Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
November 18, 2018, 05:45:34 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
Donate! | Shop: Amazon
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  Warhammer Online (Moderator: tazelbain)  |  Topic: Warhammer Online Server Dead Pool 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Warhammer Online Server Dead Pool  (Read 161608 times)
Kail
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2800


Reply #595 on: December 28, 2010, 09:10:39 PM

3) one of the common themes around WoW's success was "established IP", which Warhammer falls under.

I suspect that if you wanted to make a WoW clone, Warhammer would be among your top choices.  Warcraft has a lot of visual and thematic similarities with Warhammer already, and it would make a fairly good video game since it's already a tabletop game rather than a story (meaning it's basically a setting, as opposed to something like LotR where you have the problem of mashing the players into the storyline somewhere but not really being able to change it).
UnSub
Contributor
Posts: 8064


WWW
Reply #596 on: December 28, 2010, 10:29:37 PM

Heh, the original press release. Read it and weep.

Fordel
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8305


Reply #597 on: December 28, 2010, 11:58:52 PM

Man, was Imperator really still alive then?

and the gate is like I TOO AM CAPABLE OF SPEECH
Ratama
Terracotta Army
Posts: 130


Reply #598 on: December 29, 2010, 03:20:00 AM

Yeah, that was depressing...

Are we sure someone wasn't caught in bed with someone's cousin during a Mythic/GW press junket or something?

Anyway; Warcraft was a cuddlier, cartoonier ripoff of Warhammer... Warhammer's IP is actually not something that I would think an MMO dev house would look at and say "WoW Clone material!".  In the grand scheme of things, there really aren't that many people that play Warhammer, and i wouldn't think it's a setting that lends itself to being attractive to female gamers at all (amongst other issues).

If they really thought that IP would be a positive (with the IP owners breathing down their necks during development, to boot)... yeesh, what a fuckup.





Spare the rod, spoil the dev.
Arthur_Parker
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5865

Internet Detective


Reply #599 on: December 29, 2010, 03:45:41 AM

If they really thought that IP would be a positive (with the IP owners breathing down their necks during development, to boot)... yeesh, what a fuckup.

There's a simple test, name a better Fantasy IP.  I'm not defending the choices they made after picking the IP, but saying "lol, why pick warhammer, idiots" after the game turned out to be shit doesn't mean anything.

Also there's also zero public evidence that GW acted like cocks during development, they changed the IP a couple of times just at Mythic's request.  It wouldn't surprise me if GW were difficult to work with but this forum is full of dozens of bad points about WAR, the IP and GW seem to be pretty far down the list.

Ratama
Terracotta Army
Posts: 130


Reply #600 on: December 29, 2010, 09:21:55 AM

Self-owned IP ftw.  I doubt any hit MMO will ever use 3d party IP; you give up too much to gain too little.

Hell, there are multiple fantasy IPs that would make much better PvE-oriented DIKUs, anyway (Steven Erickson's Malazan series, for example, details what would roughly be a gajillion's year's worth of raid encounters).

As far as GW goes... it's not a matter of them 'acting like cocks', imo; it's more, did they act in what they saw as the best long-term interest of of their IP, to the detriment of WHO?  Can't imagine that they didn't do that at all.

Spare the rod, spoil the dev.
KallDrexx
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3510


Reply #601 on: December 29, 2010, 09:34:16 AM

Licensing the Warhammer IP was probably the only right decision Mythic made for this game.  Using the DAOC IP is extremely risky because you then have two games competing against each other (same reason SOE regrets using the EQ IP and name for EQ2), and at the time they licensed Warhammer DAOC was still doing OK.  Also, creating a brand new IP is extremely hard with so much competition around.

The game mechanics sucked, any fun wasn't lasting, and they relied too much on public quests.  Like it has been said, the failure had nothing to do with the IP, the IP alone is probably what has kept it around for as long as it has.
Arthur_Parker
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5865

Internet Detective


Reply #602 on: December 29, 2010, 09:38:10 AM

Self-owned IP ftw.

