It's funny, everytime someone points out that WoW is in fact a "clone" of the games before it, others try to say that those games don't matter, no one cares about them. Well guess what, without those games, there would be no WoW and this whole issue of what is a clone of what wouldn't even exist. The only time a game can rightfully be called a clone is if it looks exactly the same. Technically the term clone shouldn't even be used, clone would entail an exact copy, in reality its more like parents and children. Tho it looks like the original, and even shares some of the characteristics, it doesn't make it a clone, by that logic you are a clone of your parents
The people that say WoW is a clone of a game (EQ is usually the biggest culprit) are simply wrong. I mean, that's like saying Deus Ex is a clone of Wolfenstein 3D. The common line of thinking here is that both games take place in a first person perspective and both games have players shooting computer controled humaniods, right? All else excluded then, including Deus Ex's RPG elements, emphasis on story, and gameplay mechanics, Deus Ex is a clone. The problem is where do you draw the line? Why can't I say that World of Warcraft is a pong clone simply because both games are video games? It's utter stupidity, and honestly, the fact that so many people deny that makers of MMORPGs have modeled their games to be eerily similar to WoW really escapes me.
Sometimes I start to wonder whether or not the real issue is that grammar nazis simply take exception to the term "clone" being used instead of "highly similar game" or some other term. My line of thinking is that the terminology doesn't change the fact that the games still play far too much like one another to do anything else other than make me miss playing my level capped toon in WoW.
In these threads we see a lot of people stating why they believe "WoW clone" is an appropriate term, and we see those who believe it isn't. The problem is that when I have broken down and have seen others break down the meaning of the word point by point,I have yet to see a legitimate counter argument from those who hate the use of the term. Instead, most of them thumb their noses and post this sort of diatribe.
Of course, this is all fine. Have fun living in your fantasy world. I'll be here to debate you once you decide to come back to reality.
This is like breaking down the use of the word gay, when describing something that sucks. There are people who do not like the use, yet most know how the term is being used and know what such a usage means. There's no reason to break the word down, and very little that's going to be said in reply aside from maybe no **** Sherlock...
When you have so many people who despise the term "WoW clone" making statements like "WoW was a clone of EQ," I can only belief they lack an understanding for what the term really means so I try to describe "why" WoW was not a clone of EQ as much as a natural evolution. Next, I explain why a game like Rift is a clone of WoW because they don't redefine any concept as much as they copy them or make miniscule refinements. Of course that goes both ways as there are those that think FFXIV is a clone of WoW because SE is planning to add more quest content.
The only people who use the term "WOW clone" are the ones who are too lazy and do not want to think logically about the similarities between games. No, they rather throw out this over-used term to voice their frustration/anger/displeasure.etc.... without knowing what it really means.
Besides, the only association with the term WOW clone is a neagtive one and it is only used in a negative way. That is why when I see the term used, it immediately discredits the post/article/etc.... to me.
Yup.
In these threads we see a lot of people stating why they believe "WoW clone" is an appropriate term, and we see those who believe it isn't. The problem is that when I have broken down and have seen others break down the meaning of the word point by point,I have yet to see a legitimate counter argument from those who hate the use of the term. Instead, most of them thumb their noses and post this sort of diatribe.
Of course, this is all fine. Have fun living in your fantasy world. I'll be here to debate you once you decide to come back to reality.
What really troubles me about the comments you quoted is that they are not critiquing the word as much as they are criticizing the people who might use the word. As if to paint everyone with one giant stroke of the internet pyschology paintbrush to somehow make the appear to be lesser people.
I have seen plenty of gamers refer to various games as a wow clone without them being lazy, illogical, angry or suffering from whatever other mental defect is being carelessly hurled around. It isn't at all uncommon to see people refer to games they really enjoy as being wow clones, because they are comfortable with the comparison and see the relevence of such comparisons.
The one thing I get from this topic is that there are a lot of different views about what the term wow clone means. Some try to interpret it as the strickest definition of nearly identical twins, some take it to mean that wow somehow invented something and other see it as a comparison of similar gameplay styles between two games.
The people that say WoW is a clone of a game (EQ is usually the biggest culprit) are simply wrong. I mean, that's like saying Deus Ex is a clone of Wolfenstein 3D. The common line of thinking here is that both games take place in a first person perspective and both games have players shooting computer controled humaniods, right? All else excluded then, including Deus Ex's RPG elements, emphasis on story, and gameplay mechanics, Deus Ex is a clone. The problem is where do you draw the line? Why can't I say that World of Warcraft is a pong clone simply because both games are video games? It's utter stupidity, and honestly, the fact that so many people deny that makers of MMORPGs have modeled their games to be eerily similar to WoW really escapes me.
Sometimes I start to wonder whether or not the real issue is that grammar nazis simply take exception to the term "clone" being used instead of "highly similar game" or some other term. My line of thinking is that the terminology doesn't change the fact that the games still play far too much like one another to do anything else other than make me miss playing my level capped toon in WoW.
I'm not going to call WoW an EQ clone, but to me it's a simple fact that WoW copied/used/'borrowed' most gameplay elements from EQ and not from UO or AC or DAoC. Heck, some of the lead designers were even hardcore EQ raiders.
So I wouldn't find it strange if there are people who were calling WoW an EQ clone when it came out even if I didn't, because when I played it the first times I myself thought it had more familiarity with EQ than with an UO or AC too. Also, I found WoW be closer to EQ than GW that I played around the same time.
As for when the 'clone' calling starts, that varies, but some persons take it far, and even when there's only a few gameplay elements that are really similar, they'll be calling a game already a 'WoW clone'. For example, hypothetically, to a hardcore sandbox gamer as soon as an MMORPG has quests and leveling that is supported by questing, then there are some that'll be calling an MMORPG already a 'WoW clone'.
To me personally, a game like Vanguard isn't a WoW clone at all but I've seen people here call it like that.
The same for EQ2, it's been called a WoW clone, even when that'd be strange since it was released at the same time as WoW.
