, RvR, etc. to work. Since the majority like playing WoW over other games, it's statistically the one most likely to be enjoyable to any one specific person, and therefore the "best." If popularity were the only measurement of quality, then it would be so. But it's essentially meaningless, like who wins American Idol -- such as that guy I remember reading about a few years ago, who advanced to the finals (or semifinals, not sure) because he was a soldier at the time of the Iraq war. Nothing to do with his voice -- he was reportedly mediocre -- and everything to do with his uniform. Popularity means absolutely nothing because it is affected by so many other factors; is a blockbuster film better than an indie film that only played in the arthouse circuit? That's really what we're talking about here.
It's nice to have an actual debate about this though, and see some real, intelligent responses instead of the usual "LOL PHAIL" garbage we see around here.
WoW being original, and about fighting the evil within? Fanbois even you are not that deluded. Warcraft copied WH IP and there's no arguing that. Damn, original Warhammer FRP had a campaign called The Enemy Within which i've played when i was a kid... It was about how easily corrupted humans were by evil forces like Skaven and Chaos.It took players on an epic journey through the Old World.
So saying that WoW is about fighting evil within and other bullshite is so funny...
It's about grinding gear without which you're nothing, easy quests and raids a gaming equivalent of McDonald's. Kids and trailer park people entertainment...
it is really amazing. i never knew that playing a videogame put a person in a category of maturity in comparison of a person playing another 'video game'. so basiclly under this way of thinking me and people i know in real life who play this game just because we might 'like it' are without a doubt bad, horrible people to you.
i have stopped playing wow many times from complete bordom. big surprise huh? also i find alot of the people i encounter to be totally annoying and rude...even childish. do u think for a second that makes everyone playing a child just because its not hard to find brats?
there are somany things i am unhappy about with wow that its foolish to start. because its just a game. none of them will ever be perfect. and from what ive looked at i cant find any better mmo for me and my gf and others.
i also will not play a mmo with only humans. i find that plain and not worth paying a sub for. im drawn to dark elfs and i might add Wow has the most suited dark elves for myself that ive come across in any video game. moon worship. druids. its away from the normal ' sacrafice to the dark goddes' type dark elf setting. so unfortuantly wow has that hold on me. ive loved Night elves for years since Wc3 and i only started playing Wow because of them. so here is one example of a person who isnt playing because its popular or because i thinks it perfect because i obviously dont. i dont even care for raiding not because i find the killing boring(thats the fun part) but becaue i hate hearing people in vent ramble on as if anyone really gives a %$#@ about what they are saying.
and im not trying to fight with the wow haters. just asking why its neccesary to generalize over something as trivial as a video game. also. if wow is so bad then what other fantasy setting mmo with dark elves do any of you suggest me try? and nothing older than wow i might add. ( i tried - eq2 - vangaurd - war-)
be an adult please and if u reply to this try to actually suggest something maybe.
Yes. Stupiest thing I've ever seen. But I'm more of a fan of high fantasy, not the hodgepodge mess that has become Wow (ie. Blizzard has borrowed from about every fantasy/sci-fi IP out there).
They implement what the 11millions kids wants, its satisfying the customer:P
Calling the Warcraft playerbase kids is real mature right?
I'm sure it statistically correct thought. Based on my 3 years of playing (on and off) the vast majority of players fall in to two categories: they are kids or they act like kids.
My reaching this conclusion has nothing to do with my level of maturity. It is what it is.
Please point out one single thing that makes the World of Warcraft IP unique from other fantasy IPs.
One thing...
This is why I hate Gnomes, Im starting up WoW again because I miss my family on there. I always seem to come back to this game, even though there are Parts I dislike about the game. But I wish there was a way to kill off all the gnomes in this game I think Azeroth would be a better place without gnomes.
Please point out one single thing that makes the World of Warcraft IP unique from other fantasy IPs.
One thing...
Fantasy motorcycles...
um WoW's genre is Fantasy/Steampunk so how the hell does greed come in to play. It fits perfectly into the lore.
I played WoW for quite sometime and enjoyed my stay there,well at least to start with,the thing that got me wasnt the endless gear grind or the cartoon graphics or indeed the follow the yellow brick road gameplay.
What got me was the community,it got worse and worse and for me at least if the community is lacking than so is the mmo,near the end of my stay I could not believe how bad it got and was quite happy to leave...I guess to the op yes it did turn out to be a freakshow.
