I don't think that any game can be considered a wow clone. Just because something plays similar, doesn't necessarily mean that it is a clone. The only game I have played that I think truely played a lot like wow, was Allods online. It looked, played, and felt like wow. Until the cash shop came out. Then it was no longer a wow clone to me. I just don't see why everyone always throws that term around like it's such a bad thing either. WoW has a lot of subscribers, it is really polished, combat is fluid, and the graphics aren't too bad, they are nice looking for what it is. I enjoy wow, along with sandbox games too. So why is it such a big deal to enjoy it. I wish a true wow clone came out, then I could play wow with different content.
IMO, the only thing that can be classified as a 'clone' is WoW...
Have any of you people realized what CLONE means, it means EXACT COPY. So a 'WoW clone' would have to have the exact same, everything; to be considered a clone.
its not that what you have given as a definition is wrong, its just far to general.
ie: if a game does not have factions like wow does.. would that make it clone or not.
what if it did not have crafting, or pvp?
Would the game play, level grinding through zones to an "End Game", change? No it wouldn't, therefore I think my description stands. That was my vote, anyways.
sorry that doesnt work for me.
if i asked if sylvester stallone was a "clone" of arnold schwazzneger, on the basis that they are both american action movie stars, and started listing a dozen or so things that they have in common (while leaving out whatever did not fit) .... it wouldnt be accurate either.
thats what you have done... youve edited out anything that might not fit your description. therefore your description is inclomplete and flawed.
Do they not both generally make action movies with lots of brawn? Really though, you'd have to compare the movies, not the actors.
To the readers in general here, if you have stated you want a "Sandbox" game, and didn't agree with my description, then stop saying you want a Sandbox game.
You cannot have a sandbox game when the sandbox is broken up into zones that you have to go through in order.
ok im going to apply your logic here:
marilyn manson and michel bubble are both caucasian singers who currently work in the entertainment industry... so obviously there music is the same.
ummmmm.... not so much.
therefore the answer to your poll is NO.
What an idiotic reply. WoW and Chess are both games. So are they the same?
Any game that has level grinding up a ladder to an "End Game", with wide power gaps that force zoning of content into level groups.A "WoW clone" is the same thing as an "EQ Clone".
considering your question (posted above) applies to about 70% of the games on the market, my reply is completely apropriate to point out how general your definition is.
you might as well as have asked "if it is an mmo is it a wow clone". as to wow and chess if your asking if they are both games, yes they are. but thats what you did with your definition, its so general its as ridiculous as the comparrison i gave between marilyn manson and michel bubble (and that was the point).
its a bad definition of a wow clone because a "clone" implies many similarieties, something your post clearly intends to ignore.
"considering your question (posted above) applies to about 70% of the games on the market..."
Exactly! And that is why those of us looking for a goodSandbox game are complaining. Not because there's WoW and WoW clones, but because we don't have a good game like what we want.
And no, the definition is not "too general". It's quite simple and self explanatory. You guys are being purposefully obstinate and thick headed. That's obvious, and I really don't care why.
In reality there could be dozens of definitions of what a WoW clone is depending on what you think are the most critical things. Now the most critical thing might be where a game fits in the four quadrants created by the themepark vs sandbox and PvP vs PvE split. In that case both EQ and WoW fit into the PvE themepark quadrant.
However if you accept that that is only the first step and then talk about clones within each sub-genre then WoW is a fundamentally different type of PvE themepark from EQ as the root gameplay completely changed from group-based mob grinding to solo-based quest grinding.
So *my* definition of an EQ clone would be a PvE themepark game built around group-based mob grinding or at least grouping and *my* definition of a WoW clone is a PvE themepark game built around solo quest grinding.
Originally most cash-shop games were solo mob-grinding games which since WoW have gradually been changing into (bad) WoW clones and more recently into pretty good WoW-clones like RoM.
And since WoW most of the subscription PvE themepark games e.g Lotro, EQII, WAR, AoC, Aion, and others, have all been WoW clones according to my definition as they are all solo quest-grinders.
So something like Vanguard would be an EQ clone and pretty much everything else (in the PvE themepark quadrant) has been WoW clones.