To a lesser degree, AoC has different visuals, a totally different world feel - raw and visceral and nowhere near cartoony, tongue-in-cheek - different combat mechanics, player cities, sieges, and even (partially) different quest presentation, yet still there are people calling it a 'WoW clone' for the simple fact that it's a themepark MMO and therefore reminds them of WoW gameplay.
Also, calling a game like Rift a 'WoW clone' negates the obvious differences it has, of which the dynamic content that provides alternate way of leveling is certainly not a small one.
Me, personally, I don't care if people use the term 'WoW clone' because I instantly win 3 steps in profiling or classifying a poster's viewpoint when I see them using the term, and I know what they mean. But as for the reason why all the fuss about such a simple 2 words, that's easy.
People use 'WoW clone' as good as always when they feel that another MMORPG has too many similarities to WoW, and they want to express their disgust or disdain in a comment of dismissal.
Other people object to the term for exactly that reason, that most of the times people go negatively namecalling another MMO 'WoW clone' in a gesture of scorn and revulsion.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
The only people who use the term "WOW clone" are the ones who are too lazy and do not want to think logically about the similarities between games. No, they rather throw out this over-used term to voice their frustration/anger/displeasure.etc.... without knowing what it really means.
Besides, the only association with the term WOW clone is a neagtive one and it is only used in a negative way. That is why when I see the term used, it immediately discredits the post/article/etc.... to me.
Yup.
In these threads we see a lot of people stating why they believe "WoW clone" is an appropriate term, and we see those who believe it isn't. The problem is that when I have broken down and have seen others break down the meaning of the word point by point,I have yet to see a legitimate counter argument from those who hate the use of the term. Instead, most of them thumb their noses and post this sort of diatribe.
Of course, this is all fine. Have fun living in your fantasy world. I'll be here to debate you once you decide to come back to reality.
Reality is....I debate if and when I feel like debating and generally, I don't feel like debating things that seem, TO ME, pointless. This is one of those things. I don't care whether you like my stance on it or not. You're just not that powerful in my life, sorry. We're talking about GAMES....it's not really a subject that requires my fretting over it.
Want to talk about the nuclear plants in Fukushima? Or how about the tornado in Joplin? In other words, games are "important enough" for me to spend a few minutes reading about them. They are not, TO ME, important enough to worry with name calling, i.e. "WoW clone" or to waste much time "debating" about anymore. I have wasted the last 6 years of my life doing all that. I'm entitled to take a break and maybe even to have a differing opinion without feeling a need to debate it.
I have now given all the time to the subject that I feel it's importance warrants. It was an enjoyable read for the most part.
Some people on this forum seems to think that the term WoW clone is over-used and some kind of myth but in fact this is what publishers want.
I found this interesting tidbit on the upcoming Zombie MMORG in their FAQ.
"Over the past year we were approached by numerous publishers expressing an interest in partnering with Undead Labs. Not surprisingly, many of them were MMO industry publishers who were drawn to the team’s track record in that industry, and while they were excited to work with our team, most of them wanted us to work on yet another World of Warcraft clone."
So it is not just in our heads, most publishers only want World of Warcraft clones and hence why most MMORPGs are as such and called out as such. It is a fact of the industry.
Thats stupid they dont want WoW clones, they want to make money like WoW has. It doesnt have to be a clone it just has to be sucessful. Because befor wow it was EQ clone befoer that Ultima Online clone and so on and so on. It all started from nothing and is now a billion dollar industry. They want to make it a trillion.
It was just an example to demonstrate my point. I know I have read in the past that both StarVault and Aventurine had problems finding publishers because they wanted their game to be more like WoW, i.e. a WoW clone. However I do not remember where exactly I read those and hence why I did not reference them.
Obviously games that are WoW clones wont be using the term as it is somewhat derogatory so they instead use the euphemysm ThemePark instead and I am more and more starting to believe that a ThemePark is basically an MMORPG which is heavily influenced by WoW.
And whoever thinks that WoW is an EQ clone, you are terribly wrong. EQ was not quest based nor was it targetted towards casual players with is relatively hard leveling with downtimes, death penalties and what not. WoW simply based their game on EQ but changed it in a way that it was unrecognizable to EQ.
However current WoW clones (Rift, WAR etc) are very recognizable compared to WoW.
The problem with the term WoW clone that there's no one definition, people can use it to mean whatever they want it to mean. I'm inclined to agree with you though. In my mind something can be considered a clone if they used the old game as a starting point and didn't vary it too much.
For instance, WoW vs Rift, let's look at the UIs.
Obviously Rift has pushed the genre forward with Rifts, Invasions, and Soul System, but when you look at the near identical UIs and then add in the holy trinity gameplay, talent trees (3 at a time), traditional quests, instanced dungeons, normal and elite mobs, 2 factions, rogues with 5 combo points (seriously?), I start to think "close enough, it's a WoW clone."
That's not actually a derogative against WoW, I actually like WoW. It's a derogative against Rift for not trying hard enough.
As far as EQ goes, I don't consider that a WoW clone. First, look at the UI.
Totally different. Add in contested vs instanced dungeons, grind leveling vs quest leveling, vastly different mob difficulty (hard to solo vs easy to solo), death penalty (xp vs money), sitting to regain mana, limited number of active spells, and I think "not close enough, not a WoW clone." Even though I'm sure WoW did take a bunch of elements from EQ and the other first gen MMOs, it seems they saw a lot they didn't like as well.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it."-Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
Saying MMOs are a clone of WoW is the same thing is saying a shooter is a clone of Modern Warfare. Sure they may have the same basic gameplay concepts, but it doesn't change the fact that the game feels different. In reality, it does not matter. There is a reason you don't see much innovation in gaming; innovation is risky and costs tons of money if you fail, so why not innovate on features already in place?
If you want to get down to it, all games are just Pong clones.
