Trending Games | Pirate101 | ArcheAge | Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn | Elder Scrolls Online

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,859,683 Users Online:0
Games:742  Posts:6,244,855

Show Blog

Link to this blogs RSS feed

r1ft Gaming Blog

A mirror of my gaming blog at r1ft.com. The jaded game designer turned corporate lackey. Feedback is always welcome.

Author: Daedren

5 MMO Names That Could Have Been Better

Posted by Daedren Monday March 10 2008 at 9:03AM
Login or Register to rate this blog post!

Continuing our series of looking at the shortcomings of some popular MMO titles, we're taking a look at some of the more poorly chosen names in the MMO genre. Judgment has been reserved for games that are at least mildly successful and/or published by some of the "big boys" in the industry. We've unfortunately left off gems such as the World of Kung-fu and Dark and Light : as fun as it would be to wonder why people would name their games this, it's better going with established titles.

Keep in mind that this discussion is purely for the names of the respective titles, not their success or how good the actual game is.

Richard Garriott's Tabula Rasa

lord_british.jpgYou have to love Richard Gariott, aka Lord British, aka General British, aka I have an ego complex and need to be the main character in every game I make. I don't want to go as far as saying he's the M. Night Shayalalalala guy of the MMO scene - but the game official game name "Richard Garriott's Tabula Rasa" is a bit too arrogant douchebag-like for my tastes. It might work for Clive Barker - but you, sir, are no Clive Barker. You're not even Clive Owen. (Sin City MMO, how sweet would that be?) Anyway, with all due respect that is due from the Ultima series and Ultima Online - what the hell?

Like most gamers, we aren't fluent in ancient Latin, so we had to look up the actual meaning of this phrase "Tabula Rasa". While also learning that's it has been a Buffy and Lost episode title, and also a Neutral Zone in the Star Trek universe, we learned that it means "Clean Slate". The name Tabula Rasa is some sort of inside joke or double-meaning title having to do with, you guessed it, Richard Garriott. When he left the Ultima Online scene to pursue making unoriginal MMO's cleverly titled after himself, he wanted a "Clean Slate". Well, Tabula Rasa = Clean Slate in Latin. Obscure much?

rentonpark.jpg

Sick Boy: It's certainly a phenomenon in all walks of life.
Renton: What's that?
Sick Boy: Well, at one time, you've got it, and then you lose it, and it's gone forever. All walks of life: Richard Garriott, for example...
Renton: Some of his earlier games weren't bad.
Sick Boy: No, it's not bad, but it's not great either. And in your heart you kind of know that although it's all right, it's actually just shite.

What it could have been: The game, like its title, could have been so much more. Other than getting Clive Barker to produce your game (Clive Barker's Tabula Rasa - sweetness!) , stripping off the ego in the title is the first step. Tabula Rasa really isn't that catchy of a name. Using some sort of modernly popular Latin like Vae Victus or something would have been better if you were stuck on the Latin thing. I'd suggest some sort of game-related title if I wouldn't have fallen asleep playing before my 72 hour trial was up.

Dark Age of Camelot

daoc_logo.gifDark Age of Camelot was/is a great game. There are still plenty of players enjoying this game. I jumped ship like many others when Trials of Atlantis aka Trials of Endless Grinding came into play. That being said, though, when DAoC first came out, I was a bit confused on where/when/what the title was about, and this is because of the title.

Camelot, as most probably know, is the legendary castle or fortress held by King Arthur. Historians say that the word Camelot was actually invented by bards and storytellers and that the word "Camelot" is actually a metaphor for a place where justice and virtue were prized: Knights of the Round table and all of that jazz. Being an avid reader of Bernard Cornwell and his excellent Arthur series I was a bit hyped to play in the 300-500 AD Dark Ages period in what was now the United Kingdom.

kbold.jpgDark Age of Camelot, however, has absolutely nothing to do with Camelot. Perhaps the storytellers of the time left out the fact that little leprechaun Lurikeens were running about causing mischief with huge, ugly, placid giant friends, walking tree people, and Klingons and that the Viking secret weapon was the "The Thing" from X-men and Kobolds that were some sort of twisted Smurf variation created by Gargamel's more-evil twin brother with a goatee. It also seems the real power of Arthur and his Knights were Half-Ogres and some sort of shadowy undead people from the Underworld. The kicker is that the Albion faction was supposed to represent the valorous Knights, upholding justice and honor - and anyone that played the game can tell you that HELL HATH NO FURY LIKE AN ALB ZERG. Unless Arthur and his crew were a bunch of cowardly zerg-tastic kids, Mythic missed the mark on representing the Camelot name with any sort of credibility.

What it could have been: Dark Age alone would have been better (or even Dark Age Online - DAO, how cool is that?). In my opinion. DAoC itself isn't a bad name, it's more of a mis-representation of the name "Camelot". To put it on different terms, if World of Warcraft had been named "World of Old Middle Earth" people would have been screaming heresy. I guess Mythic was lucky the Camelot name and era isn't protected under copyright laws.

Lord of the Rings Online

2md-10311.jpgNow before everyone gets upset about this one - let me say I'm a Tolkien fan - I adore the books, I loved the movies (though picking some actors to play the elves without 5 o'clock shadows would have been nice) -- and you know -- LOTRO isn't that bad of a game. I normally shy away from PVE only titles, but I must say LOTRO isn't bad. As an amateur musician myself, the music system alone is good for hours of fun. A hobbit playing Stairway to Heaven on his lute might not exactly fit lore-wise, but let's not get too picky.

The name, however, isn't great. For those that didn't follow the title, LOTRO was originally intended to be called "Middle Earth Online" which is, quite frankly, vastly superior in every aspect. When the monkeys at Turbine somehow argued that "Lord of the Rings Online" is somehow better, they were talking straight from their wallets and/or asses. This was a move that clearly said "We are milking the movie success!" with little regard for long-term vision or creative ingenuity.

sam_frodo.jpgWhat it could have been: Middle Earth Online was such a better name because it didn't force the game to be thrown into the specific time line of the Trilogy books. And honestly - we know that our little hobbits and elves in LOTRO can't be doing *real* epic stuff like Frodo and the crew are: they even throw it in your faces as you're playing the game. Here they are telling you of Frodo and his epic journey to Mordor and all the exciting stuff happening to him: the next minute it's back to grindfest as you go fetch 15 warg tails for some idiot NPC who is too lazy to go get them theirself. Middle Earth Online could have been an entirely different epic story, where players are *gasp* actually able to effect the game-world instead of playing minion to a bunch of a clueless NPC's who happen to like standing around with rings above their heads. Lastly, they've pigeon-holed themselves into following the LOTRO storyline, meaning when it ends (and it has to) - Sauron is gone, his minions scatter, and if they stick with the lore, your army of 500 level 50 Elf Hunters with some variation of "olas" at the end of their name are going to continue their epic battle playing clean-up around Middle Earth. And no, you can't go to the Grey Havens with Gandalf and Frodo. Their boat isn't big enough.

Vanguard, Saga of Heroes

logo_vanguard.jpgIn a perfect world, or more appropriately, in a world where all the cool words in English aren't already in use by either the military or trillion-dollar investment firms, Vanguard is a cool name. Its official definition is "a forward element of an advancing military formation". It's also the name of a bunch of naval Ships. Most importantly, it's the name of an investment company that has $1.3 Trillion USD in assets, also known as enough money and power to do anything in the world except stop a sub-par MMO being released with the same name as them. This inaptly chosen name is akin to having an MMO named "Microsoft: Legends of Warriors" or "Walmart: Epic Dynasty" -- that is, of course, assuming that Microsoft and Walmart both had an alternate, cool military meaning.

What it could have been: Saga of Heroes alone would have been better. It's also ironic that a game named after a successful financial company is in financial ruin.

Age of Conan: Hyborian Adventures

ageofconan_logo.jpgEnding our list is the highly anticipated Age of Conan title. I'm looking forward to AoC - it might be second to Warhammer Online, but it's still coming out first and should offer at least a few months of some original gameplay before some jump-ship to the Mythic beast that will be WAR.

conan-arnold.jpgAge of Conan's biggest problem (other than catering to an already saturated fantasy MMO market) is its title. This problems lies in one sole fact: for me, and my generation, Conan = a half-dressed Arnold Schwarzenegger chopping heads off. When I first heard of AoC I thought to myself - damn, they're making a MMO based off that damn movie? Oh yeah, I think it was a book. (for those that don't know, the game is being based off the books/lore of this series)

This stereotype has been hard to overcome. Even now, as an avid follower of the game, I have problems with the name. "Age of Conan" just doesn't sound very epic. I like the lore and everything, and even Conan in the lore sounds like a pretty bad ass guy - sort of a mercenary, Chaotic-Neutral Warrior / Thief / King / Ladies-man / Gladiator type that kills who he wants for what he considers a good reason and could crush your head by just looking at you. I like the fact that they've taken a realistic approach to the game balanced with mythical beasts and some cool sounding races / classes.

The uphill battle that AoC is fighting against Warhammer Online started with this title. They are using a weird IP to promote an otherwise really cool game. I think that either a fresh/new IP would have been a better choice, or pick a more generic title that fits well within the Conan lore but sets it apart from other fantasy titles.

What it could have been: Age of (anything other than Conan). Age of War. Age of Kings. Age of Heroes. Age of Limbs Flying Off. You could still even use the Conan lore, if you want: just don't put it in the title. It's a tough job to find a good, catchy and marketable MMO name. The game and lore itself is not like the pansy 80's Arnold films, and is much more like a graphic comic such as Sin City / 300 and deserves an equally gritty and mean sounding name. Choosing one that doesn't evoke images of the Govenator would be a start.

This article was original posted at the r1ft gaming blog at http://www.r1ft.com and is copied here with permission from the author(s).

shad0w99 writes:

Nice blog :-)

Lots of truth in it!

While a name seems trivial, it is in fact very important.

I of all people value gameplay over anything else (graphics, name etc). But even I find the name a huge make or break when I'm buying. For example, The Witcher. I had heard great things about the game. It looks good, sounds good. But I really really liked the name. Very short and to the point. And it also makes you think... What's a Witcher? A witch? A witch hunter? Huh? Makes you want to buy it haha

(And I agree Age of Conan makes me think Arnie or Conan O'Brien)

Mon Mar 10 2008 11:31AM Report
evilric writes:

good call on the rentboy's tabula rasa. that whole game screams of arrogance! a 3 day trial is like saying "my game is so awesome you barely need the time to test it" and then like you mentioned adding yourself as the main character in all your own games is a bit too emo for a seasoned dev.

also UO sucked, lets be honest here.

 

Mon Mar 10 2008 11:38AM Report
Oyjord writes:

" Well, Tabula Rasa = Clean Slate in Latin. Obscure much?"

 

Sorry, but only to the uneducated.  Put down the keyboard and go read some John Locke.  Your ignorance is no grounds to criticize someone else.

Mon Mar 10 2008 12:26PM Report
evilric writes:

wasnt that the dude out of Lost?

 

 

Mon Mar 10 2008 12:30PM Report
lordtwisted writes:

I'm sorry to Say UO was ahead of it's time for MMO's it was a failure because it was behind the times in the area of security. If it didn't have so many PK friendly background programs to make anyone and thier mother a god, it would have turned into a decent game.

 As far as Garriot, he was actually a great game designer back then, and his intention on making his charachter a main story point in his games back then was to interact with the players.

 In one of his first attempts to interact by appearing in person <so to speak> his avatar was murdered by a brilliant person that actually used the game fundamentals to kill Lord British, most of his guards and a large population of the players present for the little party.

 Arrogance? Well, that was proved when rather then making this "oppurtunist" a legend with in the game, and making the whole event part of the story, he banned the player from the game!

 Tabula Rasa...well sadly Garriot has proven that he has lost his touch. I wish I would have had half the talant that Garriot had back in the UO days, but these days...Well, nuff said!

Mon Mar 10 2008 1:32PM Report
grimfall writes:

Uhh...

Middle Earth Online and LOTRO were different games.  That may have something to do with the different names.

How sad is it that you haven't read a Conan book?  As the previous poster said, become literate.  I actually don't think you've seen Conan the Barbarian if you refer to it as 'Panzy'.

Mon Mar 10 2008 1:42PM Report
Daedren writes:

Thanks for the feedback everyone. I urge people to be a little more constructive, though, if they want to be taken seriously.

@Oyjord: What does meta-physics have to do with me saying that Richard Garriott had a double meaning behind the game name? I know quite what it means (I made up having to look it up for editorial reasons) - and yes, Tabula Rasa does fit into the TR game lore. I never said it didn't. My gripe was that it was a double-meaning name, meant to also represent Garriott's MMO "clean slate" from leaving UO.

@grimfall: no, actually, they weren't. Vivendi's Middle Earth Online became Turbine's LOTRO when they bought the rights to it in 2004. How about you become literate on gaming knowledge before you criticize me about it?

How sad is it that I haven't read a Conan book? Well, that's an arguable subject I suppose. How sad is it that you pride yourself for reading Conan books?

And in regards to the movie(S) - yes there were 2 - if you think the 2nd Conan movie was anything other than a complete failure and total deviation from anything from the Conan books, you saw a different movie than me.

Mon Mar 10 2008 1:50PM Report
grimfall writes:

Same license, different game, Daedren.

You do understand that 'license' and 'game' are two diffrerent things?

As for reading a Conan book (or watching the movie/boggle), Conan is considered classic heroic fantasy.  Howard is like the Charles Dickens of the genre.  Go buy a book.

Mon Mar 10 2008 2:05PM Report
Hashbrick writes:

I'll agree with you on TR, that was a stupid move to allow it to be "Richard Garriott's Tabula Rasa".  First of all if you missed the MMORPGs being born generation you going to say, "Who the hell is Richard Garriott."  My first reaction would be what a douchebag, he's not a famous writer or a celebrity at all.  Tom Clancy can pull it off not you Richard Garriott, you twat.  Anyway....

Everything else I disagree with you whole heartedly.  Like grimfall stated Middle Earth Online was indeed a different direction then when Turbine picked it up they did scrap quite a bit of content to but it in the role of the movies.

Once again there is a reason behind a game's name, it's called marketing they hire these high class douchebags to make a name fitted for the masses.  Age of Conan is the perfect title what the hell is wrong with you, Age of War. Age of Kings. Age of Heroes. Age of Limbs Flying Off.  They would laugh at you, you need a marketing sense mate.  If they called it Age of War/Kings/Heroes the first reaction is wtf is the game about it.  Bingo Age of Conan, ooohh it's in the conan lore.  Cleaver huh, amazing how making a title that describes the game makes sense, I thought so.

Again with the same as conan, middle earth online also wasn't the more superior name, they were attracting the movie goers people who never read the damn books but went to the movies because thier buddy/bf/gf/mom/dad/aunt/uncle said "You have to see this one movie called Lord of the Rings!"  So Lord of the Rings Online would fetch the masses, once again cleaver huh. 

Sometimes you need to think inside the box :).

Mon Mar 10 2008 2:16PM Report
Daedren writes:

@grimfall: been looking into this the last hour. You're right for the most part. I can't find anything that says they took the cancelled MOE project and merged it into LOTRO.

Anyway, please keep in mind my arguments here are only in reference to the name / title of the MMO. We're all entitled to our opinions. ;) -- (oh, and I've read some of the books, still not sure what that has to do with anything though)

@HashBrick: Your mentioning game directions and content. This article was soley about the name. I think Lord of the RIngs Online is a crappy name. It's not ill-fitting, or anything, I just think it lacks creative vision.

I disagree with your argument for "Age of Conan" being a good marketting choice. Also, I hope you can distinguish between seriousness and humor - I think Age of Kings and Limbs Flying Off aren't good titles. I put them in to illustrate, in my opinion, any Age of X would have been better.

I think a lot of people agree with me (like a few posters above) that Conan just has a weird stereotype with it. I'm not saying they game won't be great, and I'm not saying I don't like the Conan lore (I do, I do, I do) -- I'm just saying the name could have been better. Hence the title of the article. Could have been better... ;)

Mon Mar 10 2008 2:35PM Report
lordtwisted writes:

Hash your argument goes for Tom Clancey just as well as Garriot, if you are not a fan of war novels, or spy novels, you may have never heard of Tom Clancey.

  Just about anyone into RPGs has played an Ultima game, I think there was like 9 of them along the Nintendo like of consoles and spreading out among the Sony and Microsoft lines.

 Those were all done by Garriot except maybe #9 I think that is where he left. But to the point in RPGs Garriot is a big name. MMORPG's he is not that big of a name TR being only his second.

 Hmmm, what would happen if Tom Clancey had his name on an MMO?....I would probablly play it!

Mon Mar 10 2008 3:14PM Report
Hashbrick writes:

Daedren - The game and direction has everything to do with the title it's not like they just pick one out of the air like i said its marketing and it works.  I understood your humor and I took those examples because you said them either way Age of X isn't going to be better than Age of Conan, your supporters are few if this was a wide vote, Age of Conan would be superior one being the person who has no idea who Conan or what the universe has to offer can easily look it up from that title.  If it was anything but that had conan in it people would bitch saying why the hell is it called this when conan is in it.  Hell they could have just called it Conan Online and it would still be a well choosen name, but because they wanted it more than just conan himself it's in the age of his rule, hence the name.

lordtwisted - You just proven my point valid just by this sentence.  " Hmmm, what would happen if Tom Clancey had his name on an MMO?....I would probablly play it!"  Hell of a lot more people know Tom Clancey then Garriot, there is a huge margin between MMORPGers and FPSers, trust me you walk up to anyone who plays call of duty, halo, socom, ghost recon to name a few and you ask them who is Richard Garriot and they will say who the hell is that but you ask MMORPGers who is Tom Clancey and more times then not they will know who that is.  The point is Tom Clancey made a name for himself in the video game industry he can slap his name on his shit.

Mon Mar 10 2008 4:04PM Report
lordtwisted writes:

I agree with Tom Clancey being able to slap his name on shit as you put it...

 But I also think that Garriot had earned that right at one time himself, he has created more inspiration in the realm of video games then Clancey ever has or well. But only because Garriott was with the leading visionaries of the video game industry, those that created it.

 Clancey is and always will be one of the leading experts on warfare, and has more then earned his popularity with the FPS crowd....

 But the fact of the matter is this is MMORPG.com not MMOFPS.com  atleast for now...I see this becomming a bit more balanced in the near future...I see a new breed of game and it will be "Lord Twisted presents: The MMORFPSG."

 MUhahahaha!

Mon Mar 10 2008 7:01PM Report
vajuras writes:

Excellent article Daedren. I wasnt with you on was the Age of Conan point tho. I feel that you gotta put the word 'Conan' in there somewhere when you licsence such a major IP. You obviously feel diff but thats okay guess its a minor nit. gj

Mon Mar 10 2008 9:41PM Report
redcap036 writes:

Isn't Tabula Rasa a brand of taco mix and corn chips in the U.S.?

I wonder what the dev crew where eating while they made this game?

Mon Mar 10 2008 10:43PM Report
wilson1225 writes:

I think the Richard Garriott in Richard Garriott's Tabula Rasa was more of a marketing ploy than an ego trip.  You know, one of those "how are we gonna sell this piece of shit?" moments.

Tue Mar 11 2008 1:05AM Report
Saerain writes:

Tabula Rasa is about as obscure as argumentum ad ignorantiam, so I have to disagree there. My only problem with the title Tabula Rasa is the sheer volume of idiots who mispronounce it. It takes a special kind of goofiness to be capable of mispronouncing frickin' Latin.

Also, I always felt that Age of Conan should have been titled Hyboria Online. I'm a fan of just using the name of the world itself. If I had it my way, every MMO would be Norrath Online, Dereth Online, Rubi-Ka Online, Azeroth Online, Telon Online, Hyboria Online, et cetera.

Otherwise, agreed.

Tue Mar 11 2008 2:25AM Report
Daedren writes:

Thanks again for the feedback, everyone. Glad to see that we can bring different opinions about a subject and still be civil! :)

@HashBrick - I know what you're saying. AoC is a fitting name - that I won't argue. The sole reason it has problems in my mind is that it's stereotyped with the Arnie movies. I'm not - or was not - an avid reader of the Conan books - so I associated the name Conan with the movies. The same happened with LOTRO - lots of people probably have only seen the movie. What would happen if they made a MMO called "Age of Willow" (awsome movie!) -- people would assume the game is about the movie "Willow" and might not know of the 100+ books that drove the lore behind the movie. (just an example, no idea if there are Willow Books).

It sucks that for the average gamer of my generation, Conan probably will be associated with the movie. This, in my mind, isn't a strong point. Hence "could be better."

@Saerain: I agree with you Hyboria Online is a good name. (Though I could see it being Hyboring Online very easily).

@wilson1225: It's possible, but I wouldn't be surprised if Richard Garriott's Dog has a huge tattoo on his back that says "Richard Garriott's Dog." ;)

Tue Mar 11 2008 3:54AM Report
Daedren writes:

@Saerain (and others): Regarding my "Obscure Much?" comment - this is a sarcastic comment that I put in the article in the style that is highly popularized on social news / humor sites like Fark.com and SomethingAwful.

By saying "Obscure Much?" I meant that Garriott's attempt to be clever and "obscure" failed miserably. I agree that what I wrote wasn't very clear in this sense.

Just wanted to make it clear that I wasn't saying it was obscure. I was saying it was trying to be witty / obscure and failed.

Tue Mar 11 2008 3:57AM Report
Jamkull writes:

Well, I played the Ultima games back in the day and found them a breath of fresh air compared to many CRPGs of the time.  You could manipulate the environment and do things that many other games couldn't.  The stories were well written but I only played up to Ultima 6.  after that I was in the navy so, everything took a backseat.  I can see why he would place his name on something because he has made a name for the most part.  He has always been the pinnacle roll in his games, much like a DM would be in D&D a lot.   Richard Garriott is the story weaver so to speak.  Lord British is his alter ego, thus it follows along in his other stories within games.  He's definitely not the first person to be a pinnacle roll in their story, I've known some authors to do the same when it comes to Fantasy.  Maybe it's an ego thing but honestly I don't care as long as the game/story is good.  But Richard has enough fan base to do that or it would be like pissing in the wind. I did try the UO and personally I didn't care for it much.  But the single player games are/were really good.  But UO did have a good following of subscribers, and it is still going to this day.  So obviously someone loves the game.

Then as far as DAoC goes, the Firbolg is in the Hybernia territory and both are references to mythological aspects of Ireland.  Not England as you make it perceived. And as such, Arthur Pendragon is part of the game as a ghost, and as such he supposedly died around 900 AD the later half of the dark ages.  So i'd say the game is based somewhere around there.  But as you go about the game you will notice that the whole game is designed around Mythology, not something that has been factual.  Thus it is a game, and is meant to be fun so who cares how historic it is :)  But nonetheless, if you do a small amount of research most of what they have in the game has a mythological reference somewhere. 

I honestly don't know why you get so anal retentive about their historical aspects when its not even listed as such.  Unlike the Total War games, which do try and have historical and real aspects.  If you want that, then read and find a game that you are looking for before going out and getting disappointed. 

And by saying some game failed, ok, well they failed in your eyes, but if they are holding 100k or above subs its not a failure.  Not every game is going to be like WoW.  But as long as they have a decent core following they will make enough money to carry on.  So obviously enough like Tabula Rasa or it would be closed down.  And so far there has been only one game to date that I've seen closed down and that was AC2.  That was at least somewhat mainstream.  And I would call that a failure.  Other than that, they are all still viable. 

I remember how a lot thought Anarchy Online was such a huge failure when it first came out but look at it now, it is going strong and with their newest graphics upgrade may very well become even stronger.  It has some of its old players that quit hyped and ready to try it again.

As I always say - to each, his own... either you dig it or you don't.   But it is nice to see a company break out of the box of famous games and do something original and unique.  Rather than try and ride the shirt tails of games like EQ and WoW.  And it would be nice to see games that cater to one aspect or the other when it comes to PVP and PVE.  Because most games screw things up when it comes to balance of the two.  Very few have been able to do that stuff right, and honestly even if the game was purely PVP, it would be forever until they did get the "balance" right, because there are way to many whiny sore losers in the world that will always complain that its always someone elses fault but their own.

 

oh well just my 2c

Tue Mar 11 2008 8:58AM Report
grimfall writes:

Willow was based on books written by George Lucas (Star Wars) and maybe Chris Claremont (X-Men) there's a few of them and I haven't sorted out their chronology.  They'\re not terribly good, but neither are the Star Wars books.

You really need to re-watch Conan the Barbarian.  It's pretty much what they are basing the gameplay mechanics and graphics on and it's really bad ass.  There's naked chicks and blood spurting and women getting decapitated (in the first scene!).  If you think that movie is 'pansy' you must be having your kids watching Hostel and Saw instead of Saturday morning cartoons.

Sat Mar 29 2008 2:31PM Report
grimfall writes:

Oh, yeah.  Tom Clancy is an author, not a game maker.  His name on a game is like Stephen King's or Clive Barker's.

Sid Mier, American McGhee those guys got their names on games, I don't think either has any more cache than Richcard Garriot.  The name Garriot was a grab for Ultima fans - nothing to get upset about.

Sat Mar 29 2008 2:40PM Report
Daedren writes:

@grimfall:

Thanks for the feedback. Regarding Conan, I was talking about the second Conan movie. I agree the first Conan wasn't bad, though it strayed from Conan lore. Plenty of blood and stuff - let's just hope they don't water it down like in the kid friendly Conan sequel.

Sun Mar 30 2008 3:42AM Report

MMORPG.com writes:
Login or Register to post a comment