So what's the big deal?

[MrHat]

I just hope, and I've heard this, that the pvp battleground will have some sort of point buy system for comparable gear.  I've seen muds do it and it has a good effect in lessoning the equipment gap between the uber and non.

They will be. There are going to be 14 honor ranks I believe. Each rank opens up more gear for sale on the BG vendor. I dont know if I should say any details, but there will also be a very cheap epic speed BG mount also.

Interesting, I heard only the top PvP'er gets a chance to get the BG mount.  But I remember your sources in beta, so I trust you more.

[El Gallo]

I thought the epic mount quest was "just" plunking down 900 gold.  I seem to be missing something.

[Morfiend]

Ok, maybe I should have used the term lvl 60 mount. Thats the one you plunk down 900 gold for. There is also an "Epic" mount, that you have to be "Exualted" to get the quest for. (I think, ill ask about this). But as it stands right now, you are unable to get your rep to exaulted, due to not having enough quests for faction. Hell, im level 60 and Im not even Revered with any race.

The BG mount will be as fast as the lvl 60 mount (100% run speed), but it will probably take a while fighting in the BGs to get enough honor for one. Also the equipment is REALLY nice. What is great about this, is that you can outfit yourself in really really good top of the line gear, by spending time pvping and having fun in the BGs, and its not neccessary to run the high end instances over and over and over and over to get good enough gear to compete.

From what I have been told (there is only internal beta for BGs) they are really fun and pretty much done. The only problem right now is the insane lag you get when oover 60 or so people gather in one area.

[El Gallo]

Gotcha. 

[StGabe]

All the things that SirBruce said (except content -- I'm not sure WoW really has that much content compared to the competition) and extreme newbie friendliness.

WoW is a polished, simple, highly-accessible game.

The reason why I don't think other games have presented what WoW is is that they didn't have the position in the market that WoW does to pull it off (instead they rely on flashy new ideas to build up player interest) and I think that many would believe that such an easy, unrestricted game lacking in penalties/hardships/challenges would ultimately fail when it comes to subscriber retention.

And it will be interesting to see if they are right on that.  Will WoW be able to keep players for years like other games have?  I used to think it wouldn't at all (I beta'ed and I lost interest in a month, and a lot of beta'ers left with me).  I'm not so sure though.  I think that numbers will definitely fall off but I'm not certain right now if it will die outright or if the numbers will simply fall to what is still an extremely successful number, just not what is currently there.

Gabe.

[jpark]

Gabe I disagree to some degree.

WoW is not just about great execution and simplicity - but style and art.  Their graphics with the low polygon counts would never have been acceptable unless they had the artists that created highly stylized avatars.  If the art here was not compelling - nobody could ignore the low polygon counts.

On style... the game does a great job in providing enormous differentiation among the races and zones.  Compare Thunderbluff (Tauren) to Trisfall (Undead).  The zones differ dramatically.  The quests within them reinforce their respective themes (plains hunters, Necromancy) dramatically.

Certainly what you say is true, but in and of itself insufficient in my view.

[HaemishM]

I'm not sure how you can say that WoW doesn't have the same amount of content compared to the competition, Gabe? There is a veritable shitton, probably the most content I've seen out of any MMOG at release other than maybe EQ2? I think they beat COH in that regard easily. I cannot think of another MMOG released that had as much content on opening day other than EQ2.

[StGabe]

As for style, I guess that is a rather subjective viewpoint.  When it comes to the style of the content I am of the opinion that it really isn't all that important.  I think that gameplay almost always trumps immersive quality.  When I talk about the simplicity I am more talking about the fact that it is a very vanilla MUD, with only a few classes and races, little player customization, a simplistic crafting/economic model, no reason to PvP at launch, etc.

As for content I suppose I say that it doesn't seem to have that much to me because I ran out of it in a month.  I got to the mid-40's where you basically just hang out in Stranglevale and it all seemed incredibly repetitive.  I guess when I talk about content I mean more than just "lots of mobs and places to kill mobs".  I mean different sorts of progressions and engaging game systems.  I think that other MMO's of this generation have problems putting in significant content because they tend to be stretching out in so many directions.  WoW pretty much puts out content of only one sort, i.e. "kill the foozle and collect 8 widgets" style quests.  As such I'm not that impressed by how many of these they have (and it seems to me that EQ2 has both more overall quests and more types of quests).

What Blizzard did is distill down some basic, simple, accessible MUD ideas.  And it made their job much easier I'm sure.  But to me, a hardened MUD'der, it just falls flat.  I need more than just good scripting out of a MUD and I consider this the most important form of "content".