You could say portions of WoW are clones of MMO's that came before it. So technically, you could say almost every MMO made since the first one's are clones of those before it. Yeah, the term is over used.
aaaaand how many people in the industry today have experienced both and see this comparison? Not a lot. how many played wow, now play their 100th guy with sword killing spiders and get reminded of WoW ? many.
oh puhlease, wow isnt the first game with spiders that you can kill. EQ1 had them UO had them SWG had them, and lets not forget that even in PnP form Dungeons and dragons had them even in 1e rule set. if anything any and all RPG's(CRPG, CORPG, MMORPG, etc) are all D&D Clones, because without D&D none of the RPG's you play today would exsist. as for WoW Clones just because a game comes out after WoW does, doesnt make it a WoW Clone. the only reason why you assume its a WoW Clone is because you want it to be a WoW Clone. if you stopped trying to find similarities that arent there you people will see that there is no such thing as a WoW Clone.
"Possibly we humans can exist without actually having to fight. But many of us have chosen to fight. For what reason? To protect something? Protect what? Ourselves? The future? If we kill people to protect ourselves and this future, then what sort of future is it, and what will we have become? There is no future for those who have died. And what of those who did the killing? Is happiness to be found in a future that is grasped with blood stained hands? Is that the truth?"
The people that say WoW is a clone of a game (EQ is usually the biggest culprit) are simply wrong. I mean, that's like saying Deus Ex is a clone of Wolfenstein 3D. The common line of thinking here is that both games take place in a first person perspective and both games have players shooting computer controled humaniods, right? All else excluded then, including Deus Ex's RPG elements, emphasis on story, and gameplay mechanics, Deus Ex is a clone. The problem is where do you draw the line? Why can't I say that World of Warcraft is a pong clone simply because both games are video games? It's utter stupidity, and honestly, the fact that so many people deny that makers of MMORPGs have modeled their games to be eerily similar to WoW really escapes me.
Sometimes I start to wonder whether or not the real issue is that grammar nazis simply take exception to the term "clone" being used instead of "highly similar game" or some other term. My line of thinking is that the terminology doesn't change the fact that the games still play far too much like one another to do anything else other than make me miss playing my level capped toon in WoW.
I'm not going to call WoW an EQ clone, but to me it's a simple fact that WoW copied/used/'borrowed' most gameplay elements from EQ and not from UO or AC or DAoC. Heck, some of the lead designers were even hardcore EQ raiders.
It's not a fact because the mechanics of WoW and EQ are almost nothing alike. The only similarities are the class-baed leveling and the raid-baed endgame. One game is a hardcore group dependant mob grind while the other is a solo-oriented quest based game meant for casual players.
So I wouldn't find it strange if there are people who were calling WoW an EQ clone when it came out even if I didn't, because when I played it the first times I myself thought it had more familiarity with EQ than with an UO or AC too. Also, I found WoW be closer to EQ than GW that I played around the same time.
You can take inspiration from something without outright copying it, and that's what so many people fail to comprehend. WoW and its developers were "inspired" by a lot of what they saw in EQ, but they developed it in such a way so that it could have more of a mass appeal -- hence the fact that the two games have such different mechanics while retaining the same sense of progression. GW probably didn't feel like WoW because it wasn't even to be considered an MMO. GW had much more in common with Phantasy Star Online or maybe Diablo 2 than anything else.
As for when the 'clone' calling starts, that varies, but some persons take it far, and even when there's only a few gameplay elements that are really similar, they'll be calling a game already a 'WoW clone'. For example, hypothetically, to a hardcore sandbox gamer as soon as an MMORPG has quests and leveling that is supported by questing, then there are some that'll be calling an MMORPG already a 'WoW clone'.
Right, but the fact that people are so short sighted in thinking that what those people believe is actually what constitutes a "WoW clone" is an issue. I will admit that not all "WoW clones" should really be put on the same level. Actually, if I had a personal list of WoW clones from largest to least, it would probably be like Rift, LotRO, WAR, Aion, Vanguard, EQ2, and AoC simply because the games all pretty much blatantly steel from WoW all while adding a few exclusive features here and there. Problem is, the exclusive features don't always change the way the game is played. Most of the time, you're still hoping from quest-hub to quest-hub solo grinding your way to the level cap.
To me personally, a game like Vanguard isn't a WoW clone at all but I've seen people here call it like that.
Why not? The game has the same UI, a very similar combat system, quest-based progression, and a raid-based endgame. I'd play it over WoW if it had a playerbase because I like the graphics and the gameworld more, but realistically just about the only difference is the different classes and the fact that there are no instances.
The same for EQ2, it's been called a WoW clone, even when that'd be strange since it was released at the same time as WoW.
EQ2 was released before WoW, and I played it at release for about half a year until I went without an internet connection for quite awhile. At release, EQ2 had far more in common with the original EQ than WoW, but as time went on, the vision for EQ2 (along with the budget) was drastically altered, and now you have a game that vastly resembles WoW. The only difference is perhaps the fact that the combat system is totally different, the UI (until recently) was something different, and, like Vanguard, the game had player/guild housing.
To a lesser degree, AoC has different visuals, a totally different world feel - raw and visceral and nowhere near cartoony, tongue-in-cheek - different combat mechanics, player cities, sieges, and even (partially) different quest presentation, yet still there are people calling it a 'WoW clone' for the simple fact that it's a themepark MMO and therefore reminds them of WoW gameplay.
AoC is fairly different from WoW, but it's still something I consider a "WoW clone" simply because you go through the game largely the same way you do in WoW, though I'll say AoC is a far better choice of a game to play if you're tired of WoW than any of the first three games on my list.
Also, calling a game like Rift a 'WoW clone' negates the obvious differences it has, of which the dynamic content that provides alternate way of leveling is certainly not a small one.
That difference is not so obvious, at least not so obvious past like level 20. I played on a medium population server and after I got out of my twenties, I almost never saw a Rift raid group, and I had no desire to do Rifts solo, hence I was left with solo quest grinding and the seldom dungeon run.
Me, personally, I don't care if people use the term 'WoW clone' because I instantly win 3 steps in profiling or classifying a poster's viewpoint when I see them using the term, and I know what they mean. But as for the reason why all the fuss about such a simple 2 words, that's easy.