Any game that has level grinding up a ladder to an "End Game", with wide power gaps that force zoning of content into level groups.A "WoW clone" is the same thing as an "EQ Clone".
Your definition:
A WoW clone is = (level 1 to x) + (instances +y) + (raid + z)
Substitute your "instances" with my "zoning of content", and your "raid" with my "end game", and these two descriptions look very much alike.
Yes, you are right about something. It's called a "WoW Clone" because WoW is the standard now, and used to be called an "EQ Clone" before WoW. It was a simple switch from one to the other, due to the same grinding play style and WoW's dominance.
In reality there could be dozens of definitions of what a WoW clone is depending on what you think are the most critical things. Now the most critical thing might be where a game fits in the four quadrants created by the themepark vs sandbox and PvP vs PvE split. In that case both EQ and WoW fit into the PvE themepark quadrant.
However if you accept that that is only the first step and then talk about clones within each sub-genre then WoW is a fundamentally different type of PvE themepark from EQ as the root gameplay completely changed from group-based mob grinding to solo-based quest grinding.
So *my* definition of an EQ clone would be a PvE themepark game built around group-based mob grinding or at least grouping and *my* definition of a WoW clone is a PvE themepark game built around solo quest grinding.
Originally most cash-shop games were solo mob-grinding games which since WoW have gradually been changing into (bad) WoW clones and more recently into pretty good WoW-clones like RoM.
And since WoW most of the subscription PvE themepark games e.g Lotro, EQII, WAR, AoC, Aion, and others, have all been WoW clones according to my definition as they are all solo quest-grinders.
So something like Vanguard would be an EQ clone and pretty much everything else (in the PvE themepark quadrant) has been WoW clones.
Tupodawg, I see what you are getting at. But in effect, you are simply being more specific in your use of the term than I am. That's ok, and I accept that when you say "So something like Vanguard would be an EQ clone and pretty much everything else (in the PvE themepark quadrant) has been WoW clones."
However, when I (and others) say they are all WoW Clones, we mean a looser definition as I outlined in my OP. Both statements are valid, if you accept this comment.....
"I say (this), and by that I mean (this)."
Unfortunately, as soon as we try, we get a bunch of people splitting hairs about what we meant.
Amaranthar from what you are saying in your posts, to you, everything that is not sandbox is a wow clone. Sorry you feel that way, but sandbox and theme park are two different sub genres of the mmo class.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Amaranthar from what you are saying in your posts, to you, everything that is not sandbox is a wow clone. Sorry you feel that way, but sandbox and theme park are two different sub genres of the mmo class.
Well, yeah. Are you agreeing with me that there are the two general sub genres, and that you call one of them "themepark", while I'm calling that a "WoW Clone"?
Or is your contention on EQ, and whether that's a Themepark or Sandbox game? If so, I think a game can certainly have aspects of both themepark and sandbox. It's all on a scale. Would you consider EQ more Sandbox than Themepark? It also strikes me that there's two ways to look at this. How the game world is built, and how the game play functions. I think it's possible for a game, stuck in between Themepark and Sandbox, to have a more Sandboxy world, yet have a more Themepark play experience.
I'm curious, if your contention is based on EQ, what you think about this comment.
I think such a term isn't really saying anything. Go to detail when you critizise a game. Explaining one term by another isn't saying anything really.
a) Everyone will think of something different when it comes to WOW. Thus the word isn't really defined.
b) The perception of the term WOW clone is so vague and wide, containing so many things, it looses the defining value.
c) Many things people will think of when they say WoW clone are now common standards. Like the symbol over quest givers, radars, quick bars or having quests. Some not even invented by WOW.
d) A "Clone" is by definition an identical copy. Thus there can be now WOW clone, unless WOW itself is made anew. It is thus a misleading term and illogical.
e) IMPO it is intellectual lazyness. A person dislikes a game but is too lazy to go into detail why.
Hence, I see no intellectual gain by using the term at all.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Quick and easy leveling with a big exclamation/question mark over quest givers and quests have a big cross on the map where you need to go.
