Profile: demalus
Send PM  Forum Posts  Forum Topics 

Recent Forum Posts [more...]

• • On Market Statistics Arguments

  • Good points Darkholme, but I'm still not completely convinced.  I think there was definitely a lot of buzz initially from Blizzard fans, but in my experience, a lot of people who played WoW weren't the most diehard fans.  Many of them had played a Blizzard game before but got sucked into WoW by friends and whatnot.

  • Posted: 8/19/08 10:51 PM
    General Discussion
• • On Market Statistics Arguments

  • @ Sovrath

    Yes, but WoW is touted as a casual game, for the majority of "gamers".

     

    @ Darkholme

    I don't really agree.  Star Wars as an IP has a much larger following.  The same goes for Lord of the Rings.  The two MMOs made from those IPs weren't nearly as successful as WoW, which is pretty much Blizzard's version of Warhammer.

     

    --

    I've taken a long hard look at WoW and I've concluded that its quality is why it is so succesful and because of this, there is a cascading effect making even more popular.  Of course, this is my opinion, but I've based it on my own observations.  When you play WoW, everything is easy to operate, works without major bugs, and runs smoothly.  That is what I think made WoW initially a huge success.  Now though, I don't think that is the same case.  You see, WoW's philosophy is for developer-made content instead of player-made content.  Simply put, you HAVE to do what they make for you to do in WoW.  I think a lot of people don't want to play WoW anymore, but it is the only game where there are a lot of people playing.  Of course, there are other games, but WoW is like the big city in MMOs.  The whole point of playing an MMO is to play WITH a lot of other people, and WoW has the most by far.

    I think most developers that are trying the "WoW approach" simply have misunderstood why WoW was so successful (although this is my opinion of why it was :p), which is going to be fatal.  They take the worst elements of WoW and make them even worse.  Developers need to learn that they really need to make quality games.  It's not always possible for everyone to just release games "when they're ready" but that's the only way I can see a game having as much success as WoW.

  • Posted: 8/19/08 5:52 PM
    General Discussion
• • Clone Wars

  • I actually enjoyed the film a lot.  At first I thought it was really stupid that they gave Anakin a padawan, but it actually works pretty well in the movie.   I think the safe assumption would be that she dies, but I wouldn't be suprised to see her disappear or something (get sent somewhere to be safe).

  • Posted: 8/17/08 6:12 PM
    Star Wars Galaxies
• • On Market Statistics Arguments

  • No problem.  I just think WoW is misunderstood by a lot of people.  I believe its success comes from its quality and not necessarily the underlying philosophy of content-only-by-developers.

     

    I think other types of MMOs could be just as popular if they were made properly.  MMOs (although many people hate all of the new ones coming out) are actually looking like they will have a bright future.  People LOVE playing online games.  I was going to do a big writeup sometime of what I think MMO philosophy should be.  I'm too lazy at the moment, but basically it's all about the players and the community.  That is why people play MMOs in the first place (to play with a lot of other people), no?

  • Posted: 8/17/08 6:02 PM
    General Discussion
• • On Market Statistics Arguments

  • I thought this deserved its own post because many people misunderstand it.

     

    Often, people around here make claims that what the general MMO populace wants (or at least many) is an MMO unlike the current ones (i.e. a sandbox title).  Others reject that that is a fact, and they are right to do so, but they often use flawed reasoning.  The flawed reasoning is pointing at the current market.  The argument goes something like this:  Since there are a lot more MMO players (I'm just talking about North America) today, people obviously want the WoW type of gameplay.  This really isn't the case though.  WoW isn't successful because its underlying philosophy is the best, but because it has so much quality.  WoW's quality is the reason it was so initially successful.  There is sort of a cascading effect also.  Since more and more people play WoW, others are more inclined to also play WoW because that's the point of the genre, to play with others (which is something developers are forgetting, hence the horrendous titles that have been released in recent times).

    The major flaw in the argument is that it assumes other games similar to WoW are just as popular (once again, I'm basing this off of North America only).  WoW is really the only MMO that has hit such great numbers.  Games like AoC and Vanguard failed to do the same.  It is not that people especially love WoW, but that WoW is the only game worth playing at the moment (because that's where all the players are and it has high quality). 

    Whether or not a sandbox can be successful isn't really a great debate.  Instead, I think that a large portion of the success of an MMO comes directly from its quality.  Quality is also a loose term, but I think most people understand what I mean.

  • Posted: 8/15/08 5:15 PM
    General Discussion