People use 'WoW clone' as good as always when they feel that another MMORPG has too many similarities to WoW, and they want to express their disgust or disdain in a comment of dismissal.
Other people object to the term for exactly that reason, that most of the times people go negatively namecalling another MMO 'WoW clone' in a gesture of scorn and revulsion.
Calling a game a "WoW clone" doesn't automatically mean "I hate this game." I picked up EQ2 again somewhere around 2008 to 2010, and I realized it was very much like WoW but I played it over WoW because it had player housing, appearance slots, and a focus on group content that WoW lacked until Blizzard developed the dungeon finder. The dungeon finder helped all of EQ2's flaws become that much more apparent and upon trying out WoW again after the release of the DF, I pretty much permanently shelved any future of serious EQ2 play.
Games like Rift and LotRO, on the other hand, are almost blatant copies of WoW, yet neither of them really do WoW better than Blizzard, so in the case of both games, extended peroids of play simply made me miss playing the game they were trying to copy.
It's not a fact because the mechanics of WoW and EQ are almost nothing alike. The only similarities are the class-baed leveling and the raid-baed endgame. One game is a hardcore group dependant mob grind while the other is a solo-oriented quest based game meant for casual players.
Raiding, classes, trinity combat mechanics, recognisable archetypes in classes. I'm not saying that there aren't major differences, that's 1 reason why I won't ever call EQ a themepark MMO because of those differences, but WoW felt a lot more similar to EQ than it did to 1 of the other pre-WoW MMO's in its core aspects.
You can take inspiration from something without outright copying it, and that's what so many people fail to comprehend. WoW and its developers were "inspired" by a lot of what they saw in EQ, but they developed it in such a way so that it could have more of a mass appeal -- hence the fact that the two games have such different mechanics while retaining the same sense of progression. GW probably didn't feel like WoW because it wasn't even to be considered an MMO. GW had much more in common with Phantasy Star Online or maybe Diablo 2 than anything else.
GW is listed here on this site, mmorpg.com, as 1 of the MMORPG's. You don't see Diablo listed here. Sure, it is a different enough model of MMORPG that its makers themselves called it a 'CORPG' but that doesn't change the fact that GW just as DDO and Vindictus are listed in the gamelist here on mmorpg.com.
Right, but the fact that people are so short sighted in thinking that what those people believe is actually what constitutes a "WoW clone" is an issue. I will admit that not all "WoW clones" should really be put on the same level. Actually, if I had a personal list of WoW clones from largest to least, it would probably be like Rift, LotRO, WAR, Aion, Vanguard, EQ2, and AoC simply because the games all pretty much blatantly steel from WoW all while adding a few exclusive features here and there. Problem is, the exclusive features don't always change the way the game is played. Most of the time, you're still hoping from quest-hub to quest-hub solo grinding your way to the level cap.
I agree with your list (although I'd personally have put Vanguard right from AoC), me personally I'd have stopped calling anything right from Aion WoW-style themepark MMO's ('WoW clones'). For some because they're obviously not based or inspired upon WoW or because they're too far away in gameplay feel to WoW - EQ2 and Vanguard for example clearly go back to EQ for inspirational source.
The interesting part is of course quest leveling: does having quest leveling in an MMORPG make it a 'WoW clone' by default or just a 'themepark MMO' ? I guess it's how people individually feel towards it, how much it makes an impact on their gameplay, that makes them decide whether it's a 'WoW clone' or not.
Calling a game a "WoW clone" doesn't automatically mean "I hate this game." I picked up EQ2 again somewhere around 2008 to 2010, and I realized it was very much like WoW but I played it over WoW because it had player housing, appearance slots, and a focus on group content that WoW lacked until Blizzard developed the dungeon finder. The dungeon finder helped all of EQ2's flaws become that much more apparent and upon trying out WoW again after the release of the DF, I pretty much permanently shelved any future of serious EQ2 play.
Games like Rift and LotRO, on the other hand, are almost blatant copies of WoW, yet neither of them really do WoW better than Blizzard, so in the case of both games, extended peroids of play simply made me miss playing the game they were trying to copy.
Hmm, funny. You say that 'WoW clone' doesn't automatically mean 'I hate/dislike this game', yet you give 3 examples of games that are similar enough to WoW to be called 'WoW clone' by some and that you hold in less regards than WoW yourself.
I agree that when someone calls a game 'WoW clone' it doesn't automatically mean that that person 'hates' or dislikes that game. Yet in 9 out of 10 times that people use it when namecalling another MMO, however, it IS used in a context of dislike or antipathy, either expressed in the post itself where the term is used by a poster or in the negative view that the poster saying 'WoW clone' has of the MMO that he calls it like that. I'm pretty sure that when I'd surf through the forumthreads here on mmorpg.com that this is the case in more than 90% of the times that someone uses it to describe another MMO.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
This is just a topic to get there name known throughout the mmo scene and best way to do that is start a topic about WoWclone about some unknown publisher ask to make it WoWclone and start discussion on biggest mmorpg site there is.
Bravo OP now we know your unknown company and you prolly soon get your money to develop a game kudos to you:)
Why people even try discus this dead horse we already had so many times here over and over again beats me you all prolly so bored you discus anything:P
Ive not even pass first months playing WoW when it was launched so terible is this game can't believe your all so obsesseded with this game lol.
Why game like UO is mentioned here is also beyond me it was sandbox in 2D ancient graphics and totally different from wow, even EQ is different from wow games like AC2 where more used as model and copied by blizzard then EQ.
One. Apparently a lot of you need to look up the definition of clone.
Two. There were games before WoW that looked like games of today when it comes to UI and content.
Three. There's a reason cars don't have 11 wheels. Someone decided somewhere along the line that 4 wheels are optimum.
Some vehicles have 2 wheels, they're called motorcycles. Some vehicles have 18 wheels, they're called commercial trucks. Some vehicles have 6,8,10,12,16 wheels. Why do all vehicles have to have 4 wheels and look like a WOW-clone.