[Sky]

I got to the mid-40's where you basically just hang out in Stranglevale and it all seemed incredibly repetitive.

Are we playing the same game? I spent some early 40s in STV (aka alliance central), but I've been over in Feralas a heck of a lot. There are options, you just have to leave the group think and go out and find them. I grew to hate STV, I liken it to Lake of Ill Omen, the place where the uncreative non-explorer types like to sit and level up, just jammed full of people. It does make some quests easier, though.

But over in Feralas, there's plenty of room to hunt (outside a couple quest spots), good skinning, leatherworking quests, and the people are generally nicer and less selfish. In my experience, anyway.

no reason to PvP at launch

Fun is always a reason.

WoW pretty much puts out content of only one sort, i.e. "kill the foozle and collect 8 widgets"

Again, are we playing the same game? The one that asks you to escort a mechanical chicken through a desert or infect a field of pumpkins with the Plague for the forsaken? There's a lot of basic questing styles, but that doesn't mean there aren't a lot of cool original quests.

What Blizzard did is distill down some basic, simple, accessible MUD ideas.  And it made their job much easier I'm sure.  But to me, a hardened MUD'der, it just falls flat.  I need more than just good scripting out of a MUD and I consider this the most important form of "content"

And you're playing mmorpgs why again? They are all basic and simplistic implementations of MUDs, and there are very real reasons they can't do more than they do, which have been run into the ground ad nauseum at sites like this.

So you don't like it. Ok, move on.

I think that other MMO's of this generation have problems putting in significant content because they tend to be stretching out in so many directions. WoW pretty much puts out content of only one sort,

Wait. My brain just broke, I can't respond to you any more.

[HaemishM]

As for content I suppose I say that it doesn't seem to have that much to me because I ran out of it in a month.  I got to the mid-40's where you basically just hang out in Stranglevale and it all seemed incredibly repetitive.  I guess when I talk about content I mean more than just "lots of mobs and places to kill mobs". 

Hi, that's the current MMOG formula, and it's one that Blizzard did effectively. Sure, it's shallow. Have you PLAYED some of the other MMOG's out there? They are the same thing, only Blizzard has at least made the wrapper (the quests) more interesting.

I mean different sorts of progressions and engaging game systems.  I think that other MMO's of this generation have problems putting in significant content because they tend to be stretching out in so many directions.  WoW pretty much puts out content of only one sort, i.e. "kill the foozle and collect 8 widgets" style quests.  As such I'm not that impressed by how many of these they have (and it seems to me that EQ2 has both more overall quests and more types of quests).

EQ2 may have had as many or more overall quests, but to me, they were of the same type and were MUCH MORE BORING. Like mind-numbingly so. The addition of voiceovers that I wanted to skip through hurt the quests instead of helping them. Different sorts of progression? Well, in WoW, there's crafting and PVP (which has no real 'progression' as yet). In EQ2 there's crafting. Oh yes, and leveling your guild. In DAoC, there's crafting and RVR. I'm not sure what other forms of progression and engaging game systems you are going to find in a MUD that you won't find in an MMOG, other than roleplaying. And roleplaying is entirely dependent on the players not only being given the hooks to do so, but the plaeyrs actually taking the initiative to do so.

[AOFanboi]

WoW pretty much puts out content of only one sort, i.e. "kill the foozle and collect 8 widgets" style quests.

Well, that ignores the "get the ammo to some dude and watch as some dwarves practice on a shooting range", it ignores "give this to the prisoner in the cellar and watch him turn into a zombie and fall apart", it ignores "give this potion to the young woman so that she can secretly meet with her lover", it ignores "explore the strange pool in that oasis, then see what it does with these seeds"...

It ignores a lot, simply put.

Read the fucking text instead of just trying to make teh numbers go upp. It's not the game's fault that you don't want a story in your games. Yes, the mechanics are simple, but they work. Right click to interact FTW.

[stray]

Wow, if I didn't know any better, I'd think World of Warcraft has some of the most interesting gameplay mechanics ever. You guys sound like fanbois (I know you're not).

Even if WoW has introduced some new "patterns" (as Raph would put it) to the MMOG genre, they're still boring compared to games in general. The "pumpkin patch" quests might be pretty neat if all I played was MMO's before -- but seriously, even when an MMOG is doing something new like that, it doesn't excite me. Because it's been done before in countless single player games. And in much better ways at that.