Alot of instances
Low or no death penalty
Solo friendly
Highly controlled PvP
Little persistance. Basically only your character evolves over time. Everything else is static.
Ok, that's a valid opinion. Different and more detailed than mine, which I'll stick with as a more viable general theme. But that's a good interpretation for being more specific.
Just throwing this out there....my opinion is that EQ was always going to turn into WoW. EQ had some major problems with waiting at camps (which is why that term came to be). The natural answer for a game based on level grinding is to direct player's experience towards something where you don't have to wait, sometimes for a very long time, to get your turn. Thus, the "instance" was conceived. Instances based on level groups, just as EQ's content was based on level groups to level up to "End Game" (or "Raids", if you prefer).
Taking this poll to see if there's any sort of agreement on this.
The definition, I think, is simple. It's
Any game that has level grinding up a ladder to an "End Game", with wide power gaps that force zoning of content into level groups.A "WoW clone" is the same thing as an "EQ Clone".
Your thoughts are welcome.
Edit to add: It doesn't matter if you like this sort of game play or not, and there's certainly nothing wrong with a game by this definition. "Like" is not the question, only the definition.
Well I thought you did a good definition. I voted yes. I don't know what's up with the other naysayers in this forum, bunch of punks if you ask me.
Too vague. Doesn't really mean anything, or definition varies from one to another. Incite others to argue against your own definition. Using that while describing another game turns your post into a flame bait if you ask me.
You know, *long pause for effect*, if MMORPG's weren't all the same WOW clones then there wouldn't be a General Discussion sub-forum here at mmorpg.com where one player from one MMORPG can say something and be completely understood by another player from another MMORPG.
overly exaggerated features (large hands, heads, feet, weapons)
non-human characters
dwarfs, elves, hobgoblins
D&D theme'ish
The actual "mechanics" of the gameplay don't come to mind quite as much as the art style does to me.
I don't think that's how most people define "wow clone", maybe someone should start a new poll, cause I always assumed it meant how the game played not superficial comparisons.
Amaranthar from what you are saying in your posts, to you, everything that is not sandbox is a wow clone. Sorry you feel that way, but sandbox and theme park are two different sub genres of the mmo class.
Well, yeah. Are you agreeing with me that there are the two general sub genres, and that you call one of them "themepark", while I'm calling that a "WoW Clone"?
Or is your contention on EQ, and whether that's a Themepark or Sandbox game? If so, I think a game can certainly have aspects of both themepark and sandbox. It's all on a scale. Would you consider EQ more Sandbox than Themepark? It also strikes me that there's two ways to look at this. How the game world is built, and how the game play functions. I think it's possible for a game, stuck in between Themepark and Sandbox, to have a more Sandboxy world, yet have a more Themepark play experience.
I'm curious, if your contention is based on EQ, what you think about this comment.
I agree that a mmo with both sandbox and theme park elements could be a really nice experience. I would love to see a sandboxy game that would also have a story in it of the magnitude SWToR seems to be trying. Let's say this new sub genre would be called sandpark or something. Then maybe there comes a game that makes the sandpark style mainstream. Does this mean we should start calling every sandpark game after it a X game, let's call it "Ultimate adventure"(unoriginal I know) clone by a definition like "An UA clone is a mmo that has sandbox elements intertwined with a big personal story"? I think not.
overly exaggerated features (large hands, heads, feet, weapons)
non-human characters
dwarfs, elves, hobgoblins
D&D theme'ish
The actual "mechanics" of the gameplay don't come to mind quite as much as the art style does to me.
I don't think that's how most people define "wow clone", maybe someone should start a new poll, cause I always assumed it meant how the game played not superficial comparisons.
Possibly not. It may simply be that I have a bias against the "theme" as I'm an avid scifi fanatic and never really enjoyed the whole sword and sorcery thing. Dragon Age and Oblivion have both lightened my distaste for it, but that may be why I classify it as the "WoW" theme.
Comments
Hey if its a WoW clone because of the UI,
didnt WoW get its UI from another game it copy from?
