Originally posted by kakarotrage

And why shouldn't be as polished as wow? people are looking to go forward not backwards, and forget about polish the concepts of these games were just all wrong : the graphics in WAR is just plain awful and depressing the world isn't inviting to explore and the game is just linear and small compared to wow (and I haven't mentioned that the animation is bad, movement is annoying and combat is clunky) this list just goes on and on.. the game isnt even close to wow, and don't get me started with AOC that instance fest, seriously who would rather small instanced zones on a big explorable world, I'm shocked they thought this game could even compare to wow.

So what you're saying is that now that WoW is out there can never be any game ever released that isn't 100% done; no bugs, no graphical glitches, absolutely 100% perfect???
 

And apparently all MMOs are suppose to be bright and cheery?

I personally, never had trouble playing WAR, I stopped because I didn't see the point in diverging my time into yet another time sink. And during my play I had no trouble exploring the world....though I always found myself in the RvR Lakes :P

And about the AoC Instance thing...it's needed. You CANNOT have that level of graphics and run it through this decaying network we call the Internet. The Internet 2, which is ONLY for universities, hospitals, and other agencies of important, might be able to handle it. And anyone here who tried out their Sieges knows for a fact that when you place to many high-detailed objects in one area that practical system can handle it.

You want seamless world? WoW-graphics

You want detailed world? Aoc/Tabula Rasa-graphics

One day we'll have both...but that day is not today.

I don't think the increased detail of graphics in AOC has anything to do with the amount of network traffic going to/from the server.  Well at least in comparison to other games.   Once your PC is informed of what artwork should be applied to a network object (player, house, landscape) then the appropriate files are loaded from your harddrive.  I would imagine there is no more traffic required to update the position and actions of a low poly low resolution object than there is a high poly/resolution object.  

I suspect the instancing is done to limit the amount of work your GPU/CPU will encounter if to many objects appear on your screen at one time. 

Originally posted by Dyner

Originally posted by kakarotrage

And why shouldn't be as polished as wow? people are looking to go forward not backwards, and forget about polish the concepts of these games were just all wrong : the graphics in WAR is just plain awful and depressing the world isn't inviting to explore and the game is just linear and small compared to wow (and I haven't mentioned that the animation is bad, movement is annoying and combat is clunky) this list just goes on and on.. the game isnt even close to wow, and don't get me started with AOC that instance fest, seriously who would rather small instanced zones on a big explorable world, I'm shocked they thought this game could even compare to wow.

So what you're saying is that now that WoW is out there can never be any game ever released that isn't 100% done; no bugs, no graphical glitches, absolutely 100% perfect???
 

And apparently all MMOs are suppose to be bright and cheery?

I personally, never had trouble playing WAR, I stopped because I didn't see the point in diverging my time into yet another time sink. And during my play I had no trouble exploring the world....though I always found myself in the RvR Lakes :P

And about the AoC Instance thing...it's needed. You CANNOT have that level of graphics and run it through this decaying network we call the Internet. The Internet 2, which is ONLY for universities, hospitals, and other agencies of important, might be able to handle it. And anyone here who tried out their Sieges knows for a fact that when you place to many high-detailed objects in one area that practical system can handle it.

You want seamless world? WoW-graphics

You want detailed world? Aoc/Tabula Rasa-graphics

One day we'll have both...but that day is not today.

I do want a seamless world and I know the majority does, I rather have "bad graphics" with a seamless huge world than a "good graphics" with tons of instancing.

I just mention the situation as it is, people who played wow want another mmorpg which is polished as wow was, that's why you see just tons of people just trolling all over the place about AOC and WAR because they hoped theese games will replace it for them.

I guess some people "enjoy" games like WAR / AOC , unpolished , linear , small zones, nothing new mmos, but the numbers just here to show you this isn't what the majority wants, but it's all a matter of taste, some people like to eat steaks and some people like to eat a piece of cheese that has been sitting in the fridge for 2 months and has stuff growing on it, I'm looking forward my next steak.

Originally posted by kakarotrage

Originally posted by Dyner

Originally posted by kakarotrage

Text.

And more text

 

I do want a seamless world and I know the majority does, I rather have "bad graphics" with a seamless huge world than a "good graphics" with tons of instancing.

I just mention the situation as it is, people who played wow want another mmorpg which is polished as wow was, that's why you see just tons of people just trolling all over the place about AOC and WAR because they hoped theese games will replace it for them.

I guess some people "enjoy" games like WAR / AOC , unpolished , linear , small zones, nothing new mmos, but the numbers just here to show you this isn't what the majority wants, but it's all a matter of taste, some people like to eat steaks and some people like to eat a piece of cheese that has been sitting in the fridge for 2 months and has stuff growing on it, I'm looking forward my next steak.

See, with WAR and AoC it was all about getting it released ASAP, hoping to get a quick buck out of their IPs.

Blame the publishers, the dev's ideas weren't that bad. 

And about seamless worlds... UO was seamless. Wasn't a deal-breaker in a long run. WoW is also semi-seamless, and once you look through it, the zones themselves are nothing THAT special. It's all about the polish and good circumstances, really.

@Daf

It's hard to say what can be handled locally and what needs to be sent through the Internet. I've noticed a steady increase in latency as WoW added expansions; not much but still ~3ms (a lifetime in the computer world) per expansion.

But agree that it was mostly for the end-user's computer that the game was heavly instanced

@Kak

That's the problem, most of the current player base never played WoW before TBC, and even less played at launch. As for:

Unpolished: WoW wasn't always polished either

Linear: all a matter of what the player defines as linear. WoW can be linear...

Leveling | Human: Northshire -> Elwynn Forest -> Westfall -> Darkshire,etc,etc

Map-wise, AoC epitomizes linear maps; WAR though I went around and explored all the way up to Tier 2.75 (What I call the beginning area of Tier 3; since I was only lvl 20 at the time) 

Small Zones: probably to do with what Daf said...can you imagine trying to play with 300 in a zone in a high-detailed world? I lose almost 50% of my FPS in Dalaran compared to Ironforge just because of all the players there.

Plus, WAR and AoC centered more on PvP, you do NOT want a large world if your game is PvP-Oriented. Makes it very rare to partake in the main event of the game...PvP

---

Originally posted by Dyner

 
Unpolished: WoW wasn't always polished either

---

It was less polished than now, but it was still more polished than any MMO released before it. WOW redefined what a launch could be like and newer MMOs(a few) followed suit.

Originally posted by Josher

 

---

Originally posted by Dyner

 

 
Unpolished: WoW wasn't always polished either

---

 

It was less polished than now, but it was still more polished than any MMO released before it. WOW redefined what a launch could be like and newer MMOs(a few) followed suit.

I got allot of respect for Blizzard and what they have done with WoW, but  they did not redefine what launch should be like, I mean if all MMORPG's where as limited as WOW "was" then sure we must expect the same kind of polish. What they did was take the things they knew would work and made it easy acces, if WoW at release had a deep crafting system, had housing/citybuilding then WOW would have shared the same fate as other MMORPG's that offer more then just a online combat oriented game.

To be honest when I played WoW for the brief time I did because I really couldn't see the point of paying to play it, the people I talked to had no idea that Warcraft was a game before it was a MMO. I also talk to other people in other games about WoW and they tend to not realize that WoW was based on a RTS.

Dustin

if Warcraft is the reason for WoW success, why hasnt Warhammer beating out WoW?

because Warcraft isn't the reason for WoW's success.

Yea it's done to a few reasons like ppl have said

Timing - there was nothing like WoW on the market at release - the only real 'big' names at the time were EQ and DAoC ( others were still smaller names) - these days the market is flooded with IPs- therefore it's harder to break into the market

Related Fanbases - WoW's fanbase was basically All of Blizzard's stuff, EQ/DAoC castoffs AND the Warhammer few mainly because Warcraft was the closest thing to Warhammer in gaming at the time. Theres no other bigger fanbase out there at the time - unless you count the Starwars/LOTR fanbases - but again Blizzard did break into the 'geeky' market by bringing over the 'gamer' to MMOs

'WoW is the best' - This factors in a LOT: ppl say 'it's polished' but anyone whos been with the game at major release times knows it's just as buggy with new content as anything else, Blizzard can just hide it better.

For example WAR has 'laggy PVP' but you enter Wintergrasp and it's just as bad, to the fact Blizzard limited the numbers to tone it down, yet ppl don't really focus on that as the other BGs run fine and they're smaller numbers and being a pve based game ppl focus on the instances over open world - the reverse of other games, it's way easier to hide things like system/client/server lag behind instances.

Factor that in theres a lot more latecommers to WoW that swear by 'it's polished' as they missed the first months/year whereas these days ppl jump on every title on release and see what it's REALLY like and flock back to WoW under that false beleave that WoW has always been 'polished'.

Marketing/Content releases - This is where Blizzard catipalises on the situation they see whats comming and plan their 'new content' on the back of a title released so by time you 'give up' on a new game Blizzard have already dropped in said content ready to tempt you back in.

On top of that they look at the other titles and basically cherry pick the best ideas and meld them into their game in a few months after you come back - So why would you play X MMO if WoW has everything you need? It's very cleaver, cheap and nasty but effective.

-----------

So why didn't WAR work?

Easy WAR uses the 'idea' of DAoC and Warhammer Fantasy but it actally neither - On the Lore front it's screaming an epic bloody war between 'good and evil' yet the game is nethier warlike and bloody. It looks and feels like Warhammer alright but it plays nothing like it - For one it rewards players for NOT fighting the other faction - To a Warhammer player ( and kinda DAoC players) thats like not bothering to play at all.

A lot of the classes don't even play like the achtypes their ment to be (something that LOTRO got right) for example the Runepriest my 2nd personal favourate choice on the TT who is basically a battlemage in combat - WAR he's a healer archtype, very weak on the magics and VERY squishy.. Thats not a Runepriest!

Bottom line with WAR it was just bad choice after bad choice Mythic just took two GOOD IPs that go perfectly together and just totally ignored everything about them, WAR has to be rebuilt from the ground up - I'm hoping they do that - but thats if EA doesn't shut the game down first.

To make matters worse there was already a better title out there to WAR - that was DAoC.

they are both pants, but warhammer is the better one.

wow sucks

Originally posted by rodingo

I dont think warcraft had a fanbase in the several milions mark. It's wow's game design, taken from other games to include pen and paper D&D, that led to it's success. The developers of WAR had a great IP to work with, but just squandered it with bad design decisions. If Mythic would have stuck with more of their original concepts of DOAC, this conversation could have easily been started off with asking why WoW hasn't beat out WAR.

agree+++++++++

EA Mythic got greedy, and chose to make a cross between WoW and DAOC, and they end up making a game not as good as WoW and DAOC in respect to PvE, raids, and RvR.  That was their biggest problem.  Bad design decisions, poor server performance in RvR, really bad itemization, and really bad endgame design made it fail hardcore.

If they wanted it to be a good RvR game, they should've followed DAOC's steps in design and creativity. If they wanted it to be a PvE-centric game, they should've done everything WoW has done plus more.  Making something in between and not excel at either was their big downfall.

It's too bad, because I actually enjoyed WAR for awhile, and thought it had great potential to be a great game.  Unfortunately MMO's often don't recover after a bad first impression.