I won't call an MMOG "fun" until it starts really innovating in the multiplayer department, instead of playing catch up to shit that single player games have been doing better for years. Only a few have accomplished that, I think.

edit: goddamn typos

[Xilren's Twin]

Wow, if I didn't know better, I'd think World of Warcraft has some of the most interesting gameplay mechanics ever.

Even if WoW has introduced some new "patterns" (as Raph would put it) to the MMOG  genre, they're still boring compared to games in general. The "pumpkin patch" quests might be pretty neat if all I played was MMO's before -- but seriously, even when an MMOG is doing something new like that, it doesn't excite me. Because it's been done before in countless single player games. And in much better ways at that.

I won't call an MMOG "fun" until it starts really innovating in the gameplay (multiplayer is the key, I think, not content), instead of playing catch up to shit that single player games have been doing better for years. Only a few have accomplished that, I think.

I think people are still confusing mechanics with execution and fun factor.  No mater what game you play, even the venerated pen and paper rpgs, most quests can be boiled down to a very few base mechanics: kill foozles, fed-ex, escort, spy/info type, etc and the like.  There just not that many.

That not important part; what's important is how well they are executed in terms of gameplay, which basically means are the interesting and fun.

Consider you and your fiends in a p&p session doing a tried and true "stop the dragon from rampage our lands" story.  It's basically a typical go here and kill the foozle quest, but what makes it fun is the interactions and plot twiests you have along the way. End result, still go here, kill dragon and shinys for everyone, but with a good DM the story experience transcends the mechanics of the quest.

In EQ, that story line surronding say the Dragon Vox was pratcially invisible.  No story, no immesion, no interesting plot or interactions; just straight go here and kill X.  Hell most quests werent done b/c they were actively unfun (long times, pitiful rewards, uninteresting storylines).

Most quests thus far in WoW are just the opposite.  If you care about such things like story, purpose, timeliness, style and fun factor, they are a very well done rendition of the rpg quest mechanics.

Fer instances, ive been doing the battle of hilsbrad quest line; my last one had me having to find a kill 4 important people, including the town clerk, magistrate, local blacksmith and notable citizen, plus destory the towns charter and steal the town registar.  It's a 4 part kill quest with 2 fedex peices on top.  But, it was a logical escalation of the other mayhem i'd been working in hilsbrad, and being a rogue, i treated it like an assassination mission where i could stealh around and eliminate my targets, steal and destroy stuff, and escape retribution.  I enjoyed it.  Now, I just as easily could have gone with a group to just kill all the people in the entire town and completed the quest by accident that way, but that didn't appeal to me nearly as much.

In short; the mechanics (or patterns) of "quests" in rpgs are the same no matter where you go; that's not what makes them fun or unfun.  It's all about the execution....again.

Xilren

[Jayce]

But, it was a logical escalation of the other mayhem i'd been working in hilsbrad, and being a rogue, i treated it like an assassination mission where i could stealh around and eliminate my targets, steal and destroy stuff, and escape retribution.  I enjoyed it. 

And you people say there's no RP in WoW.  Looks like Xilren didn't get the memo.

[StGabe]

They are the same thing, only Blizzard has at least made the wrapper (the quests) more interesting.

It has?  I think that is a very favorable read.  Blizzard has made the wrapper quests very polished certainly.  Interesting?  Umm, how?  How are 99% foozle-killing quests more interesting than the ones we had in text?

EQ2 may have had as many or more overall quests, but to me, they were of the same type and were MUCH MORE BORING.

Umm, err, how much did you play?  Don't get me wrong, EQ2 has it's faults, but I don't see how one could mention quest variety as one of them.  They have flipped over backwards to make interesting sorts of quests for different playstyles.  There are collection quests, guild raids, crafting tasks, guild-leveling tasks, race quests, zone-wide exploration quests, lots of quests that require harvesting/crafting, lore and other book quests, class quests that get their own instances, access quests, epic quests for diehard campers and even epic quests for died-in-the-wool casuals.

WoW is 99% kill-the-foozle-for-bob and are almost all casual in nature (until 60).  I was bored out of my mind with them by Stranglevale (which is also the point in the game where I think the content starts to show as quite thin).

WoW's quest system got a lot of press and fanfare and I'm really left wondering why.  It's polish, polish, and more polish with little innovation or extended gameplay.

As for alternate means of progression there are lots of things that other games have done.  Questing is a big thing.  See the EQ2player metrics and the cool titles you can get in EQ2 for doing heritages, for example.  There is meaningful PvP, see DAoC.  There are game economies that actually work after the first 6 months of the game, see SWG (but don't look to either EQ2 or WoW -- both their economies are pretty much doomed to stagnate, with WoW getting there sooner).  There is social play, guilds that are more than glorified chat channels, etc.  Look at A Tale in the Desert or Puzzle Pirates for a plethora of manners of progression.  Creating static world locations (i.e. houses) is another big form of alternate progression content.