That's not what you said.
Modern Angel
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3553


Reply #603 on: December 29, 2010, 09:53:24 AM

The IP alone is what pushed a million boxes out the door. That part is emphatically NOT a failure. The IP was fine.
Typhon
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2388


Reply #604 on: December 29, 2010, 09:59:18 AM

I agree that the IP just doesn't matter beyond "eyes on box", unless your game works against the IP, or the IP works against the type of game you are creating.

  • Need no IP - DaoC, Guild Wars.  I'd also throw CoX in here, as they would have been more popular if they had reduced the grind and had figured out how difficult they wanted the game to be upfront.
  • Work against your IP - SWG.
  • IP works against you - LotRO.  I think this IP only works with a strategic war game.  There is just something soul crushing about creating a character in a fantasy game where you know the final resolution results in the death of magic.
  • WAY more players than the IP could be accounted for (at the time of release) - WoW.  Positive beta word-of-mouth and the game being very solid and accessible account for more than the IP, imo.
  • IP is beneficial from a marketing perspective - WAR, AoC, Star Trek Online.
  • IP just doesn't matter - Champions Online

WAR and AoC go off the rails after the first X levels.  It has nothing to do with the IP, it has everything to do with the game ceasing to be fun after a certain point. 

In the case of WAR, it has everything to do with the developers not focusing on their strong suit, and spending too much energy trying to compete head-to-head with the best in the business. 
In the case of Conan, the developer simply couldn't afford to create a couple dozen Tortages (which would be an awesome game, actually).
Typhon
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2388


Reply #605 on: December 29, 2010, 10:07:37 AM

The IP alone is what pushed a million boxes out the door. That part is emphatically NOT a failure. The IP was fine.

Here's my take on what drove #s of box sales (which I admit is worth nothing):

IP - 25%
Idea that the game would be an improvement on DaoC combined with positive buzz on the first 20 levels - 25%
Boredom with WoW -  50%

But honestly how many people actually give a shit about the Warhammer IP or played DaoC?  Probably I'm not giving boredom with WoW enough credit.
Modern Angel
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3553


Reply #606 on: December 29, 2010, 10:30:30 AM

I think WoW ennui was certainly a big driver but it would be a mistake to shortchange the IP. In the not so distant past GW games outsold everything in the hobby market, D&D included. Unsure about now but it's pervasive in Europe and it's high profile in the States, too.
Rendakor
Terracotta Army
Posts: 9194


Reply #607 on: December 29, 2010, 11:58:18 AM

Honestly the fact that it was Warhammer was a big selling point for me. I've never seriously played the table top game either (too expensive, fuck assembling and painting minis), but some of my friends do and I'd sat in/watched a few games and read some of the novels.

Check out my podcast: ADD&D, Attention Deficit Dungeons & Dragons!
"I think it's time for a dose of F13 RED PILL MOTHER FUCKERS" ~cosapi
Ratama
Terracotta Army
Posts: 130


Reply #608 on: December 29, 2010, 06:26:56 PM

The IP alone is what pushed a million boxes out the door. That part is emphatically NOT a failure. The IP was fine.
Bullshit; there's barely a million people that have played Warhammer alive today (if that), let alone interested in playing a Warhammer MMO. Certainly less people have paid $$$ to GW for Warhammer crap than have subscribed to DAoC at some point.

Boredom with WoW + Mythic's recognition via DAoC sold a million boxes.

Warhammer would be a great IP for a PvP game, not arguing that. DAoC with Warhammer skins would have been a bit grindy for more PvPers, but it would have worked as an RvR (each race its own faction; practically unlimited expansion possibilities).

But a WoW clone?  Notsomuch; I'm rather surprised some of you think Warhammer = good PvE IP.
Self-owned IP ftw.