If someone had came up to me in 1980 when I was on my Atari 2600 and said we will be playing games with thousands of people at the same time.I guess my response would have been,"but I only have 2 joysticks"
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/235780/page/8
And like a big fly to a steaming pile of shit, Zorndorf rallies to protect the oh so precious game he adores
Like 3 topics on frontpage of MMORPG.com are replies of Zorndorf in defense to WoW. lol
But before you start your usual rant, I'm sure you're informed that Warcraft lore was a project created after things went sour between Blizzard and Games Workshop on a deal to make a game on Warhammer lore....right? :P
It's not a copycat per se, but you can't deny that it did not deviate far from the "original" lore Blizzard intended for their games...
So in fact Warhammer DID come before Warcraft no matter what you may believe. Success tho is another issue
You may like your WoW but WAR etc. ain't bad. Maybe not for you but I know several people who quit WoW for WAR and never came back.
To each his own right?
And like a big fly to a steaming pile of shit, Zorndorf rallies to protect the oh so precious game he adores
Like 3 topics on frontpage of MMORPG.com are replies of Zorndorf in defense to WoW. lol
But before you start your usual rant, I'm sure you're informed that Warcraft lore was a project created after things went sour between Blizzard and Games Workshop on a deal to make a game on Warhammer lore....right? :P
It's not a copycat per se, but you can't deny that it did not deviate far from the "original" lore Blizzard intended for their games...
So in fact Warhammer DID come before Warcraft no matter what you may believe. Success tho is another issue
You may like your WoW but WAR etc. ain't bad. Maybe not for you but I know several people who quit WoW for WAR and never came back.
To each his own right?
Wrong about the blue. Dead simply wrong. A myth. If you knew anything about pre Blizzard and early Blizzard projects you wouldn't say this.
All I know is, Warhammer came first. WoW was second and, according to some book I read through Google Books, was directly inspired by the Warhammer lore.
I will just say, however, that regardless of who came first and how much can be considered legitimate appropriation, Warhammer respects its own setting. World of Warcraft, with all its Haris Piltons, doesn't. It regards itself as one huge joke and doesn't really deserve to be taken seriously.
Ultimately, it just reminds me of an old lawsuit I used to hear about, some novelist suing the producers of Falcon Crest for allegedly plagiarizing her idea of a family saga set in a vineyard. Falcon Crest won. How? By demonstrating how everyone had been using the same cliches for years -- Falcon Crest, the novelist's book, and previous examples even. In other words, they demonstrated that what they had been doing was routine crap just to show they could have copied someone else's routine crap by accident, because everybody was writing routine crap based on the same old formulas.
Just shows that fantasy settings can pretty much be traced back to Tolkien, and that most of them are, well, routine crap.
>>>> Source and reference please. You won't find anything official on that. Not from GW, not from Blizzard.
And besides we are talking computer games here.
You may like WAR, but as seen by the 75% closing servers (which were FULL and LOCKED at the end of September), it seems you are not followed by most fellows.
The problem is ... a game needs to better than "ain't bad".
A new mmorpg needs to be EXCELLENT and a push further UP compared to WotLK. What you guys just do NOT realise is that a" new world" to play in ... is NOT a basis for a game.
And you're blaming EVE for not allowing you to step outside the cockpit... No matter what the strengths of that game are. WoW is raising the bar, true. But if you're intent on making a case of how much money one needs to put into a game to compete with WoW, I say stop this damn madness now. I want to be able to look around and find quasi-indie and niche MMO's out there that don't sell their soul to appeal to the lowest common denominator, which is what a game with WoW's price tag would have to do in order to be financially successful. That's why part of me hopes that PotBS and Darkfall, made on small budgets with skeleton crews, will be successful after all. And that's why another part of me couldn't care less about your damn flying mounts and helicopters, because it's the kind of POINTLESS eye candy that drives up the necessary budget for a game. If you want to turn such trivialities into key elements of game design that other games have to include just to compete with WoW (with you presumably declaring them failures anyway), I have no other choice but to object.
Yours is the mentality that gave us the plotless Hollywood blockbuster, all special effects and zero originality, with a brain-dead story to boot. And it's dangerous. But it's just more of the same tyranny-of-the-majority claptrap I've come to expect from you.
The game has to be BETTER than 'ain't bad". Because no one needs a 'ain't bad" copy of something we already have. Oh yes to play a bit and try it for a few sessions, but it "ain"t working that way.
Any opinion is valid. But everyone agrees War did NOT walk like the way that Paul guy talked.
And why didn't it? Barnett and Jacobs are quite low in the credibility department these days. But the real irony is that I remember reading all too often how WAR did not look enough like Dark Age of Camelot... and too much like WoW.
In other words, too much like your beloved WoW to attract and keep people. That was the big mistake Mystic made.