You could say portions of WoW are clones of MMO's that came before it. So technically, you could say almost every MMO made since the first one's are clones of those before it. Yeah, the term is over used.
aaaaand how many people in the industry today have experienced both and see this comparison? Not a lot. how many played wow, now play their 100th guy with sword killing spiders and get reminded of WoW ? many.
oh puhlease, wow isnt the first game with spiders that you can kill. EQ1 had them UO had them SWG had them, and lets not forget that even in PnP form Dungeons and dragons had them even in 1e rule set. if anything any and all RPG's(CRPG, CORPG, MMORPG, etc) are all D&D Clones, because without D&D none of the RPG's you play today would exsist. as for WoW Clones just because a game comes out after WoW does, doesnt make it a WoW Clone. the only reason why you assume its a WoW Clone is because you want it to be a WoW Clone. if you stopped trying to find similarities that arent there you people will see that there is no such thing as a WoW Clone.
If you find yourself grinding quests and mobs, wacking on rocks to make your armor, and going to town to dump your grind materials in the bank or sell to an NPC then it's a WOW clone. I didn't do anything like that in Pre-CU SWG hence SWG is (was) not a WOW clone. I didn't do anything like that in WWIIONLINE or PLANETSIDE hence they are not WOW clones.
Saying MMOs are a clone of WoW is the same thing is saying a shooter is a clone of Modern Warfare. Sure they may have the same basic gameplay concepts, but it doesn't change the fact that the game feels different. In reality, it does not matter. There is a reason you don't see much innovation in gaming; innovation is risky and costs tons of money if you fail, so why not innovate on features already in place?
If you want to get down to it, all games are just Pong clones.
WWIIONLINE and Planetside (only 2 MMOFPS in existance) are Quake clones. You capture a flag and frag people on a bigger map with vehicles.
Once I see the term WOW-clone have some other connotation or meaning or used in a positive light (that game is a wow-clone...look at its success or what it did for that genre) then I will retract my comments. Until then its a single term, used by people who want to summarize a game in a negative light, Its the same thing when people try and reduce sports to a single term or few words (golf is trying to hit a ball in a hole, baseball is hitting a ball with a stick, or racing is going around in circles).
Sure the description might be accurate but the hidden meaning in their use of the term is one of negativity.
I guess where we differ is that you see terms like that as only having negative uses where I think their meaning is completely developed by the person using the term.
Take for example a father teaching golf to his young son who is getting frustrated. If he says "Son, golf is trying to hit a ball in a hole". Is he trying to make golf look bad or trying to present the basic function of the game to his son in a way that he will more easily relate to?
More often than not that is how I see the term wow clone used. It isn't to cast negative light on certain games as much as it is used to convey a ton of information about an mmos gameplay with two words. Then the smaller differences can be pointed out like chapter stories, dynamic content, free to play or whatever the specific situation calls for.
Sure it can be used in a negative fashion also and it is pretty much chic around here to beat up on wow, but the term itself is neutral.
Its funny how "WoW clone" has a different meaning.
WoW is an EQ clone.
EQ2 is also an EQ clone.
Vanguard is an EQ clone.
Its nothing special. They all took a concept and went from there.
However, WoW clone is somehow a title games try to avoid now. LotRO, Warhammer, Age of Conan etc all have been called "WoW clone". With what reason ? I have yet to see how they are conceptionally the same.
And of course all newer games are now WoW inspired. Why is that a bad thing ? As long as you keep in mind what kind of concept you're going for, its not a bad thing if you take inspiration from other games. WoW has been a huge success, so yeah, everybody knows it, so yeah, everybody copies their favorite features from it.
I wished Vanguard would have been a success and people would start copying from Vanguard ... oh well, not gonna happen.
Its even weirder. Take SW:TOR, for example. Some people EVEN EXPLICITLY DEMAND IT TO BE A WOW CLONE (!!!) Others post "oh, its just another WoW clone" or "Its WoW in Star Wars".
Neither is true of course. If you check out the concepts behind this MMO, theres WoW (such as 3 different skillings for each class, albeit its very different as two players of the same class might hardly share a single skill, so theres a lot more variance), DAoC (RvR with different classes on each side) and even some typical asian/Lineage 2 elements (such as your starter class isnt your final class).
WoW took a bit from every game that came before it and added it's own influence, the result was a great game that rapidly deteriorated to the item store that we see today. Many games tried to copy WoW and failed the only WoW clones are as such:
Burning Crusade
Wrath of the Lich King
Cataclysm
See what i did there? Each one of these expansions did the same thing as the one before it. Increased the level cap, gave everything a new skin and TADAA!! A brand new place to explore which was exactly the same thing and nothing new added to make it any more interesting. THAT is my idea of a clone, something which looks and acts identically to what it was copied from. Rift is not a copy, Warhammer is not a copy, AOC is not a copy, each of these games brought something unique to the market and that makes them their own slice of the same MMO genre pie. Then you have games which go beyond that pie and form slices of their own new pie such as EVE Online, Battlestar Galactica, Black Prohpecy and others. Each slice of the same pie has it's similarities but differ from other pies entirely.
This is making me hungry for pie now.
I don't see any other developer doing what Blizzard has done. Blizzard had a game where the sense of accomplishment made you feel as though you have actually done something worthwhile when your guild brought down a hard boss for the first time and turned it into a "Why should I bother playing when every Tom, Dick and Harry are identically geared as me and all copy the same talen...... oooo a new pet in the item store".
That last paragraph makes me feel glad i quit when i had the chance otherwise I'd still be there trolling in the trade channel buying vanity pets.
"Not meaning to anger anyone with this thread, though I know in these forums its quite impossible. You can say "I enjoy vanilla ice cream" and still have 50 posts of angry, hot-tempered people who have nothing better to do than argue with you." - Dirkzen
You guys are getting all butt-hurt over simple words.....