Furthermore, there is simply investing depth into the existing treadmill.  This is a very real form of content.  WoW has a very short treadmill (as does SWG for example).  A lot that has to do with the fact that it simply doesn't have the depth to support a longer treadmill.  If levels didn't wizz by players would be much more apt to realize that zero risk soloing of blues for 60 levels (with occasional breaks to party for quests) wasn't really very deep or meaningful gameplay. 

Look at things from this perspective: why do games fail to deliver lots of content at release?  Ok, art assets and such are an issue, definitely.  But a lot of these games are investing huge amounts of time into the new, amazing systems that they are going to unleash on the world.  WoW went the route of simply deciding not to invest any time at all into any innovative systems whatsoever.  Ok, that's a design choice.  What they got was a really polished, simple, accessible game.  What they lost is a lot of depth to that content.  In the end did they really end up with more content because all of it is fairly 1-dimensional?  I think it better to say that they just lumped all their efforts into one form of content.

---

ell, that ignores the "get the ammo to some dude and watch as some dwarves practice on a shooting range", it ignores "give this to the prisoner in the cellar and watch him turn into a zombie and fall apart", it ignores "give this potion to the young woman so that she can secretly meet with her lover", it ignores "explore the strange pool in that oasis, then see what it does with these seeds"...

If I'm really interested in a good story I'll just pickup a book.  And when I do, I'll likely stay up until 3am reading a couple hundreds pages.  All of that nifty quest dialogue (which sure, is nifty) is tisel probably only about 200 pages worth.

There is a adage about writing that goes like this: "show don't tell".  And it's something that any decent writer needs to learn.  I would say that MUD's/MMO's (the two wards are interchangeable to me) are in the process of learning how to show instead of telling.  WoW tells with reckless abandon.  It tells me that I'm a hero, it tells me that I just saved the day, etc.  And all I really care about is the new quest item I got because eventually I realize that this is all that really matters in the context of the virtual world.  I.e. what matters is what actually happens gamewise, not storywise, because being told that I'm a great hero for the 15th time through some concocted NPC plot loses its charm awfully quick.

What we need, and what I think other games are stumbling to give (to greater and lesser degrees) are games that show you that you are a hero by giving you game reasons to realize your hero-status.  I.e. you are a hero not because npc_01 told you that you are but because you actually did something, in the game, that was heroic in terms of real game actions.

Feeling that way, when I read quest text I will enjoy it -- for about the 15-30s it takes me to read, and then I will move on to what matters, actually playing the game.  What will actually make me feel somewhat heroic is saving someone's ass when they are about to get killed by a mob, pulling off some amazing move that saves my group, capturing a PvP castle, etc. -- stuff that actually involves heroic action instead of  a short grind followed by an NPC's transparent attempts at praise.

[Margalis]

I would have to agree here. 95% or so of the WOW quests are of the basic kill X or collect X variety. The cool quest is the exception.

In addition, quest text doesn't get you very far. It's all well and good that the quest text was super-interesting, but in the end I'm still just collecting X tiger hides or Y poison sacs or whatever. As soon as you are done reading the text that's it.

You know what would be cool? If you went on a quest to kill some Centaurs, and the Centaurs said "holy shit, there's the guy who killed my brother let's get him!" and then you quest changed to "live for 5 minutes!" That's showing.

What you guys are talking about is window dressing. The window is the same. Throw a sheet over a shitty couch and it's still a shitty couch. So this time I'm killing 20 centaurs to collect their armbands, and next time it's because they stole some supplies, and the time after that it's because I need some centuar tailes for a potion or some shit. Only the explanatory text is changing.

I have no problem with nice exposition. But that's step 1.
----

I think I'm in the minority here but if I have the choice between killing what I want where I want and doing quests that are just "kill X of Y" I'll take option A and just do what I want. If I feel like collecting those centaur armbands I will, if I don't I'll go do something else. Maybe I'll just go kill some scorpions because I like the look of that zone better.

[WindupAtheist]

What if one of the centaurs gave his side of the story, and then asked you to go back and kill the guy who wants them dead?  Then you'd have, you know, a choice.

[StGabe]

What if one of the centaurs gave his side of the story, and then asked you to go back and kill the guy who wants them dead?  Then you'd have, you know, a choice.