That's not what you said.
? PvP IP for PvP games = good, PvP IP for PvE games = bad.  Self owned IP = bestest.  I didn't say that?
« Last Edit: December 29, 2010, 06:29:55 PM by Ratama »

Spare the rod, spoil the dev.
IainC
Developers
Posts: 6256

Wargaming.net


WWW
Reply #609 on: December 29, 2010, 06:51:14 PM

Bullshit; there's barely a million people that have played Warhammer alive today (if that), let alone interested in playing a Warhammer MMO. Certainly less people have paid $$$ to GW for Warhammer crap than have subscribed to DAoC at some point.

You are wrong in both of your assertions above (speaking as someone who knows both the Warhammer brand penetration and the DAoC sub numbers).

Boredom with WoW + Mythic's recognition via DAoC sold a million boxes.

More people have played Warhammer, read a novel or painted a miniature than have ever even heard of DAoC or Mythic.

A good IP will bring players but only a good game will keep them.

- And in stranger Iains, even Death may die -

SerialForeigner Photography.
Modern Angel
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3553


Reply #610 on: December 29, 2010, 08:31:08 PM

Bullshit; there's barely a million people that have played Warhammer alive today
[/quote]

Do some research before you run your mouth. They're a publicly traded company so all of this is a matter of public record. I also used to manage a store way back when they were at the height of their market penetration so was privy to enough numbers to know it's well over a million living people. Peg your number several multiples of a million and you're closer to the mark.
Rendakor
Terracotta Army
Posts: 9194


Reply #611 on: December 30, 2010, 12:35:22 AM

Most of us came to WAR expecting a PVP game, not a PVE game, so I'm not sure what your point is. In fact, I leveled almost exclusively through PVP in WAR (skirmishes) and had a great time of it until T3. It was like WoW PVP but new and with instant queues (on my server/faction, etc.) and XP.

Check out my podcast: ADD&D, Attention Deficit Dungeons & Dragons!
"I think it's time for a dose of F13 RED PILL MOTHER FUCKERS" ~cosapi
Arthur_Parker
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5865

Internet Detective


Reply #612 on: December 30, 2010, 01:24:03 AM

Ratama
Terracotta Army
Posts: 130


Reply #613 on: December 30, 2010, 08:17:00 PM

Most of us came to WAR expecting a PVP game, not a PVE game, so I'm not sure what your point is.
My point is that, after the fact, you had Barnett and other devs admit that they don't enjoy PvP themselves, and weren't really interested in making a PvP/RvR game.  So why go get a PvP IP?
Quote
DRILLING AND WOMANLINESS

Yeah, getting into an argument with Warhammer fans about GW and their insane hobby is sorta like starting an argument over religiion.

I am sorry.  So very, very sorry.  Cry
« Last Edit: December 30, 2010, 08:20:17 PM by Ratama »

Spare the rod, spoil the dev.
Modern Angel
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3553


Reply #614 on: December 30, 2010, 09:29:35 PM

I haven't played in seven years. I can't afford it and I don't consider myself a fan anymore. You were demonstrably wrong which is why you were told to shut up.
squirrel
Contributor
Posts: 1767


Reply #615 on: December 30, 2010, 10:01:13 PM



Yeah, getting into an argument with Warhammer fans about GW and their insane hobby is sorta like starting an argument over religiion.

I am sorry.  So very, very sorry.  Cry

Noone here is a fanboy, they just happen to know a fuck of lot more than you do about this topic, and probably many others. Don't be a douchebag, admit you were wrong with some humility and move on.

For fucks sake.

Speaking of marketing, we're out of milk.
Rendakor
Terracotta Army
Posts: 9194


Reply #616 on: December 31, 2010, 02:28:06 AM

My point is that, after the fact, you had Barnett and other devs admit that they don't enjoy PvP themselves, and weren't really interested in making a PvP/RvR game.  So why go get a PvP IP?
Because regardless of what they enjoyed or whatever, they made a decent PVP game. If not for the fact that the shit BG happened in the same tier that the PVE went to hell, I would've played at least 1 or 2 toons to max level.

