Blizzard starting work on 'Next-Gen MMO'?

[WindupAtheist]

Blizzard could have shat in the box (and you can make convincing argument that they did) and as long as it is polished enough it would sell.

People bought the box because it said Blizzard on it.  That was years ago.  What's your explanation for why they're still playing it now?

WoW minimal specs are quite higher than UO/EQ/DAoC/AC at the time WoW released.

I suppose you also believe no FPS can claim "low system specs" unless it requires fewer resources than Doom, right? 

If it means I don't have to play with you fucknuts, can I claim it as a victory?

I keed, I keed!

[sinij]

I got to max level in WoW, D2 and many other DIKU titles. Trust me, I know what DIKU is and I understand (and even partially share) what DIKU's to people is.

Still that is MAJORITY of gameplay in WoW is, you get into group, you run to instance and you pull mobs and kill them... repeatedly, until you are max level. Then you do A LOT MORE of the same to get your Twhatever sets.

[Akkori]

<snip> The Blizzard name argument makes no god damn sense.  Nobody keeps playing and paying for a god damn game because it has a name written on the box.  

There are a lot of people who played (and maybe are STILL playing SWG because of the name only. It's pretty much universally accepted that the game never reached it's potential, and despite many many flaws, people play(ed). I'm not disagreeing with you, per se, but I just wanted to point out that peopl WILL play a game out of reverence to the name (IP, etc...).

[Morat20]

WoW minimal specs are quite higher than UO/EQ/DAoC/AC at the time WoW released.

Goodness! You're right. WoW's minimum specs WERE quite a bit higher than a 6 year old game and a 8 year old game. Seriously, was that meant to be an argument?

EQ required a flaming video card -- back when those things weren't cheap or common. I don't know what UO required at the time of it's launch, but WoW launched looking better and playing better on a MUCH wider variety of machines than EQ2 did, than Vanguard did, than SWG did.....

I can't speak to AC or DAoC, never having played them.

Are you trying to tell me that quests were WoW's innovation? Think about this again. Quests are almost as old as DIKU.

Can you read, or are you just playing stupid? I say quest-based leveling. Quests formed the bulk of the experience needed to level, NOT grinding. That was a major fucking change.

WoW UI was awful at release, they were just smart enough to incorporate majority of community mods into a client. Again, many games, have much better and equally open UI... just for some reason it took-in with WoW and huge UO mod community flourished that developers took clues from.

Even if WoW's launch UI was the shittiest thing ever done, the fact that they actually took cues from users was innovative -- and frankly, you're really overstating it's launch UI. It was functionable, scaleable, VERY intuitive (no necessary slash commands, for example) and was clearly transparent to new users.

So why WoW so popular, what are these KEY things they got RIGHT? Is it ONLY Blizzard name and polish at release? Does it mean that any other title they release is 100% guaranteed success, given that its equally polished? Should they just re-skin WoW every few years and release it to be massive success? Why EQ2 failed but WoW succeeded, they are identical games. What does this mean for LoTR considering that its non-Blizzard's WoW?

I can only imagine either you didn't play EQ2 at launch, you've never played WoW, or you are, in fact, so fucking blinded by the DIKU hatred as to be incapable of making any sort of realistic judgement.

EQ2 and WoW -- at launch -- had very little in common, aside from being DIKU.

[WindupAtheist]

There are a lot of people who played (and maybe are STILL playing SWG because of the name only. It's pretty much universally accepted that the game never reached it's potential, and despite many many flaws, people play(ed). I'm not disagreeing with you, per se, but I just wanted to point out that peopl WILL play a game out of reverence to the name (IP, etc...).

A certain number of people will, but SWG never reached it's potential in subscribers, either.

[Ironwood]

Murray the Hydralisk Zerg.  That's awesome.

[Simond]

Anyone else getting 'Life of Brian' vibes from Sinji? "Apart from releasing a mostly-complete, fun to play, system friendly Everquest-done-right with quest-based levelling, an adaptable UI, artful graphics, and bringing MMOGs to a wider audience than anything before...what have Blizzard ever done for us, eh?"

[schild]

Blizzard really is about 90% of the popularity. There's no question at this point.

I'd question that.  I'm sure it helps, but there are a lot of big name companies with big name licenses which haven't had nearly the success that Blizzard has.  Square can sell crap in a can as long as it's got a "Final Fantasy" label on it, but Final Fantasy XI capped at what, 500k subs?  Less than 10% of World of Warcraft?  Is Square really that gimp compared to Blizzard?  I suspect that most of it's popularity is just because it's popular (like Counterstrike; everyone played Counterstrike, even if it wmistake.asn't their favorite game, because it was so universal, not because they had some deep reverence for the dev team).