Then most of the players would just look up the quest and do whatever had the best reward.  Of those who didn't half would get something cool and half would go whine to the forums that they didn't know they were missing out on CoolItemX when by taking the Centaur's side and demand a chance to do the other side of the quest or have it reset (or they'll go play EQ2 of course ).

Flavor text is just flavor.  What matters is anything that actually has a game effect.  I think one of the most common mistakes that players make is thinking that the text actually matters more than that -- to them or to other people.  They think that the world is what someone says it is and not actually what things you can happen in it, i.e. the game mechanics.

StGabe.

[Jayce]

Umm, err, how much did you play?  Don't get me wrong, EQ2 has it's faults, but I don't see how one could mention quest variety as one of them.  They have flipped over backwards to make interesting sorts of quests for different playstyles.  There are collection quests, guild raids, crafting tasks, guild-leveling tasks, race quests, zone-wide exploration quests, lots of quests that require harvesting/crafting, lore and other book quests, class quests that get their own instances, access quests, epic quests for diehard campers and even epic quests for died-in-the-wool casuals.

I wonder how much you played WoW?  WoW has many of the above:
Collection quests, check.  Guild raids, check. Crafting tasks, check.  Guild-leveling, no, as that concept doesn't exist.  Race quests, check.  Exploration, check.  Harvesting/crafting, check.  Lore, check.  Class, check. Access, I'm not sure what you mean by this.  Epic quests, check (probably not for casuals though, at least not specifically for them).

So let's see, 9/12.  Not too bad.

Being short of time, as to the rest of your post, I'll just say that agree with some of the things you said, but not others.

edit:spelling

[Toast]

WoW went the route of simply deciding not to invest any time at all into any innovative systems whatsoever.  Ok, that's a design choice.

Combat system
Diverse combat styles offer unique gameplay. Rogues use combo points. Warriors use rage. Shamen have totems. Talent trees offer real class differentiation (Combat rogue versus assassination rogue; Shadow spec priest versus healing)

Crafting system
Most accessible and fun crafting system that I have seen in this genre.

[Ironwood]

Don't forget useful - I have shoddy leatherworking skills for my hunter, yet I am able to MAKE better armor than I'm finding.  And then upgrade it with MY OWN armor mods.  I find this to be more than a little cool.

[Sky]

WoW is 99% kill-the-foozle-for-bob and are almost all casual in nature (until 60).  I was bored out of my mind with them by Stranglevale (which is also the point in the game where I think the content starts to show as quite thin).

I mentioned another mid 40 level area, Ferelas, that I had been hanging out in. The last few days I've been over in Tanaris. Seeing that you think that the only thing to do for mid40s is hang out in STV, it's easy to see why you think 99% of WoW's quest are kill x mobs.

Because you're a fucking moron.

[HaemishM]

StGabe, you are starting to sound like one of those assholes who complain in early beta message boards that levelling pace is too quick and that you should "earn" your levels (whatever the fuck that means). If so, stop it. That's one of the main reasons most MMOG's suck, some of the players and designers think that earning the fun is more important than being entertained.

I don't see any of the quests in EQ2 making any more impact on the "world" than WoW. Access quests are just gated content, cockblock moves by game designers who are too lazy to make content challenging or fun, they just want to elongate your subscription. Especially when you meld that access quest to a minimum level.

No, WoW did not innovate. But when you log in, you have things to do that are fairly fun, provided you like the underlying gameplay itself. And unlike most MMOG's at release, it is pretty consistently that way throughout the life of your character's progression. During my time in WoW, I never felt like I needed to go do nothing but sit in one place and kill the same mobs over and over. I always had a quest to do something, and even though at heart, most of them are just "kill x to get y" it was still an assload more interesting than any of the time I spent in EQ2. I saw nothing at all innovative about EQ2, nor do I see anything innovative about WoW.

Well, other than WoW was fun, and EQ2 wasn't.

[WindupAtheist]

Then most of the players would just look up the quest and do whatever had the best reward.

Oh noes!   

Of those who didn't half would get something cool and half would go whine to the forums that they didn't know they were missing out on CoolItemX when by taking the Centaur's side and demand a chance to do the other side of the quest or have it reset (or they'll go play EQ2 of course ).

Except that they were told what each of the rewards would be, prior to making their decision.  And fuck forum whiners.

[StGabe]

If so, stop it. That's one of the main reasons most MMOG's suck, some of the players and designers think that earning the fun is more important than being entertained.

No offense, but that is a very unenlightened view of things.  No game designer sets out to make an unfun game.  It's just a stupid idea that wouldn't make any money.  What MUD designers do set out to do, however, is create games that spawn longterm gameplay.  Achievement is fun, well for a large amount of players anyway.  Don't you think that if it really more fun to just give players level 60 at the start and have done with it, that this would have been realized long before muds even got graphical? 

That which is dubbed a treadmill is really a way of setting up a long journey through your game.  While many games can of course make that journey dull and tedious, that is bad design and not some inherent weakness in the treadmill system.  A game that has a shorter treadmill is offering a shorter journey through its world -- i.e. has less content.  Saying that the treadmill is just making you "earn" content is missing the entire point.  What is any RPG (massive or not) but a sequence of challenges that you overcome leading you to the next set of challenges.

A game designer must seek to give his game the depth that will allow players to spend a lot of time "earning" the next step of the system (so that they will actually play longer than they would with a single-player game) without making this boring.  Those that still end up boring are, again, simply examples of bad design.  This is where WoW is relatively weak on content.

And as I said in my original post, the challenge for WoW will be not, "can it sell a lot of boxes".  Blizzard could have sold a lot of boxes of Starcraft2 of what have you, even if it wasn't that great.  It will be: can it keep players around for more than 6 months.  Actually it will probably be a year or more before we know the answer to that as they are still phasing players in.  I mean I doubt they'll lose money either way and I don't actually think it is a bad game.  I enjoyed myself thoroughly -- for about a month and a half.  I just never felt like I was really in a virtual world.  I felt more that I was in an sort of extension of Diablo 2 with no terribly deep gameplay that would keep me after I'd tired of the same copy&pasted foozle-kills.

I mentioned another mid 40 level area, Ferelas, that I had been hanging out in. The last few days I've been over in Tanaris. Seeing that you think that the only thing to do for mid40s is hang out in STV, it's easy to see why you think 99% of WoW's quest are kill x mobs.

I explored to the extent that I could.  I even spent a few hours in the badlands (I think that was it, it's been a while and I could be confused on zone names -- I was one of 3 or fewer people there most hours of the time).  Any argument that is predicated on, "you are just too stupid to find out what is reallly cool about the game" is ultimately not going to be a very successful one.  Especially with a game like WoW that otherwise bends over backwards to cater to its players.

Crafting system
Most accessible and fun crafting system that I have seen in this genre.

Crafting systems that are that simplistic (and thus accessible) existed in text muds 15 years ago.  Every single serious crafter that I knew in Beta quit crafting after a month or two.  Because the crafting system was so simplistic (not to mention inferior to non-craft options 98% of the time) that it was virtually impossible to sustain any longterm gameplay there.  The EQ2 system is slightly better (and has some pretty interesting insights) but is also doomed to stagnate like WoW's -- it will just take longer.

Diverse combat styles offer unique gameplay. Rogues use combo points. Warriors use rage. Shamen have totems. Talent trees offer real class differentiation (Combat rogue versus assassination rogue; Shadow spec priest versus healing)

This drew me to WoW initially, I thought it had a lot of potential.  Unfortunately the boring character customization and the lack of variety in abilities made it still a very shallow system -- in my opinion of course.  I was saddened to find that the resulting system was less interesting than D2's (which had a lot to do with the fact that I actually kept my interest in D2 longer than I kept my interest in WoW).

StGabe.

[StGabe]

Except that they were told what each of the rewards would be, prior to making their decision.  And fuck forum whiners.

Then the only impact of your cool flavor is that players get a choice about their reward which is hardly something new.  You are still using static, boring NPC flavor text to attempt to simulate actual choice (which players will ignore and simply take whatever is optimal for their character -- which is the point of my post) instead of creating world-like situations where real choices that actually matter within the physics of the world (i.e. game mechanics) take place.

StGabe.

[StGabe]

Don't forget useful - I have shoddy leatherworking skills for my hunter, yet I am able to MAKE better armor than I'm finding.  And then upgrade it with MY OWN armor mods.  I find this to be more than a little cool.

It is.  But it has a very finite window of content.  The higher you climb in levels the less interesting it is (as it becomes easier to simply find better stuff with quests/loot) and when you cap out at 60 you are essentially done with crafting.  It doesn't create any continuing game content like the crafting system of SWG did.

I had a lot of fun blacksmithing until I did everything there was to do.  The market was fun and cool except that what happened over and over again was that the pool of blacksmiths making item X would eventually fill into the point where it became impossible to sell at a profit.  This cascaded up through the levels.  I stayed a little bit ahead of it and so I actually made a profit for a while.  I could sell Jade Serpentblades, for a while, for example, until enough plans for those made it out to different blacksmiths that the market became flooded and it was impossible again to sell at profit (i.e. you couldn't actually buy the components for less than you could sell the item for).

Thus crafting in WoW (and EQ2 and other games) is a source of disposable content, and not a source of sustainable gameplay.  In the end it isn't accomplishing stuff that isn't already done very well in single-player games.  That's not always a bad thing, single-player games can be very fun.  In fact I think it is by channeling successes in single-player games that WoW manages to create an initially very gratifying, polished experience.  The cost however is in the depth of the longterm game.

StGabe.

[HaemishM]

Ahh, I see the issue. You think content should take months and months and months for even the most hardest of catasses to traverse through. You are a hardcore powergamer.

WoW isn't for you, unless you happen to belong to an uberguild that likes to raid the same shit over and over again until taking down the dungeon is the most scientifically efficient, least fun task ever. WoW is very much meant for someone who doesn't necessarily feel that they HAVE to play every night.

No, it isn't a virtual world, nor was it meant to be. You're one of THOSE types, then. Which means you belong in the group of people that includes Windup Atheist, and should go back to UO or MUD's, because nothing out there is going to satisfy you. Those of us who want to play a game will be over here, playing a game and enjoying it.

WoW has assloads of content, it just doesn't take assloads of time to get through that content.

As for simplistic crafting, it's again crafting for casual players. Anyone can pick it up and make something useful. I think that is a good thing, an improvement over previous iterations of MMOG's, if not an innovation.

Really, if you expected WoW to be innovative, you haven't been paying attention to Blizzard for the last 10 years or so.

[StGabe]

Which means you belong in the group of people that includes Windup Atheist, and should go back to UO or MUD's, because nothing out there is going to satisfy you. Those of us who want to play a game will be over here, playing a game and enjoying it.

Uhh, no.  But thanks for trying to uselessly pigeon hole and stereotype me away so that you don't have to talk to me.  The last two MMO's I played lasted me a year and 2 year respectively.  Ultimately I had very rewarding experiences with them and while I realize that these games had significant problems, I think that overall they were a ton of fun.  It just happens that I got bored out of my mind with WoW after only a month and a half and I don't view it with the same bambi eyes that you guys have.

The more I think about it the more I realize that why WoW works is that it is only marginally an MMO.  It is really, 90% a single-player game.  And we know that single-player games can be fun.  But a lot of us want more out of a world.  For all the people who whinge about EQ2 and SWG, they actually are doing pretty well and they do have a large audience.  I love how everyone talks about EQ2's mediocrity at "only" 300k or so subscribers and yet never delves into the real game -- which actually has quite a bit of depth if you look at it.  There is just so much SOE angst out there that people were lined up for blocks ready to say that EQ2 was mediocre before they knew anything about it, and they're still doing it and still don't know that much about it.  I'm not even a fanboy, I stopped playing EQ1 about 5 years ago and I think that EQ2 like all MMO's has it's share of problems.

WoW is a polished, heavily single-player, solo, casual experience.  And I've praised it for what its successes as this.  But let's not kid ourselves here.  Other games don't go for more detailed, sustaining gameplay just because their designers are S&M freaks.  They do it because many players do enjoy complex, sustaining game systems, they do like long, epic-style progressions.

That Blizzard has succeeded through creating this ultimately polished but not very deep experience isn't some huge lesson for the MMO industry (no more than Lineage, with its huge subscriptions, is) or an indictment of EQ2.  Really I think it's just, like I've said, a sort of channeling of single-player successes invested into an MMO to create a sort of extended, more world-like D2.

StGabe.

[StGabe]

Really, if you expected WoW to be innovative, you haven't been paying attention to Blizzard for the last 10 years or so.

Where did I ever say that I did?  I  I actually expected something quite a bit like what Blizzard put out.  And I expected it to sell a shitload of boxes -- but always wondered if it could manage good retention (still an open and interesting question).

I think you are replying not to me, but to some stereotype you have of me.

StGabe.

[StGabe]

Oops, mispost.

[Jayce]

The last two MMO's I played lasted me a year and 2 year respectively. 

I don't know that how long you played means anything here.  The question is, did you have max-level characters?  Multiple ones? 

WoW is designed for people like me, to wit:  I've had one character.  I've played since release.  He's level 41.  I don't have enough money for a mount.

[StGabe]

The question is, did you have max-level characters?  Multiple ones? 

Yes, and no.  And in one of those games, no I didn't hit max level.

StGabe.