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
I don't think that any game can be considered a wow clone. Just because something plays similar, doesn't necessarily mean that it is a clone. The only game I have played that I think truely played a lot like wow, was Allods online. It looked, played, and felt like wow. Until the cash shop came out. Then it was no longer a wow clone to me. I just don't see why everyone always throws that term around like it's such a bad thing either. WoW has a lot of subscribers, it is really polished, combat is fluid, and the graphics aren't too bad, they are nice looking for what it is. I enjoy wow, along with sandbox games too. So why is it such a big deal to enjoy it. I wish a true wow clone came out, then I could play wow with different content.
IMO, the only thing that can be classified as a 'clone' is WoW...
Have any of you people realized what CLONE means, it means EXACT COPY. So a 'WoW clone' would have to have the exact same, everything; to be considered a clone.
So, no game except WoW, is a WoW clone.
smh
/thread
Total MMOs played: 274|Enjoyed: 9. >:|
This thread is a clone of another thread. They both have words and opinions. When will the cloning end?
A tiny mind is a tidy mind...
^
I like your sig too : >
Total MMOs played: 274|Enjoyed: 9. >:|
"considering your question (posted above) applies to about 70% of the games on the market..."
Exactly! And that is why those of us looking for a good Sandbox game are complaining. Not because there's WoW and WoW clones, but because we don't have a good game like what we want.
And no, the definition is not "too general". It's quite simple and self explanatory. You guys are being purposefully obstinate and thick headed. That's obvious, and I really don't care why.
Once upon a time....
WoW Clone == any game that can get over eleven million people to sub to it.
Well shave my back and call me an elf! -- Oghren
I voted no.
In reality there could be dozens of definitions of what a WoW clone is depending on what you think are the most critical things. Now the most critical thing might be where a game fits in the four quadrants created by the themepark vs sandbox and PvP vs PvE split. In that case both EQ and WoW fit into the PvE themepark quadrant.
However if you accept that that is only the first step and then talk about clones within each sub-genre then WoW is a fundamentally different type of PvE themepark from EQ as the root gameplay completely changed from group-based mob grinding to solo-based quest grinding.
So *my* definition of an EQ clone would be a PvE themepark game built around group-based mob grinding or at least grouping and *my* definition of a WoW clone is a PvE themepark game built around solo quest grinding.
Originally most cash-shop games were solo mob-grinding games which since WoW have gradually been changing into (bad) WoW clones and more recently into pretty good WoW-clones like RoM.
And since WoW most of the subscription PvE themepark games e.g Lotro, EQII, WAR, AoC, Aion, and others, have all been WoW clones according to my definition as they are all solo quest-grinders.
So something like Vanguard would be an EQ clone and pretty much everything else (in the PvE themepark quadrant) has been WoW clones.
My definition:
Any game that has level grinding up a ladder to an "End Game", with wide power gaps that force zoning of content into level groups. A "WoW clone" is the same thing as an "EQ Clone".
Your definition:
A WoW clone is = (level 1 to x) + (instances +y) + (raid + z)
Substitute your "instances" with my "zoning of content", and your "raid" with my "end game", and these two descriptions look very much alike.
Yes, you are right about something. It's called a "WoW Clone" because WoW is the standard now, and used to be called an "EQ Clone" before WoW. It was a simple switch from one to the other, due to the same grinding play style and WoW's dominance.
Once upon a time....
Tupodawg, I see what you are getting at. But in effect, you are simply being more specific in your use of the term than I am. That's ok, and I accept that when you say "So something like Vanguard would be an EQ clone and pretty much everything else (in the PvE themepark quadrant) has been WoW clones."
However, when I (and others) say they are all WoW Clones, we mean a looser definition as I outlined in my OP. Both statements are valid, if you accept this comment.....
"I say (this), and by that I mean (this)."
Unfortunately, as soon as we try, we get a bunch of people splitting hairs about what we meant.
Once upon a time....
Amaranthar from what you are saying in your posts, to you, everything that is not sandbox is a wow clone. Sorry you feel that way, but sandbox and theme park are two different sub genres of the mmo class.
You guys really get into overthinking this stuff.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
No.
imo a WoW clone is:
Linear and Themepark
Quick and easy leveling with a big exclamation/question mark over quest givers and quests have a big cross on the map where you need to go.