Final Fantasy is a mixed bag. World of Warcraft was made with the Warcraft mythos in mind and could run on anything. FFXI was a $100 PS2 game, a $60 360 game and a game that couldn't run on most PCs. It was not based on any known FF world. It was not a familiar set of rules for the universe. And most importantly - PC games don't mean shit in Japan. And Final Fantasy doesn't mean shit to PC Gamers in America. Anyway, this is the sort of thing - despite being very popular - that I call a "judgement error."

As for Sinij in this thread, his insanity in this particular situation shines because of us knowing his fanaticism about UO and general inability to participate in an argument. That doesn't change the fact that WoW sets the bar for mediocrity. 8,000,000 people can be wrong and often are. But once again, with numbers like that, who gives a flying fuck what they do or how the game plays. They pull in more money than some countries and at the end of the day, that's what this is about.

And finally, for those trying to take that "name doesn't mean that much" bullshit. Really? It doesn't? Then why am I practically swooning over Diablo Online when I know Blizzard North has been gutted and spread between four different companies? Why aren't I waving a 4 section flag over my head with Arena.Net, Red 5, Perpetual and Flagship on it? BECAUSE I WANT DIABLO. AND I WANT IT TO SAY FUCKING BLIZZARD ON THE BOX. IP and Name does matter that much and you know it.

[tkinnun0]

That doesn't change the fact that WoW sets the bar for mediocrity. 8,000,000 people can be wrong and often are.

If WoW only had 150000 people, they would set the bar for excellence. In other words, they raised the average so much that their deficiencies and the deficiencies of the whole genre became readily apparent. For this they cannot be praised enough.

And finally, for those trying to take that "name doesn't mean that much" bullshit. Really? It doesn't? Then why am I practically swooning over Diablo Online when I know Blizzard North has been gutted and spread between four different companies? Why aren't I waving a 4 section flag over my head with Arena.Net, Red 5, Perpetual and Flagship on it? BECAUSE I WANT DIABLO. AND I WANT IT TO SAY FUCKING BLIZZARD ON THE BOX. IP and Name does matter that much and you know it.

That might be insanity. It might also be that Diablo was your first MMOloot-based-whatever and you can't get over your first until you've been burned by your second.

Seriously, go play Diablo 2 from level 1 to 99 and then see if you ever want to play Diablo anything ever again. I tried to play D2 a year ago and I couldn't get to level 2 before remembering all the ways it sucked. I remembered all the improvements that would remove the suck, too. However, the resulting game wouldn't be Diablo, it would be an improved WoW.

Diablo is obsolete. And you clinging on to the Blizzard name is just refusing to accept that.

[Phred]

I got to max level in WoW, D2 and many other DIKU titles. Trust me, I know what DIKU is and I understand (and even partially share) what DIKU's to people is.

Still that is MAJORITY of gameplay in WoW is, you get into group, you run to instance and you pull mobs and kill them... repeatedly, until you are max level. Then you do A LOT MORE of the same to get your Twhatever sets.

I guess that might be the experience on a PvP server, but it's doesn't bear any resemblence to how people do it on PvE servers, where people do quests all day long, not pull mobs non-stop in instances.

Refering back to your claim that lots of games have the flexibility of WoW's ui. Do you even understand the difference between a programming language like lua and an xml file? Every other game with a customizable ui only allows reskinning, which is downright primitive after being able to write programs that sit there and cooperate with the main program to help your playing. Try writing (or even finding) a mod for EQ2, or LoTR or any other game you can name with a custimizable ui that does half what a WoW mod does. Good luck.

I'm not a fanboi, in fact I quit WoW last month but seeing such ignorance expressed as fact is too much to bear. Just cop to hating the damn game and stfu.

[schild]

Tikunnun0: I'm trying to figure out how to respond to you here, but saying that removing the suck from Diablo would make it WoW is just too incredibly bizarre to properly argue. A WoW with the option to start a character who can actually die wouldn't be WoW. And removing the Chasing the Exact Same Shiny aspect of WoW would remove it even further from WoW. Raids suck, man. And on top of that, there's no point in WoW that I've seen where your character is more than a well equipped peon. A well-equipped peon who has the same gear as everyone else no less. You're talking about adding suck to my Diablo, not removing it. And that's just crazytalk to me. You may as well have just written "pehpehpehpehpehpeh" for six lines.

-

Everyone else: What is with this UI nonsense? It's a fucking GUI. While bad GUIs are just that, they're bad. I would never base the quality of a game on a GUI though. I mean, who gives a shit? No matter what the GUI looks like it's still just a game of hotkey memorization and response. I'm not going to prop Diablo up to be more than that, but arguing it as a Point for WoW is just something I have trouble wrapping my head around.

[Typhon]

IP and Name does matter that much and you know it.

Not 90%.  Not for most people.  SWG is a terrible example.  That fan base is wonky.  It's like the StarTrek fanbase.  Make a MMO game using the StarTrek IP and no matter how much it sucks, you'll still keep a couple hundred thousand people who use the game as a StarTrek-themed chat engine.  That doesn't mean Blizzard, or any other game IP can do the same thing.

A better example is Master of Orion 3.  Yes, name/IP caused me to buy the game.  Craptacular gameplay made me return it.  I don't think anyone is arguing that name won't bring users to the door, but they aren't going to come in and stay for a couple years if the game blows.

Additionally, look at DDO.   Game has tremendous IP, and a fanbase that could be expected to be wonky.  Yet the game was underwhelming and people are staying away in droves.

[schild]

Dungeons & Dragons isn't really a name. I mean, it is, it's a brand. But under that brand are where the names are. Dragonlance, Forgotten Realms, Planescape, etc. Instead of going for one of the well-established, interesting, and most importantly - loved - IPs under D&D, they went another direction. There's failure all around on that game but just slapping Dungeons and Dragons on it doesn't really guarantee anything.

How many times do I have to point out that the Star Wars and Star Trek fanbase is filled with people who aren't gamers. Blizzard's fanbase - and their millions and millions of boxes sold - can be fully attributed to how Blizzard functions as a company. Everything they do targets the gamer and their fanbase is legion. It is in the gaming industry and speaks directly to it. Yes, boxes and boxes of Star Wars and Star Trek games are sold on name alone. But I don't think a single title from either one of those IPs has ever sold as much as a Warcraft or Diablo title or Starcraft. Except maybe Warcraft 1. Blizzard puts out well-polished and tight titles often lacking in the innovation department but perfecting and thus profiting off the rest of the industries failures. WoW has snowballed into a phenomenon sure, but that fanbase is more likely to stay with Blizzard than touch any other company's product.

[Typhon]

Clearly Blizzard needs to get off their laurels and release a suck-fest so that we can prove once and for all who's right.  What the hell are they waiting for?!

[schild]

Clearly Blizzard needs to get off their laurels and release a suck-fest so that we can prove once and for all who's right.  What the hell are they waiting for?!

Blizzard doesn't release suck fests. Your response gives me a divide by zero error. On the other hand, I'd love them to give me something so innovative and exciting that I have interest in a Visa with its logo on it.

[Simond]

Brand name recognition with gamers + mmog = success?
What about The Sims Online, then?

Edit: I'm also not buying the SW fans <> gamers. If that were true, Lucasarts would have gone bankrupt a decade ago.

[Nija]

Sinji, you're trolling with the wrong engine.

Stop scaring away all the fish.

[Yegolev]

Seriously, go play Diablo 2 from level 1 to 99 and then see if you ever want to play Diablo anything ever again.
...
Diablo is obsolete. And you clinging on to the Blizzard name is just refusing to accept that.

Dead.  Inside.

I weep for the etheral hollow that once constrained your soul and/or ability to love.

Also, even though I joked about Diablo 3, know this: any Blizzard employee(s) that went to South Korea to make a BIG ANNOUNCEMENT and subsequently announced something non-StarCrafty would never leave the stage alive.

[Slayerik]

Me and some friends have been playing Diablo 2 Lord of Destruction multiplayer, using Hamachi

Its fun stuff.

Though its about time for some hardcore action. Hey Schildy, wanna get in on some hardcore with me 

[SnakeCharmer]

Am I the only person on the planet who never played Starcraft?

Nah, you're not.

[Akkori]

Clearly Blizzard needs to get off their laurels and release a suck-fest so that we can prove once and for all who's right.  What the hell are they waiting for?!

Blizzard doesn't release suck fests. Your response gives me a divide by zero error. On the other hand, I'd love them to give me something so innovative and exciting that I have interest in a Visa with its logo on it.

Would it be safe to say that pursuing such a goal is what leads to pages of scorn about the resulting game when things don't go as planned? If I absorbed some of the remarks properly, it would appear that Blizzard was not "innovative" in their design of WoW, but simply took what others had tried and failed with and made it right. Sorta like how my sister saw how I got punished for doing something when we were kids, and didn't do it herself, saving her from some pain. I give them marks for listening to the players and putting in tools where the players can feel like a part of the process.

But isn't that because of the fact that they make a lot of money and are ABLE to do those things? WHat it seems to boil down to is that first, the Warcraft IP is much more valuable to the *gaming* market that many other's, and second, money makes things happen. Was WoW great right from launch, or did it take them a month or two to get things in gear? The absolute FLOOD of money that began poring into their pockets after launch sure would have helped to solve any problems they had.

This is why I asked earlier why it was that someone like Blizzard didn't "sponsor" the games/companies that chased after the new game shinies. If anyone can ensure a revolutionary piece of code that changes the way we play games, it's got to be someone with the money to see it through... or someone supporting someone else who does it.

[Nija]

Seriously, go play Diablo 2 from level 1 to 99 and then see if you ever want to play Diablo anything ever again.

I've had 4 different level 99 D2 characters over the years.

[robusticus]

it's got to be someone with the money to see it through... or someone supporting someone else who does it.

You all are seriously downplaying the value of marketing via a global media company (Vivendi Universal).

Sure, WoW is solo/quest friendly, has low specs, no death penalty... but there is something about the way Vivendi games grab noobs and turn them into hardcore fanboys with a mission to make everyone they know play the game.  It may not be Vivendi so much as maybe perhaps Sierra, I don't know for sure.

And $50 or $80 million or whatever for development doesn't hurt, either.

Next Blizzard project?  Eve Online with instances and no looting other players.

[Lantyssa]

Are you trying to tell me that quests were WoW's innovation? Think about this again. Quests are almost as old as DIKU.

Can you read, or are you just playing stupid? I say quest-based leveling. Quests formed the bulk of the experience needed to level, NOT grinding. That was a major fucking change.

Sinij, quests weren't standard for DIKU.  DIKU had plenty of mob grinding, but the stock code had almost no quests what-so-ever.  Adding them is a pain in the ass as each required individual coding.  We started adding special mob procs to let creative zone builders put in mini-quests, but even then all the quests revolved around getting items, maybe gold, leveling past 99, but never xp.

[Lantyssa]

How many times do I have to point out that the Star Wars and Star Trek fanbase is filled with people who aren't gamers. Blizzard's fanbase - and their millions and millions of boxes sold - can be fully attributed to how Blizzard functions as a company. Everything they do targets the gamer and their fanbase is legion. It is in the gaming industry and speaks directly to it. Yes, boxes and boxes of Star Wars and Star Trek games are sold on name alone. But I don't think a single title from either one of those IPs has ever sold as much as a Warcraft or Diablo title or Starcraft. Except maybe Warcraft 1. Blizzard puts out well-polished and tight titles often lacking in the innovation department but perfecting and thus profiting off the rest of the industries failures. WoW has snowballed into a phenomenon sure, but that fanbase is more likely to stay with Blizzard than touch any other company's product.

Raph and others have said SWG sold at least a million boxes.  The crappy gameplay kept people from continuing and word of mouth kept the curious away.

The name gets the initial surge (Blizzard will have more than most), but their experience is what draws or keeps away additional players.  WoW would not be so successful without the people who never heard of Blizzard before.

[Yegolev]

Eve Online with instances and no looting other players.

What sort of game would that be?  EQ2 in space?

[Morat20]

Clearly Blizzard needs to get off their laurels and release a suck-fest so that we can prove once and for all who's right.  What the hell are they waiting for?!

Blizzard doesn't release suck fests. Your response gives me a divide by zero error. On the other hand, I'd love them to give me something so innovative and exciting that I have interest in a Visa with its logo on it.

Would it be safe to say that pursuing such a goal is what leads to pages of scorn about the resulting game when things don't go as planned? If I absorbed some of the remarks properly, it would appear that Blizzard was not "innovative" in their design of WoW, but simply took what others had tried and failed with and made it right. Sorta like how my sister saw how I got punished for doing something when we were kids, and didn't do it herself, saving her from some pain. I give them marks for listening to the players and putting in tools where the players can feel like a part of the process.