The point is....Blizzard did something with World of Warcraft that none of the other MMORPGs before it has been able to do....main stream MMORPG gaming for the largest sub-section of the gaming audience. Blizzard has been able to take a very complex form of gaming (for gaming enthusiasts) and turn it into something that the "everyday gamer" can jump in / out of easily. They done this by creating a MMORPG thats casual friendly, using a gear based linear progression model.
It's the quest / dungeon crawling focus, in addition to casual friendly game mechanics (light death penalty, quick & easy travel, short cycled game experiences) that has been the major difference between WOW and all the MMORPGs before it. It's also these traits that we see many other game companies try to make their game in the image of, is the reason we refer to them as WOW Clones.
So its not the "borrowed" fantasy game setting, or even the level based progression system that people are refering to when they use the word WOW Clone.....its the whole "EZ Mode Linear Progression to satisfy the masses" that warrents the title.
To some degree, just about all mmo's created after 2003 have some affinity with EverQuest, DAoC, Ultima Online, and ect. World of Warcraft is not and has never been 100% unique. Most mmo's worth their "snuff" have something they can claim as their own design. But, frankly the term, "WoW Clone" is meant to be deragatory in nature and thus, in my eyes, not worth the time to take seriously. Remember the top execs now at Blizzard were once just devs that played EverQuest religiously. The theory-crafting you see now was first experimented with in EverQuest by these guys.
I really do not care if a game mimicks WoW because WoW mimicked EverQuest and those games that the devs played while they were working on WoW itself. Therefore when I read a post that claims that Game X is a clone of WoW and should not be played, well I just grin and go for it anyway. You see, it is more important for me to see good competition in this market rather than experience the "dead air" of no games at all. This year we should see a couple more mmo's emerge and it is my wish that they ALL do well. By 2012, we'll see even more opportunities for us to expand our "gaming horizons" a bit. I say good show and keep'em coming. Competition is a healthy thing. Monopoly is stagnation and none of us want to continue to experience that.
Play the game you enjoy and do not take subjective name-calling too seriously!
Alyn
All I want is the truth Just gimme some truth John Lennon
Comments
The people that say WoW is a clone of a game (EQ is usually the biggest culprit) are simply wrong. I mean, that's like saying Deus Ex is a clone of Wolfenstein 3D. The common line of thinking here is that both games take place in a first person perspective and both games have players shooting computer controled humaniods, right? All else excluded then, including Deus Ex's RPG elements, emphasis on story, and gameplay mechanics, Deus Ex is a clone. The problem is where do you draw the line? Why can't I say that World of Warcraft is a pong clone simply because both games are video games? It's utter stupidity, and honestly, the fact that so many people deny that makers of MMORPGs have modeled their games to be eerily similar to WoW really escapes me.
Sometimes I start to wonder whether or not the real issue is that grammar nazis simply take exception to the term "clone" being used instead of "highly similar game" or some other term. My line of thinking is that the terminology doesn't change the fact that the games still play far too much like one another to do anything else other than make me miss playing my level capped toon in WoW.
When you have so many people who despise the term "WoW clone" making statements like "WoW was a clone of EQ," I can only belief they lack an understanding for what the term really means so I try to describe "why" WoW was not a clone of EQ as much as a natural evolution. Next, I explain why a game like Rift is a clone of WoW because they don't redefine any concept as much as they copy them or make miniscule refinements. Of course that goes both ways as there are those that think FFXIV is a clone of WoW because SE is planning to add more quest content.
What really troubles me about the comments you quoted is that they are not critiquing the word as much as they are criticizing the people who might use the word. As if to paint everyone with one giant stroke of the internet pyschology paintbrush to somehow make the appear to be lesser people.
I have seen plenty of gamers refer to various games as a wow clone without them being lazy, illogical, angry or suffering from whatever other mental defect is being carelessly hurled around. It isn't at all uncommon to see people refer to games they really enjoy as being wow clones, because they are comfortable with the comparison and see the relevence of such comparisons.
The one thing I get from this topic is that there are a lot of different views about what the term wow clone means. Some try to interpret it as the strickest definition of nearly identical twins, some take it to mean that wow somehow invented something and other see it as a comparison of similar gameplay styles between two games.
Why should we really care if it is or isn't?
If it's a fun game to play then play it, if not then move on to another game.
I'm not going to call WoW an EQ clone, but to me it's a simple fact that WoW copied/used/'borrowed' most gameplay elements from EQ and not from UO or AC or DAoC. Heck, some of the lead designers were even hardcore EQ raiders.
So I wouldn't find it strange if there are people who were calling WoW an EQ clone when it came out even if I didn't, because when I played it the first times I myself thought it had more familiarity with EQ than with an UO or AC too. Also, I found WoW be closer to EQ than GW that I played around the same time.
As for when the 'clone' calling starts, that varies, but some persons take it far, and even when there's only a few gameplay elements that are really similar, they'll be calling a game already a 'WoW clone'. For example, hypothetically, to a hardcore sandbox gamer as soon as an MMORPG has quests and leveling that is supported by questing, then there are some that'll be calling an MMORPG already a 'WoW clone'.
To me personally, a game like Vanguard isn't a WoW clone at all but I've seen people here call it like that.
The same for EQ2, it's been called a WoW clone, even when that'd be strange since it was released at the same time as WoW.
To a lesser degree, AoC has different visuals, a totally different world feel - raw and visceral and nowhere near cartoony, tongue-in-cheek - different combat mechanics, player cities, sieges, and even (partially) different quest presentation, yet still there are people calling it a 'WoW clone' for the simple fact that it's a themepark MMO and therefore reminds them of WoW gameplay.
Also, calling a game like Rift a 'WoW clone' negates the obvious differences it has, of which the dynamic content that provides alternate way of leveling is certainly not a small one.
Me, personally, I don't care if people use the term 'WoW clone' because I instantly win 3 steps in profiling or classifying a poster's viewpoint when I see them using the term, and I know what they mean. But as for the reason why all the fuss about such a simple 2 words, that's easy.
People use 'WoW clone' as good as always when they feel that another MMORPG has too many similarities to WoW, and they want to express their disgust or disdain in a comment of dismissal.
Other people object to the term for exactly that reason, that most of the times people go negatively namecalling another MMO 'WoW clone' in a gesture of scorn and revulsion.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Reality is....I debate if and when I feel like debating and generally, I don't feel like debating things that seem, TO ME, pointless. This is one of those things. I don't care whether you like my stance on it or not. You're just not that powerful in my life, sorry. We're talking about GAMES....it's not really a subject that requires my fretting over it.
Want to talk about the nuclear plants in Fukushima? Or how about the tornado in Joplin? In other words, games are "important enough" for me to spend a few minutes reading about them. They are not, TO ME, important enough to worry with name calling, i.e. "WoW clone" or to waste much time "debating" about anymore. I have wasted the last 6 years of my life doing all that. I'm entitled to take a break and maybe even to have a differing opinion without feeling a need to debate it.
I have now given all the time to the subject that I feel it's importance warrants. It was an enjoyable read for the most part.
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
Thats stupid they dont want WoW clones, they want to make money like WoW has. It doesnt have to be a clone it just has to be sucessful. Because befor wow it was EQ clone befoer that Ultima Online clone and so on and so on. It all started from nothing and is now a billion dollar industry. They want to make it a trillion.
The problem with the term WoW clone that there's no one definition, people can use it to mean whatever they want it to mean. I'm inclined to agree with you though. In my mind something can be considered a clone if they used the old game as a starting point and didn't vary it too much.
For instance, WoW vs Rift, let's look at the UIs.
Obviously Rift has pushed the genre forward with Rifts, Invasions, and Soul System, but when you look at the near identical UIs and then add in the holy trinity gameplay, talent trees (3 at a time), traditional quests, instanced dungeons, normal and elite mobs, 2 factions, rogues with 5 combo points (seriously?), I start to think "close enough, it's a WoW clone."
That's not actually a derogative against WoW, I actually like WoW. It's a derogative against Rift for not trying hard enough.
As far as EQ goes, I don't consider that a WoW clone. First, look at the UI.
Totally different. Add in contested vs instanced dungeons, grind leveling vs quest leveling, vastly different mob difficulty (hard to solo vs easy to solo), death penalty (xp vs money), sitting to regain mana, limited number of active spells, and I think "not close enough, not a WoW clone." Even though I'm sure WoW did take a bunch of elements from EQ and the other first gen MMOs, it seems they saw a lot they didn't like as well.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." -Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
Saying MMOs are a clone of WoW is the same thing is saying a shooter is a clone of Modern Warfare. Sure they may have the same basic gameplay concepts, but it doesn't change the fact that the game feels different. In reality, it does not matter. There is a reason you don't see much innovation in gaming; innovation is risky and costs tons of money if you fail, so why not innovate on features already in place?
If you want to get down to it, all games are just Pong clones.
Alganon is literally and factually a WoW clone. The term may have its limits, but such a thing does exist.
oh puhlease, wow isnt the first game with spiders that you can kill. EQ1 had them UO had them SWG had them, and lets not forget that even in PnP form Dungeons and dragons had them even in 1e rule set. if anything any and all RPG's(CRPG, CORPG, MMORPG, etc) are all D&D Clones, because without D&D none of the RPG's you play today would exsist. as for WoW Clones just because a game comes out after WoW does, doesnt make it a WoW Clone. the only reason why you assume its a WoW Clone is because you want it to be a WoW Clone. if you stopped trying to find similarities that arent there you people will see that there is no such thing as a WoW Clone.
"Possibly we humans can exist without actually having to fight. But many of us have chosen to fight. For what reason? To protect something? Protect what? Ourselves? The future? If we kill people to protect ourselves and this future, then what sort of future is it, and what will we have become? There is no future for those who have died. And what of those who did the killing? Is happiness to be found in a future that is grasped with blood stained hands? Is that the truth?"
One. Apparently a lot of you need to look up the definition of clone.
Two. There were games before WoW that looked like games of today when it comes to UI and content.
Three. There's a reason cars don't have 11 wheels. Someone decided somewhere along the line that 4 wheels are optimum.
Hmm, funny. You say that 'WoW clone' doesn't automatically mean 'I hate/dislike this game', yet you give 3 examples of games that are similar enough to WoW to be called 'WoW clone' by some and that you hold in less regards than WoW yourself.
I agree that when someone calls a game 'WoW clone' it doesn't automatically mean that that person 'hates' or dislikes that game. Yet in 9 out of 10 times that people use it when namecalling another MMO, however, it IS used in a context of dislike or antipathy, either expressed in the post itself where the term is used by a poster or in the negative view that the poster saying 'WoW clone' has of the MMO that he calls it like that. I'm pretty sure that when I'd surf through the forumthreads here on mmorpg.com that this is the case in more than 90% of the times that someone uses it to describe another MMO.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
This is just a topic to get there name known throughout the mmo scene and best way to do that is start a topic about WoWclone about some unknown publisher ask to make it WoWclone and start discussion on biggest mmorpg site there is.
Bravo OP now we know your unknown company and you prolly soon get your money to develop a game kudos to you:)
Why people even try discus this dead horse we already had so many times here over and over again beats me you all prolly so bored you discus anything:P
Ive not even pass first months playing WoW when it was launched so terible is this game can't believe your all so obsesseded with this game lol.
Why game like UO is mentioned here is also beyond me it was sandbox in 2D ancient graphics and totally different from wow, even EQ is different from wow games like AC2 where more used as model and copied by blizzard then EQ.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlxoyw_8I7I
lol
Some vehicles have 2 wheels, they're called motorcycles. Some vehicles have 18 wheels, they're called commercial trucks. Some vehicles have 6,8,10,12,16 wheels. Why do all vehicles have to have 4 wheels and look like a WOW-clone.
If you find yourself grinding quests and mobs, wacking on rocks to make your armor, and going to town to dump your grind materials in the bank or sell to an NPC then it's a WOW clone. I didn't do anything like that in Pre-CU SWG hence SWG is (was) not a WOW clone. I didn't do anything like that in WWIIONLINE or PLANETSIDE hence they are not WOW clones.