Alot of instances
Low or no death penalty
Solo friendly
Highly controlled PvP
Little persistance. Basically only your character evolves over time. Everything else is static.
My gaming blog
Well, yeah. Are you agreeing with me that there are the two general sub genres, and that you call one of them "themepark", while I'm calling that a "WoW Clone"?
Or is your contention on EQ, and whether that's a Themepark or Sandbox game? If so, I think a game can certainly have aspects of both themepark and sandbox. It's all on a scale. Would you consider EQ more Sandbox than Themepark? It also strikes me that there's two ways to look at this. How the game world is built, and how the game play functions. I think it's possible for a game, stuck in between Themepark and Sandbox, to have a more Sandboxy world, yet have a more Themepark play experience.
I'm curious, if your contention is based on EQ, what you think about this comment.
Once upon a time....
I think such a term isn't really saying anything. Go to detail when you critizise a game. Explaining one term by another isn't saying anything really.
a) Everyone will think of something different when it comes to WOW. Thus the word isn't really defined.
b) The perception of the term WOW clone is so vague and wide, containing so many things, it looses the defining value.
c) Many things people will think of when they say WoW clone are now common standards. Like the symbol over quest givers, radars, quick bars or having quests. Some not even invented by WOW.
d) A "Clone" is by definition an identical copy. Thus there can be now WOW clone, unless WOW itself is made anew. It is thus a misleading term and illogical.
e) IMPO it is intellectual lazyness. A person dislikes a game but is too lazy to go into detail why.
Hence, I see no intellectual gain by using the term at all.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Ok, that's a valid opinion. Different and more detailed than mine, which I'll stick with as a more viable general theme. But that's a good interpretation for being more specific.
Just throwing this out there....my opinion is that EQ was always going to turn into WoW. EQ had some major problems with waiting at camps (which is why that term came to be). The natural answer for a game based on level grinding is to direct player's experience towards something where you don't have to wait, sometimes for a very long time, to get your turn. Thus, the "instance" was conceived. Instances based on level groups, just as EQ's content was based on level groups to level up to "End Game" (or "Raids", if you prefer).
Once upon a time....
Well I thought you did a good definition. I voted yes. I don't know what's up with the other naysayers in this forum, bunch of punks if you ask me.
Too vague. Doesn't really mean anything, or definition varies from one to another. Incite others to argue against your own definition. Using that while describing another game turns your post into a flame bait if you ask me.
Personnally, "Clone" doesn't factor into making my decision to play Game x, y or z....
Posts like this are looking for responses in order to support their own bias.
This is true. I won't deny it. However, I'm looking for more than just responses in support.
Once upon a time....
You know, *long pause for effect*, if MMORPG's weren't all the same WOW clones then there wouldn't be a General Discussion sub-forum here at mmorpg.com where one player from one MMORPG can say something and be completely understood by another player from another MMORPG.
When I think of a "WoW clone", I think:
cartoonish graphics
swords and sorcery
overly exaggerated features (large hands, heads, feet, weapons)
non-human characters
dwarfs, elves, hobgoblins
D&D theme'ish
The actual "mechanics" of the gameplay don't come to mind quite as much as the art style does to me.
I don't think that's how most people define "wow clone", maybe someone should start a new poll, cause I always assumed it meant how the game played not superficial comparisons.
I agree that a mmo with both sandbox and theme park elements could be a really nice experience. I would love to see a sandboxy game that would also have a story in it of the magnitude SWToR seems to be trying. Let's say this new sub genre would be called sandpark or something. Then maybe there comes a game that makes the sandpark style mainstream. Does this mean we should start calling every sandpark game after it a X game, let's call it "Ultimate adventure"(unoriginal I know) clone by a definition like "An UA clone is a mmo that has sandbox elements intertwined with a big personal story"? I think not.
Possibly not. It may simply be that I have a bias against the "theme" as I'm an avid scifi fanatic and never really enjoyed the whole sword and sorcery thing. Dragon Age and Oblivion have both lightened my distaste for it, but that may be why I classify it as the "WoW" theme.