But isn't that because of the fact that they make a lot of money and are ABLE to do those things? WHat it seems to boil down to is that first, the Warcraft IP is much more valuable to the *gaming* market that many other's, and second, money makes things happen. Was WoW great right from launch, or did it take them a month or two to get things in gear? The absolute FLOOD of money that began poring into their pockets after launch sure would have helped to solve any problems they had.

This is why I asked earlier why it was that someone like Blizzard didn't "sponsor" the games/companies that chased after the new game shinies. If anyone can ensure a revolutionary piece of code that changes the way we play games, it's got to be someone with the money to see it through... or someone supporting someone else who does it.

Actually, my opinion on Blizzard's success is that they -- more than most gaming shops -- have implemented professional quality software development processes, and that their shop culture revolves around it. Judging by the way they develop, they seem to have adapted evolutionary development to the game industry quite well, have a mature and rigorous process, and have talented designers, developers, and artists who fully buy into doing things "the right way".

Too many shops run by the solo-hacker method of development, or it's team-based equivilant. Makes development slow, but you can see the benefits over the long-term.

[SnakeCharmer]

How many times do I have to point out that the Star Wars and Star Trek fanbase is filled with people who aren't gamers. Blizzard's fanbase - and their millions and millions of boxes sold - can be fully attributed to how Blizzard functions as a company. Everything they do targets the gamer and their fanbase is legion. It is in the gaming industry and speaks directly to it. Yes, boxes and boxes of Star Wars and Star Trek games are sold on name alone. But I don't think a single title from either one of those IPs has ever sold as much as a Warcraft or Diablo title or Starcraft. Except maybe Warcraft 1. Blizzard puts out well-polished and tight titles often lacking in the innovation department but perfecting and thus profiting off the rest of the industries failures. WoW has snowballed into a phenomenon sure, but that fanbase is more likely to stay with Blizzard than touch any other company's product.

Raph and others have said SWG sold at least a million boxes.  The crappy gameplay kept people from continuing and word of mouth kept the curious away.

The name gets the initial surge (Blizzard will have more than most), but their experience is what draws or keeps away additional players.  WoW would not be so successful without the people who never heard of Blizzard before.

Not that it really matters much, but SWG sold a mil boxes about a year and a half after launch.  Although I wonder what percentage of those was people buying extra accounts and dual / triple boxing it.

[sinij]

it would appear that Blizzard was not "innovative" in their design of WoW

By elimination method only reason for success that is left is fact that  Blizzard does not innovate. Is it why Blizz's so success? Polished mediocrity sells?

[Simond]

it would appear that Blizzard was not "innovative" in their design of WoW

By elimination method only reason for success that is left is fact that  Blizzard does not innovate. Is it why Blizz's so success? Polished mediocrity sells?

Hello, and welcome to the real world. Enjoy your stay.

[Furiously]

it would appear that Blizzard was not "innovative" in their design of WoW

By elimination method only reason for success that is left is fact that  Blizzard does not innovate. Is it why Blizz's so success? Polished mediocrity sells?

The Honda Civic is a nice car isn't it...

[tkinnun0]

I've had 4 different level 99 D2 characters over the years.

Congratulations, you have conquered your Everest many times.

Here are the things that sucked in Diablo 2 as I remember them:

• You can permanently gimp your character with your stat and talent point allocation.
• The talent system rewards you for saving your talent points.
• The zones are lifeless. There is no unforgettable scenery.
• You have to grind for exp to keep up with quests, especially later.
• There is no path to getting a better piece of equipment, just grinding.
• The UI with its click-click-click and the choose-skill/use-skill distinction.
• The endless grind and repeating quests if you want to beat the game by creating a perfect character.

If Blizzard were to make Diablo Online that fixed those, a) it wouldn't be Diablo as y'all remember and b) when it finally released, it would be to WoW as EQ2 at launch was to EQ.

[sinij]

it would appear that Blizzard was not "innovative" in their design of WoW

By elimination method only reason for success that is left is fact that  Blizzard does not innovate. Is it why Blizz's so success? Polished mediocrity sells?

The Honda Civic is a nice car isn't it...

Does it outsell everything else by as much as WoW? I give it that there is market for polished turds in every market but you don't see 9/10 people drive Civic/Yaris/Sentra.

I'd say most represented market is low-mid class, something like Altima/Accord/Camry followed by entry luxury like BMW/Lexus/Acura.

[Furiously]

You didn't answer my question, so I won't answer yours.

[sinij]

Honda Civic is not a nice car. BMW 760 Alpina or Austin Martin are nice cars. Honda Civic is CHEAP car and people that buy them do it simply because they can't afford anything better.