[Phred]

I have to agree with others. The only excuse for thinking that STV is the only place to level is not spending any time exploring or even reading the few quests that send you to other zones. Off the top of my head a few other zones in the same level range are, southern thousand needles, desolace, Arathi Highlands, Duskwallow marsh, and the badlands. It's not the game's fault you didn't go looking if you got bored with STV. There are also a few instances geared to the 30+ crowd.

I believe he's talking about EQ2's zone access quests. I think the only comparable thing WoW has is the quests for shortcut/backdoor access to instances. Personally, when I heard you had to quest for access to zones in EQ2 I didn't think much of the idea, but then guild experience sounds pretty lame IMO as well.

After having played EQ fairly steadily over 5 years I'm very impressed with WoW. I find the different play styles required for each class very fun, I think the zone design kicks EQ out of the top spot, and personally I like the questing style, which is just as good as any single player game I've played if you actually read the flavor text rather than just going to thottbot and looking up the answer. Compared to the quests in original EQ, WoW is a breath of fresh air, with no endless camps for rare spawns from rare mobs.

Sadly WoW seems to have a fundamental flaw in it's database architecture which they seem to be trying to fix with the tried and true throw more hardware at it technique. I'm really tired of the loot lag and server crashes.

 

[Xilren's Twin]

The more I think about it the more I realize that why WoW works is that it is only marginally an MMO.  It is really, 90% a single-player game.  And we know that single-player games can be fun.  But a lot of us want more out of a world.  For all the people who whinge about EQ2 and SWG, they actually are doing pretty well and they do have a large audience.  I love how everyone talks about EQ2's mediocrity at "only" 300k or so subscribers and yet never delves into the real game -- which actually has quite a bit of depth if you look at it.  There is just so much SOE angst out there that people were lined up for blocks ready to say that EQ2 was mediocre before they knew anything about it, and they're still doing it and still don't know that much about it.  I'm not even a fanboy, I stopped playing EQ1 about 5 years ago and I think that EQ2 like all MMO's has it's share of problems.

WoW is a polished, heavily single-player, solo, casual experience.  And I've praised it for what its successes as this.  But let's not kid ourselves here.  Other games don't go for more detailed, sustaining gameplay just because their designers are S&M freaks.  They do it because many players do enjoy complex, sustaining game systems, they do like long, epic-style progressions.

That Blizzard has succeeded through creating this ultimately polished but not very deep experience isn't some huge lesson for the MMO industry (no more than Lineage, with its huge subscriptions, is) or an indictment of EQ2.  Really I think it's just, like I've said, a sort of channeling of single-player successes invested into an MMO to create a sort of extended, more world-like D2.

But here's the thing, many of us jaded mmorpg types have come to the realization that a truly deep and dynamic virtual world isn't really what we want, b/c of whole host of issues we're learned about by playing.  And the biggest single problem with the concept is also the one that makes it possible at all; random other people sharing your gamespace.  Having long recognized the absolute assmuchery of 90% or more of the population of ANY such game, the concept of allowing said chuckleheads to have large, meaningful impacts on my game world (b/c it is all about my and only my personal enjoyment after all) is no longer desirable.

That's why in terms of such deep and player responsive worlds, I'm much more interested in seeing something like NWN brought forward; very small population worlds that can be unique with controls on who gets to particiapte in them.  If us lazy bastards would ever put together a persistant mud/NWN world for just the f13 regulars, it would probably be much closer to what you want.

But in terms on a truly large scale (in players) game aimed and the mass market? No way in hell I'm looking for such a virtual world.

I'm settling for a entertaining game that I can play in limited fashion and enjoy.  And thats WoW (and Coh) for now.  I'm not looking for another title i would even WANT to stay subscribed to for 1-2 years and I suspect I'm not alone in that.  Mass market games are all about delivering fun stuff on demand.  So, while I am interested in seeing how subs hold up, I suspect there will be much less bleed off than you expect.  The hardcore gamers will be moving on the next new game anyway (or still raiding new instances and battlegrounds for gear); the non hardcord will probably still be playing along and having fun at their less than meteoric rates.  But make no mistake, the market has spoken; they want GAMES not life commitments.

Makes me wonder what sort of average account lifespan Blizzard was making in their projections.  I would advise thinking you can hold gamers attention (and money) for a full year on average to now be a thing of the past.

Oh yeah, one last thing.  While I would enjoy more varied game mechanics, if given a choice between 1 well executed a fun mechanic and 10 half asses unfinished ones, guess where i'm voting?  Right, for the 1 that works...  Take what works and build on it; in that respect, WoW is a step in the right direction just by getting the "it works!" part done.

Xilren