Check out my podcast: ADD&D, Attention Deficit Dungeons & Dragons!
"I think it's time for a dose of F13 RED PILL MOTHER FUCKERS" ~cosapi
IainC
Developers
Posts: 6256

Wargaming.net


WWW
Reply #617 on: December 31, 2010, 03:16:06 AM

Most of us came to WAR expecting a PVP game, not a PVE game, so I'm not sure what your point is.
My point is that, after the fact, you had Barnett and other devs admit that they don't enjoy PvP themselves, and weren't really interested in making a PvP/RvR game[citation needed].  So why go get a PvP IP?
Quote
DRILLING AND WOMANLINESS

Yeah, getting into an argument with Warhammer fans about GW and their insane hobby is sorta like starting an argument over religiion.

I am sorry.  So very, very sorry.  Cry

You don't know why you are wrong but you're somehow trying to write off the arguments against you as 'fanboys'. I tried to correct your wild speculation with actual facts based on professional experience and somehow I'm the one making an emotional argument?

- And in stranger Iains, even Death may die -

SerialForeigner Photography.
Arthur_Parker
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5865

Internet Detective


Reply #618 on: December 31, 2010, 04:47:34 AM

Quote
DRILLING AND WOMANLINESS

Yeah, getting into an argument with Warhammer fans about GW and their insane hobby is sorta like starting an argument over religiion.

I am sorry.  So very, very sorry.  Cry

I'm still laughing over the "Steven Erickson's Malazan series" comment, really, there's no need to apologise.
Ratama
Terracotta Army
Posts: 130


Reply #619 on: January 03, 2011, 02:20:13 AM

Because regardless of what they enjoyed or whatever, they made a decent PVP game. If not for the fact that the shit BG happened in the same tier that the PVE went to hell, I would've played at least 1 or 2 toons to max level.
Well, yeah, T1 was an awesome PvP esperience, because few of the classes had game-ruining CC yet.  T2 and higher, at launch (dunno about now), WHO was a terrible PvP game (well, most of T2 was ok, unless the other side was made up of nothing but BWs, IBs, and RPs.  

Too much CC, melee healing non-viable (in T4), OP classes (mostly the DPS clothies, iirc), RvR/PvP zone mechanics a mess, crappy scenarios, etc (not counting purely technical issues, just game mechanics).

In other words, an ok PvP game, until their PvE-based class designs started to kill it at higher levels, and their shitty RvR/zones finished it off in T4.

Spare the rod, spoil the dev.
Lantyssa
Terracotta Army
Posts: 20848


Reply #620 on: January 03, 2011, 08:11:31 AM

Crowd control is much more reasonable now.  I had fun in most engagement when I went back for a month or so.  Finding good skirmishes got hard at times though, and I got tired of following a zerg around.  I'm not sure how the latest changes have affected that.

Hahahaha!  I'm really good at this!
Wershlak
Terracotta Army
Posts: 58


Reply #621 on: January 17, 2011, 07:03:43 PM

Crowd control is much more reasonable now.  I had fun in most engagement when I went back for a month or so.  Finding good skirmishes got hard at times though, and I got tired of following a zerg around.  I'm not sure how the latest changes have affected that.

I had fun when I resubbed a few months back until I got to tier 4 and felt like I had no chance against the geared/max rvr level folks and quit.

I had the urge for some fun pvp today and resubbed for an hour. The new changes completely destroyed t2-t3 pvp it seems. I was in the scenario queue for an hour and was running around the rvr lakes with a group and didn't see a single enemy player. I didn't get to use a single ability in the entire time i was logged in. I guess war isn't everywhere anymore...

Apparently everyone does pve till 40 so they can spend months getting their nuts kicked in by rvr level 100 people now. Sounds fun!