WWIIONLINE and Planetside (only 2 MMOFPS in existance) are Quake clones. You capture a flag and frag people on a bigger map with vehicles.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtC4PNK72Hs
^ WoW Clone
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/I guess where we differ is that you see terms like that as only having negative uses where I think their meaning is completely developed by the person using the term.
Take for example a father teaching golf to his young son who is getting frustrated. If he says "Son, golf is trying to hit a ball in a hole". Is he trying to make golf look bad or trying to present the basic function of the game to his son in a way that he will more easily relate to?
More often than not that is how I see the term wow clone used. It isn't to cast negative light on certain games as much as it is used to convey a ton of information about an mmos gameplay with two words. Then the smaller differences can be pointed out like chapter stories, dynamic content, free to play or whatever the specific situation calls for.
Sure it can be used in a negative fashion also and it is pretty much chic around here to beat up on wow, but the term itself is neutral.
Its funny how "WoW clone" has a different meaning.
WoW is an EQ clone.
EQ2 is also an EQ clone.
Vanguard is an EQ clone.
Its nothing special. They all took a concept and went from there.
However, WoW clone is somehow a title games try to avoid now. LotRO, Warhammer, Age of Conan etc all have been called "WoW clone". With what reason ? I have yet to see how they are conceptionally the same.
And of course all newer games are now WoW inspired. Why is that a bad thing ? As long as you keep in mind what kind of concept you're going for, its not a bad thing if you take inspiration from other games. WoW has been a huge success, so yeah, everybody knows it, so yeah, everybody copies their favorite features from it.
I wished Vanguard would have been a success and people would start copying from Vanguard ... oh well, not gonna happen.
Its even weirder. Take SW:TOR, for example. Some people EVEN EXPLICITLY DEMAND IT TO BE A WOW CLONE (!!!) Others post "oh, its just another WoW clone" or "Its WoW in Star Wars".
Neither is true of course. If you check out the concepts behind this MMO, theres WoW (such as 3 different skillings for each class, albeit its very different as two players of the same class might hardly share a single skill, so theres a lot more variance), DAoC (RvR with different classes on each side) and even some typical asian/Lineage 2 elements (such as your starter class isnt your final class).
WoW took a bit from every game that came before it and added it's own influence, the result was a great game that rapidly deteriorated to the item store that we see today. Many games tried to copy WoW and failed the only WoW clones are as such:
Burning Crusade
Wrath of the Lich King
Cataclysm
See what i did there? Each one of these expansions did the same thing as the one before it. Increased the level cap, gave everything a new skin and TADAA!! A brand new place to explore which was exactly the same thing and nothing new added to make it any more interesting. THAT is my idea of a clone, something which looks and acts identically to what it was copied from. Rift is not a copy, Warhammer is not a copy, AOC is not a copy, each of these games brought something unique to the market and that makes them their own slice of the same MMO genre pie. Then you have games which go beyond that pie and form slices of their own new pie such as EVE Online, Battlestar Galactica, Black Prohpecy and others. Each slice of the same pie has it's similarities but differ from other pies entirely.
This is making me hungry for pie now.
I don't see any other developer doing what Blizzard has done. Blizzard had a game where the sense of accomplishment made you feel as though you have actually done something worthwhile when your guild brought down a hard boss for the first time and turned it into a "Why should I bother playing when every Tom, Dick and Harry are identically geared as me and all copy the same talen...... oooo a new pet in the item store".
That last paragraph makes me feel glad i quit when i had the chance otherwise I'd still be there trolling in the trade channel buying vanity pets.
"Not meaning to anger anyone with this thread, though I know in these forums its quite impossible. You can say "I enjoy vanilla ice cream" and still have 50 posts of angry, hot-tempered people who have nothing better to do than argue with you." - Dirkzen
You guys are getting all butt-hurt over simple words.....
The point is....Blizzard did something with World of Warcraft that none of the other MMORPGs before it has been able to do....main stream MMORPG gaming for the largest sub-section of the gaming audience. Blizzard has been able to take a very complex form of gaming (for gaming enthusiasts) and turn it into something that the "everyday gamer" can jump in / out of easily. They done this by creating a MMORPG thats casual friendly, using a gear based linear progression model.
It's the quest / dungeon crawling focus, in addition to casual friendly game mechanics (light death penalty, quick & easy travel, short cycled game experiences) that has been the major difference between WOW and all the MMORPGs before it. It's also these traits that we see many other game companies try to make their game in the image of, is the reason we refer to them as WOW Clones.
So its not the "borrowed" fantasy game setting, or even the level based progression system that people are refering to when they use the word WOW Clone.....its the whole "EZ Mode Linear Progression to satisfy the masses" that warrents the title.
To some degree, just about all mmo's created after 2003 have some affinity with EverQuest, DAoC, Ultima Online, and ect. World of Warcraft is not and has never been 100% unique. Most mmo's worth their "snuff" have something they can claim as their own design. But, frankly the term, "WoW Clone" is meant to be deragatory in nature and thus, in my eyes, not worth the time to take seriously. Remember the top execs now at Blizzard were once just devs that played EverQuest religiously. The theory-crafting you see now was first experimented with in EverQuest by these guys.
I really do not care if a game mimicks WoW because WoW mimicked EverQuest and those games that the devs played while they were working on WoW itself. Therefore when I read a post that claims that Game X is a clone of WoW and should not be played, well I just grin and go for it anyway. You see, it is more important for me to see good competition in this market rather than experience the "dead air" of no games at all. This year we should see a couple more mmo's emerge and it is my wish that they ALL do well. By 2012, we'll see even more opportunities for us to expand our "gaming horizons" a bit. I say good show and keep'em coming. Competition is a healthy thing. Monopoly is stagnation and none of us want to continue to experience that.
Play the game you enjoy and do not take subjective name-calling too seriously!
Alyn
All I want is the truth
Just gimme some truth
John Lennon