75 replies to this topic

[machineman]

If you have not yet got this game, RUN out and get it as soon as possible. It is completely accessible to the casual gamer (which I am) and the quality is unmatched.

A few launch glitches (which all online games have had) but this is a VERY special game with depth and attention to detail a Mac user will appreciate.

Bill

[placebo]

In the Open Beta, there were some REALLY weird hit-detection glitches, where I'd be running away from a wolf - and it would be biting me, while trailing me by three feet! It looked like it was biting the thin air behind me, but I was losing health!

Also, another really weird bug was that everything lacked a hitbox. I could just run through people. WTF.

Another small annoyance is that you couldn't pick up quest items when you weren't on that quest, and you didn't take credit for killing beasts when you weren't on that quest. That was really annoying, because if you killed twenty harpies on your way to Orgrimmar, and then discovered a quest involving killing twenty harpies, you'd have to go out and kill twenty more!

If they fix those, I'll might consider dropping that much money per month to play it.

[Whaleman]

Quote

In the Open Beta, there were some REALLY weird hit-detection glitches, where I'd be running away from a wolf - and it would be biting me, while trailing me by three feet! It looked like it was biting the thin air behind me, but I was losing health!

This is common in most semi-turnbased games. The hit is determined from "dices" not collision detection. So they're not always hitting when they're hitting.

Quote

Also, another really weird bug was that everything lacked a hitbox. I could just run through people. WTF.

Try imagining what would happen if there wasn't. People would form guilds just to lock persons in by blocking their path. Or imagine what it would be like when 200 persons hearth back to the same in right before a server shutdown, or how it would be getting out of there right after. It's by design, and a damn good decision.

Quote

Another small annoyance is that you couldn't pick up quest items when you weren't on that quest, and you didn't take credit for killing beasts when you weren't on that quest. That was really annoying, because if you killed twenty harpies on your way to Orgrimmar, and then discovered a quest involving killing twenty harpies, you'd have to go out and kill twenty more!

Also by design. Imagine how full the backpack would be if you filled it with stuff that you thought you would be needing for future quests. And the killing # of enemies is about the same. There would be way to many quests that wouldn't be quests because you already did them because of this. I'm not saying this is good design, because killing # enemies isn't a good quest by design. In a good quest the killing is a way to the goal, not the goal itself.

Quote

If they fix those, I'll might consider dropping that much money per month to play it.

Then I guess you won't, because there's nothing to fix on that list.

Well, besides redesigning the whole game.

[placebo]

I understand the reasons, Whaleman. My post was more of a 'sour grapes' about me not being able to play WoW due to some rather, er, baroque parents.

But it still frustrates me when I can be killed by a melee attacked not even close to me. But I'm a UT nut, so anything not completely solid and concrete bothers me.

[Gafgarion]

Quote

If you have not yet got this game, RUN out and get it as soon as possible. It is completely accessible to the casual gamer (which I am) and the quality is unmatched.

Well, except for the fact that it's boring as hell and Blizzard chose a "dead world" model, rather than a dynamic world model.

Certainly not worth $15 a month in its current state. However, I never found doing Meph runs over and over again in Diablo 2 fun (many people did, and I can see why they enjoy WoW) either.

[placebo]

Quote

Quote

If you have not yet got this game, RUN out and get it as soon as possible. It is completely accessible to the casual gamer (which I am) and the quality is unmatched.

Well, except for the fact that it's boring as hell and Blizzard chose a "dead world" model, rather than a dynamic world model.

Oh PLEASE, could you dumb it down into terms that a simple man like myself could understand, ie: back up your reasons instead of using meaningless buzzwords?

[Gafgarion]

Quote

Quote

Quote

If you have not yet got this game, RUN out and get it as soon as possible. It is completely accessible to the casual gamer (which I am) and the quality is unmatched.

Well, except for the fact that it's boring as hell and Blizzard chose a "dead world" model, rather than a dynamic world model.

Oh PLEASE, could you dumb it down into terms that a simple man like myself could understand, ie: back up your reasons instead of using meaningless buzzwords?

Ok sure, here's the expanded version: Your actions have no effect on the world and you do static quests which everyone else does and you can do again if you make a new character. The persistent world is wasted.

[Whaleman]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

If you have not yet got this game, RUN out and get it as soon as possible. It is completely accessible to the casual gamer (which I am) and the quality is unmatched.

Well, except for the fact that it's boring as hell and Blizzard chose a "dead world" model, rather than a dynamic world model.

Oh PLEASE, could you dumb it down into terms that a simple man like myself could understand, ie: back up your reasons instead of using meaningless buzzwords?

Ok sure, here's the expanded version: Your actions have no effect on the world and you do static quests which everyone else does and you can do again if you make a new character. The persistent world is wasted.

With even simpler words: You can't do popsnizzle to affect the world. It all spawns back.

[landru]

Interesting design choice. I imagine it has to do with their desire to cater to more casual players. It wouldn't be much fun if you didn't play that often and each time you logged on, the world had changed in major ways.

The screenshots I've seen look beautiful and I have to give Blizzard props for trying to keep occasional players in the loop. If I was going to join a MMORPG it would probably be this one, as I just don't have the time to keep up with the EverJoneses. Even so, I don't think I'm going to buy WoW--I guess I'm just not a monthly-fee type of gamer. Good gaming to those of you that do, and best of luck to Blizzard.

[Gafgarion]

Quote

Interesting design choice. I imagine it has to do with their desire to cater to more casual players. It wouldn't be much fun if you didn't play that often and each time you logged on, the world had changed in major ways.

Yes, but then why even charge a monthly fee or have a persistent world?

$15/month does not cater to casual gamers, nor does the fact that they won't be able to quest with their friends because of level differences.

[Joe M.]

Well, you either enjoy the prospect of 60-80 player guild wars or you don't. You either derive satisfaction from building your character from the ground up or you don't. You like to party up with a few friends to see if you can slay monster X, or you don't.

Being able to affect the world would be a major drawback, IMO. I don't want to have to deal with the messes other players have created, nor should I have to. This is why they have employed many GMs who will probably insert random, dynamic quests every so often and that's all I really want or expect: some dynamic play, but not so much that the game is utterly unfamiliar if I take a 6-month break.

Hell, even now my guild is forming a hit list that will be used to hunt down and assassinate high level punks who prey on low level characters that can't defend themselves. Taken into consideration is the fact that attempts at punishing opposing guild members may result in an all out war. Does this sound "dead end" to you? If so, then WoW probably isn't for you. But to me, it's fun. It's worth the price of two movies per month.

What's also fun is sorting out a system whereby people use their professions to craft armor and potions for their fellow guildmates. We're all committed to assisting each other with our various talents and I'm really enjoying the sense of community. The in-game postal service is going to put in a ton of work. ;)

And yes, the early quests are somewhat limited. I don't find them all that amusing, either. But having played many other RPG-type games I am accustomed to the tedious early levels nearly every character (from NWN to Summoner)  suffers.

But to say "oh my god, i refuse to extend myself, this game SUCKS" is kind of silly. There's a whole world out there to explore and people to meet. Blanket condemnations ignore many of the reasons I'll be paying to play.

[Gafgarion]

Quote

Well, you either enjoy the prospect of 60-80 player guild wars or you don't. You either derive satisfaction from building your character from the ground up or you don't. You like to party up with a few friends to see if you can slay monster X, or you don't.

I do enjoy 80 person guild wars and building a character form the ground up... That's why I played Shadowbane: Real PvP and complex character creation.

Quote

Being able to affect the world would be a major drawback, IMO. I don't want to have to deal with the messes other players have created, nor should I have to. This is why they have employed many GMs who will probably insert random, dynamic quests every so often and that's all I really want or expect: some dynamic play, but not so much that the game is utterly unfamiliar if I take a 6-month break.

Eh? You want to pay a monthly for a persistant world and you DON'T want to be able to change it? That just doesn't make sense.

Quote

Hell, even now my guild is forming a hit list that will be used to hunt down and assassinate high level punks who prey on low level characters that can't defend themselves. Taken into consideration is the fact that attempts at punishing opposing guild members may result in an all out war. Does this sound "dead end" to you? If so, then WoW probably isn't for you. But to me, it's fun. It's worth the price of two movies per month.

If PvP is your thing, then why are you playing WoW? There are far superior PvP games out there and excellent ones in the works.

WoW's PvP is indeed dead end as there's nothing to fight over. No cities, no sieges, no resources... It's silly.

Quote

What's also fun is sorting out a system whereby people use their professions to craft armor and potions for their fellow guildmates. We're all committed to assisting each other with our various talents and I'm really enjoying the sense of community. The in-game postal service is going to put in a ton of work. ;)

Community is indeed half the game, but how is this unique to WoW?

Quote

And yes, the early quests are somewhat limited. I don't find them all that amusing, either. But having played many other RPG-type games I am accustomed to the tedious early levels nearly every character (from NWN to Summoner)  suffers.

I've played to level 50 in beta and it does not get any better.

Quote

But to say "oh my god, i refuse to extend myself, this game SUCKS" is kind of silly. There's a whole world out there to explore and people to meet. Blanket condemnations ignore many of the reasons I'll be paying to play.

WoW has watered down PvP, a joke for character development, boring grind and no meaningful endgame... I'm not saying WoW is the worst game ever made, but it's certainly not worthy of all the hype it's been receiving.

[Whaleman]

Quote

Well, you either enjoy the prospect of 60-80 player guild wars or you don't. You either derive satisfaction from building your character from the ground up or you don't. You like to party up with a few friends to see if you can slay monster X, or you don't.

You don't need an MMO to build up a character, you don't need an MMO for partying up with a few friends to slay monster with some friends. Had it been "normal" game with 64 player Multiplayer, you would get pretty good guild wars as well.

Quote

Being able to affect the world would be a major drawback, IMO. I don't want to have to deal with the messes other players have created, nor should I have to.

But, had the game been a normal RPG, you could affect the world all you wanted, because only you (or you and your friends if you played a multiplayer session) would be affected. And you would never have to sit down and wait for monster X to respawn just to be tagged by some other guy who just go there.

Quote

Hell, even now my guild is forming a hit list that will be used to hunt down and assassinate high level punks who prey on low level characters that can't defend themselves.

Which would never happen from the start in a normal RPG. or the host would kick the player from the server.

Quote

And yes, the early quests are somewhat limited. I don't find them all that amusing, either. But having played many other RPG-type games I am accustomed to the tedious early levels nearly every character (from NWN to Summoner)  suffers.

I would have to disagree. The first 3 levels might be tedious in some of these games, but more seldom than not, the quests affect the world, which gives them more purpose than just that extra level. In WoW most levels are still just the same, and the quests never really change, but comes again against more difficult monsters again. Normal RPGs can have more variation and more purpose in its quests since the world doesn't have to be static.

So in the end, WoW doesn't really much use the MMO aspect, besides the trading skills and larger raids, most of which could be somewhat functional on a 64 player server as well.

What WoW will do though, is give Blizzard popsnizzleloads of money, and I hope this money could be used creating a real RPG out of WoW. But I doubt that will ever happen, so I guess I will have to suffer the drawbacks of a MMO for a while... because I love the world of Warcraft a bit too much to just sit here and miss out on it.

[Joe M.]

Since most of the preceding was simply opinion (as was my post, mind you), I'll just direct one question to Whaleman:

What RPGs currently have dedicated 64-player multiplayer servers online 24/7?

Other than that, all I hear is griping about WoW not being designed to personal tastes. And that's fine, no one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to buy it. But I thought I'd add a counterpoint to all the complaining. The game IS extremely fun if you're into some of the things I've mentioned (i'm leveling a stealth/backstab/stun rogue up simply to handle guild business -- my own goals in game are also part of what drives me to play). And obviously, with over 200k registrations on day one, there are a lot of people who feel the same way.

And no, I don't need to change the world. To go back a few years, I used to log into Multi-User Dungeons almost daily. We couldn't change the world and it made it no less addicting. In fact, it was much like EQ in that you'd typically spend a couple hours killing the same crap over and over for gear and XP.

What draws me to WoW is the thousands of quests, many of which have been changed or "unlocked" in retail. Never are you stuck doing the same old thing repeatedly, unless of course you want constrain yourself that way.

As for Shadowbane: no thanks. Until you mentioned it, I hadn't heard a good word about it.

[Robo-X]

I played the Open Beta and built up my character to level 17. It was fun. Take a long time to build up a good character but it is easy enough for most people to just sit down and have fun.

The world is pretty static. The monsters respawn pretty quickly so that you don't have to wait forever to finish a quest. The big point of getting a good character and high level is to raid other cities. The more the merrier. You can't just attack another player unless he is on the other side, Alliance vs. Horde. You can duel against other people from the same side if you  want though. Dying have very little penalty and not like I remember from playing on MUDs long time ago, where you lost a level and about 5% exp points. Now all you loose is 1/4 armor durability which can be repaired in the shop.

What really annoys me with WoW is that you have different realms for different regions of the world and you can't play on a realm from another region. EU can't play on USA servers for instance. Blizzard says it is because of the support. I think it is a bad decision and splitting many clans who maybe have played online for years.

//Rob

[Gafgarion]

Quote

And obviously, with over 200k registrations on day one, there are a lot of people who feel the same way.

There are a lot of people that like Windows, too. What's your point?

Quote

And no, I don't need to change the world. To go back a few years, I used to log into Multi-User Dungeons almost daily. We couldn't change the world and it made it no less addicting. In fact, it was much like EQ in that you'd typically spend a couple hours killing the same crap over and over for gear and XP.

I don't know about you, but I always played MUDs that allowed me to affect the world and even the ones that didn't were tolerable because they were free.

Quote

What draws me to WoW is the thousands of quests, many of which have been changed or "unlocked" in retail. Never are you stuck doing the same old thing repeatedly, unless of course you want constrain yourself that way.

Oh joy, the thousands of quests... the majority of the which are the same.

Quote

As for Shadowbane: no thanks. Until you mentioned it, I hadn't heard a good word about it.

Have you even played it? Shadowbane is, despite its bugs, well-regarded in the PvP community because it was one of the first games to ever feature real NvN PvP.
Shadowbane gave real meaning to PvP and didn't bother with boring, pointless quests and leveling-grinding. The carebears were very turned off to it... But since you're all about "guild wars", it seems right up your alley.

[DaveyJJ]

Quote

If you have not yet got this game, RUN out and get it as soon as possible. It is completely accessible to the casual gamer (which I am) and the quality is unmatched.

Same discussion, new thread, huh? Cool.

I'm guessing everyone defines "casual gamer" differently cause there ain't no game that I play for an hour or two a month (or maybe even three or four) that's worth CDN$220 in the first year. That's my definition of casual.

None.

Unless they made Rome Total War. I'd probably pay CDN$200 just to buy a copy that runs on a Mac [this goes to show you how ethics/choices change as the situation does, or how silly I am, one of the two].

I'll be the first in line to join WoW when they have a pay-as-you-play option. Not before. My kids and stuff take up my "casual" time.

PS. Nice new avatar, Whaleman.

[DaveyJJ]

Quote

There are a lot of people that like Windows, too. What's your point?

Isn't mentioning <shudder>Windows</shudder> in a Mac gaming forum akin to saying "Hitler" in a politically oriented newsgroup, Gafgarion? :wink:

The topic's supposed to stop now, right, as none of us will ever agree about the merits of WoW/pricing/world-type etc?

[Gafgarion]

Quote

Quote

There are a lot of people that like Windows, too. What's your point?

Isn't mentioning <shudder>Windows</shudder> in a Mac gaming forum akin to saying "Hitler" in a politically oriented newsgroup, Gafgarion? :wink:

Yes, yes, it is. I feel terrible. :)

Quote

The topic's supposed to stop now, right, as none of us will ever agree about the merits of WoW/pricing/world-type etc?

True, it really depends on what you want out of the game. Saying that WoW is a must-have is a little ridiculous, which is the point I wanted to make (granted I chose to make the point by juxtapositioning a very skeptical view of WoW against an enamored view).

[Joe M.]

We don't need to agree.  :wink:

Some tend to flog the dead horse more than others is all.