I would highly discourage anyone from giving it a shot now.
Ratama
Terracotta Army
Posts: 130


Reply #622 on: January 17, 2011, 07:27:07 PM

The free trial's alright, if you have a few friends to do scenarios with.

What server were you on, Wershlak?  I've heard Badlands is the only reasonably populated server.

Spare the rod, spoil the dev.
FatuousTwat
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2223


Reply #623 on: January 18, 2011, 05:37:53 AM

So, why isn't this F2P yet?

Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
ghost
The Dentist
Posts: 10569


Reply #624 on: January 18, 2011, 06:58:53 AM

So, why isn't this F2P yet?

I think they already missed that window.  It should have happened about 6-9 months ago when they still had anyone at all playing it. 
Wershlak
Terracotta Army
Posts: 58


Reply #625 on: January 18, 2011, 02:02:08 PM

The free trial's alright, if you have a few friends to do scenarios with.

What server were you on, Wershlak?  I've heard Badlands is the only reasonably populated server.

I forget which server I logged into. I'm sure it wasn't badlands as I have all my destruction characters there. Are the Scenarios cross server in WAR? I can't remember.

F2P wouldn't help here. The design changes seem to have killed everything that was fun about the first 30+ levels. F2P games are usually fun initially and then shallow later unless you buy addons. Here, they've designed all the  fun out of the game until you are max level and have grinded renown long enough to compete. Once you get to rr60 or so I bet it's probably still a fun game... For a week, till you get bored.
Ratama
Terracotta Army
Posts: 130


Reply #626 on: January 18, 2011, 09:44:03 PM

Lure a few thousand more players back, then  try to get a few hundred $$$ each from said weekend warriors for RvR ranks and items.  That + one last good session of massive overbilling, then the plug-pulling ceremony on PPV.


Spare the rod, spoil the dev.
UnSub
Contributor
Posts: 8064


WWW
Reply #627 on: January 18, 2011, 10:57:51 PM

So, why isn't this F2P yet?

I've wondered if there is a contractual thing between EA and Games Workshop that might prevent it, or if EA is using WAR as some sort of MMO test bed to see how long sub players hold on.

But yeah, I've wondered the same thing. I'm surprised it is still alive.

Merusk
Terracotta Army
Posts: 27447

Badge Whore


Reply #628 on: January 30, 2011, 09:02:14 AM

So, why isn't this F2P yet?

I've wondered if there is a contractual thing between EA and Games Workshop that might prevent it, or if EA is using WAR as some sort of MMO test bed to see how long sub players hold on.

But yeah, I've wondered the same thing. I'm surprised it is still alive.


I'd wager that GW won't let them because it would dilute the brand or set a precedent for not charging for things or some such silly logic.

I DID see an ad somewhere the other day for an "Endless Trial"   Here's their faq on it: http://www.warhammeronline.com/faq/?section=11#ans11_2

So unlimited time, no auctions or mail, only allowed on certain servers and can't go past R1.  Not quite F2p, but doesn't seem too bad a deal if you just want to scratch that itch or check it out.  R1 seemed more fun to me in beta anyway.

The past cannot be changed. The future is yet within your power.
IainC
Developers
Posts: 6256

Wargaming.net


WWW
Reply #629 on: January 30, 2011, 10:23:47 AM

I doubt that there's any pressure from GW to keep the game sub-based. God knows there have been enough shitty video games based on GW IP in the past that they can't possibly care about brand dilution in that way. More likely EA are paying a fortune in licensing fees and they don't believe that rejigging it for f2p would stop the haemorrhaging. Additionally, an advantage of a sub-based business model is that you can pretty accurately chart your future income once you have some historical data to work with.

- And in stranger Iains, even Death may die -

SerialForeigner Photography.
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  Warhammer Online (Moderator: tazelbain)  |  Topic: Warhammer Online Server Dead Pool  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC