|
|
If you're going to just ignore the history of MMO's then there is no point discussing with you.
If you're going to pretend that an industry doesn't exist because it goes against your opinions, there's no point discussing with you.
And when you say (pg 34) "Dude, have you ever considered the people that were dissatisfied with the art and design direction in both Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3? That many people didn't like Diablo 3 because of it's art? Don't even get me started on it's design direction with RMAH, online only stuff etc?" and "And look at SC2 and D3 now. Both are in very hard decline "
And then follow that up by saying (page 36) "Here we go again. Why are you pulling statements out of your arse? Quote me where did I say it's a dead genre. And ARPG was pretty much a new concept that came with Diablo. There was no other ARPG before. My point still stands..."
Then you're simply just trolling. Don't come in, talk about how bad Diablo3 is, get shown that its actually very succesful for its genre, and then pretend that you never talked about Diablo3.
Don't talk about how Magic the Gathering does not happen online when you can download it on fucking Steam.
Don't talk about how the RTS players that have had a tournament scene since Command and Conquer, Warcraft 1, and Age of Empires don't count as an RTS scene just because it goes against your narrative. The moment Dune II Battle for Arrakis came into the scene everyone was going for multiplayer play.
Please, just stop.
|
On October 23 2013 07:29 Arrinao wrote:Show nested quote +A.) So your proof for EQ is that your brother played it, disregard that the biggest and best EQ clans moved over to WoW and became a big part of what bulged the popularity of the WoW as a legitimate MMO, but since your brother still played that means there wasn't a shift? That's ridiculous. I'm tired. Show nested quote +
When WoW came out, it was at the same time as Everquest 2. So it not only came out against competition, but it was against competition with a massive history to it in Everquest. Everyone in Everquest bailed out on their old product and jumped ship to WoW despite WoW having all the problems it had during release
Show nested quote +
A.) While you are right about myself not following the EQ scene, and having no idea about people from EQ being in development for WoW, I don't really need it to refute your statement. All that I need to know is the fact that in this era (2003-2006) I was living in with my brother-in-law, who by that time played Everquest. WoW came, went by, and rose to stardom, and yet he was still playing Everquest in 2006 and there was still a lot of people around. So most definitely not everyone left for WoW.
******************************************************************************************************************************************* Show nested quote +
B.) MTGO or MTG Online is a global game where people go online, buy cards, and play magic the gathering. It's been around for years and is the biggest name in the industry. People globally use it to test new brews and to just do daily tournaments. If you want to pretend it doesn't exist, that the only people who play magic are cardboard flippers, then once again you're being ridiculous. Very few people can afford to build decks for both online and offline since the price structure is exactly the same. Booster packs and individual cards sells as much in MTGO as it does in real life because it is its own industry. You pretending that it doesn't happen does not mean it isn't happening no matter how hard you bury your head in the sand.
Once again, you're from America and I have no idea of the situation there so I can't argue with you. But for as long as I am active in MTG, I've never heard about MTGO. I'll ask around if people actually know about it but I doubt it.
Oh, he said "Everyone". That surely is completely literal and means not a single person ever played EQ after WoW was released. What a nitpick...
As for MTGO it's definitely played globally and is well known. You just happen to be ignorant in this case but can't seem to come to grips with that.
|
Please, just stop.
That pretty much sums it up. It's painful to read, as his "arguments" get more and more ridiculous. Kudos to you for arguing with him as long as you did, I would have rage quitted this thread pages ago.
|
Mexico2170 Posts
On October 23 2013 07:19 Daralii wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2013 07:06 NukeD wrote:
Butterfly kills Deckard Cain. Lord of Lies is a humorously pathetic lier. Villains make you cringe and want to punch someone in the face on a regular basis. What are we arguing here? Its Diablo man, get a grip. Datamined stuff from RoS implies Belial is a much better liar than we thought.
what do you mean? <.< (dont mind spoilers btw)
Ontopic:
It amaze me how a lot of people say this will fail when they havent even announced it (well, this new game because as far as i know, the scrapped what they had and started from 0 all over again).
People should wait and play it. Its difficult that it will surpass LoL, but its not impossible. Sky's the limit man.
|
On October 23 2013 08:06 [SXG]Phantom wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2013 07:19 Daralii wrote:On October 23 2013 07:06 NukeD wrote:
Butterfly kills Deckard Cain. Lord of Lies is a humorously pathetic lier. Villains make you cringe and want to punch someone in the face on a regular basis. What are we arguing here? Its Diablo man, get a grip. Datamined stuff from RoS implies Belial is a much better liar than we thought. what do you mean? <.< (dont mind spoilers btw) Ontopic: It amaze me how a lot of people say this will fail when they havent even announced it (well, this new game because as far as i know, the scrapped what they had and started from 0 all over again). People should wait and play it. Its difficult that it will surpass LoL, but its not impossible. Sky's the limit man.
Because people are haters. It's really as simple as that.
If it launches and it isn't good, don't play it. If it launches and it's good and you don't want to play it, then don't play it, but don't try and convince people that it's going to be a fail just because you WANT it to be a fail for some dumb reason.
|
On October 23 2013 07:45 Thieving Magpie wrote:
If you're going to just ignore the history of MMO's then there is no point discussing with you.
If you're going to pretend that an industry doesn't exist because it goes against your opinions, there's no point discussing with you.
And when you say (pg 34) "Dude, have you ever considered the people that were dissatisfied with the art and design direction in both Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3? That many people didn't like Diablo 3 because of it's art? Don't even get me started on it's design direction with RMAH, online only stuff etc?" and "And look at SC2 and D3 now. Both are in very hard decline "
And then follow that up by saying (page 36) "Here we go again. Why are you pulling statements out of your arse? Quote me where did I say it's a dead genre. And ARPG was pretty much a new concept that came with Diablo. There was no other ARPG before. My point still stands..."
Then you're simply just trolling. Don't come in, talk about how bad Diablo3 is, get shown that its actually very succesful for its genre, and then pretend that you never talked about Diablo3.
Don't talk about how Magic the Gathering does not happen online when you can download it on fucking Steam.
Don't talk about how the RTS players that have had a tournament scene since Command and Conquer, Warcraft 1, and Age of Empires don't count as an RTS scene just because it goes against your narrative. The moment Dune II Battle for Arrakis came into the scene everyone was going for multiplayer play.
Please, just stop.
I don't get this. If you are trying to mock me by trying to point out ambiguity of my posts, you need to come up with something better than this. Yes I said that D3 is in decline. Where did I say it's dead? Those are too completely different things (at least for me).
"And ARPG was pretty much a new concept that came with Diablo. There was no other ARPG before. My point still stands..."
What's wrong with this sentence? Where did I pretend to never talk about Diablo 3? By "Diablo" - i mean Diablo 1, not 3. Is it this, maybe?
I also never said Magic: The Gathering isn't happening online. I just said that I, and the other people from the community, which play MTG never heard about it and refused to argue with you about it as I have don't have enough data of the situation in your market. You just love to put words in people's mouths don't you? I don't care you can download it on Steam, you can download Rogue Legacy on Steam, and yet it doesn't make it recognizable outside of the RPG platformer market, which was my original point.
Don't talk about how the RTS players that have had a tournament scene since Command and Conquer, Warcraft 1, and Age of Empires don't count as an RTS scene just because it goes against your narrative.
Okay. Now I'm begging You to stop. Because you are apparently totally out of touch with what I said. I never-ever said they don't count as an RTS scene I said that every game with multiplayer can have a scene, and very specifically mentioned that not every one of these games are actually built with a multiplayer in mindset, which separates those who do and those who don't. This is not my narrative, this is reality.
And that last sentence of yours ... well yeah the moment Dune 2: Battle for Arrakis came into the scene, everyone was going for a multiplayer play... which was non-existant, because Dune 2 was not only not multiplayer-focused, but also singleplayer only
What astounds me that even uder these circumstances you actually have a following.
That pretty much sums it up. It's painful to read, as his "arguments" get more and more ridiculous. Kudos to you for arguing with him as long as you did, I would have rage quitted this thread pages ago.
I have talked down SC2 a little bit and I'm in SC2 forum. But reactions like this are priceless...
|
On October 23 2013 10:03 Arrinao wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2013 07:45 Thieving Magpie wrote:
If you're going to just ignore the history of MMO's then there is no point discussing with you.
If you're going to pretend that an industry doesn't exist because it goes against your opinions, there's no point discussing with you.
And when you say (pg 34) "Dude, have you ever considered the people that were dissatisfied with the art and design direction in both Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3? That many people didn't like Diablo 3 because of it's art? Don't even get me started on it's design direction with RMAH, online only stuff etc?" and "And look at SC2 and D3 now. Both are in very hard decline "
And then follow that up by saying (page 36) "Here we go again. Why are you pulling statements out of your arse? Quote me where did I say it's a dead genre. And ARPG was pretty much a new concept that came with Diablo. There was no other ARPG before. My point still stands..."
Then you're simply just trolling. Don't come in, talk about how bad Diablo3 is, get shown that its actually very succesful for its genre, and then pretend that you never talked about Diablo3.
Don't talk about how Magic the Gathering does not happen online when you can download it on fucking Steam.
Don't talk about how the RTS players that have had a tournament scene since Command and Conquer, Warcraft 1, and Age of Empires don't count as an RTS scene just because it goes against your narrative. The moment Dune II Battle for Arrakis came into the scene everyone was going for multiplayer play.
Please, just stop. I don't get this. If you are trying to mock me by trying to point out ambiguity of my posts, you need to come up with something better than this. Yes I said that D3 is in decline. Where did I say it's dead? Those are too completely different things (at least for me). Show nested quote +"And ARPG was pretty much a new concept that came with Diablo. There was no other ARPG before. My point still stands..." What's wrong with this sentence? Where did I pretend to never talk about Diablo 3? By "Diablo" - i mean Diablo 1, not 3. Is it this, maybe? I also never said Magic: The Gathering isn't happening online. I just said that I, and the other people from the community, which play MTG never heard about it and refused to argue with you about it as I have don't have enough data of the situation in your market. You just love to put words in people's mouths don't you? I don't care you can download it on Steam, you can download Rogue Legacy on Steam, and yet it doesn't make it recognizable outside of the RPG platformer market, which was my original point. Show nested quote +Don't talk about how the RTS players that have had a tournament scene since Command and Conquer, Warcraft 1, and Age of Empires don't count as an RTS scene just because it goes against your narrative.
Okay. Now I'm begging You to stop. Because you are apparently totally out of touch with what I said. I never-ever said they don't count as an RTS scene I said that every game with multiplayer can have a scene, and very specifically mentioned that not every one of these games are actually built with a multiplayer in mindset, which separates those who do and those who don't. This is not my narrative, this is reality. And that last sentence of yours ... well yeah the moment Dune 2: Battle for Arrakis came into the scene, everyone was going for a multiplayer play... which was non-existant, because Dune 2 was not only not multiplayer-focused, but also singleplayer only What astounds me that even uder these circumstances you actually have a following. Show nested quote +That pretty much sums it up. It's painful to read, as his "arguments" get more and more ridiculous. Kudos to you for arguing with him as long as you did, I would have rage quitted this thread pages ago. I have talked down SC2 a little bit and I'm in SC2 forum. But reactions like this are priceless...
I'm done. You're either trolling or stupid. I'm not going to waste any more time with your bullshit.
|
As someone who has written a few pages in response to him, too, it's clear he's one of those internet debaters that refuse to learn and refuse to admit to being wrong about things. Seriously saying that the MMORPG was a niche market before the internet boom despite it being factually wrong (never mind about the US and EU, just look at Asia where high-end PCs with high-speed internet were cheap and affordable for your average student from much earlier on due to PC rooms and WoW still crushed everything on the market. Oh wait, but the competing games were just niche games despite having huge user-bases and real-money-markets surrounding them). Or, in his total ignorance regarding Magic the Gathering Online (which accounts for 30~50% of Magic the Gathering business but his friends don't know what it is so it doesn't count) or the history of the RTS genre (this is the funniest. You come to a forum dedicated to the biggest RTS games and think people won't know you are full of shit).
I'll end with a statement repeating what I've been saying all along. I've said this in response to Arrinao numerous times and he has failed to understand it just as many times.
LoL and DotA 2 are not the be all, end all of MOBA gaming. People thought BW would never be surpassed in South Korea. Guess what? It's happening. A game will come along that has the same casual appeal as LoL does in terms of graphics but do it better. A game will come a long that has better server stability and user support than LoL. A game will come a long that has tighter, more responsive controls than DotA 2. A time will come when there is a better league than LCS and a better tournament than TI. If you think none of that will happen in due time, you have a very small and feeble mind.
What we regard as AAA is constantly being redefined. The games we define as leaders within a genre are constantly being replaced with bigger, better games. LoL and DotA 2 are obviously incredibly successful. But, it isn't farfetched to think Blizzard, a company that has continually released games into markets with substantial competition (despite your ignorance) and come out on top, has a chance of creating a MOBA that could challenge and maybe surpass the current competition.
|
I don't think the quality of the gameplay itself will be a problem at all. What I wonder is if Blizzard will be able to compete against dotas feats such as speccing ladder games, downloading replays from ladder, allowing people to create their own armors/weapons/uis, in-game tournament observing and so on. If they can handle that then I see no limit on how successful the game might become.
|
I will switch from dota 2 if matchmaking has leagues like sc2. i just play by myself in dota 2 public games, and the matchmaking is terrible.
|
On October 23 2013 18:59 Brian333 wrote:
As someone who has written a few pages in response to him, too, it's clear he's one of those internet debaters that refuse to learn and refuse to admit to being wrong about things. Seriously saying that the MMORPG was a niche market before the internet boom despite it being factually wrong (never mind about the US and EU, just look at Asia where high-end PCs with high-speed internet were cheap and affordable for your average student from much earlier on due to PC rooms and WoW still crushed everything on the market. Oh wait, but the competing games were just niche games despite having huge user-bases and real-money-markets surrounding them). Or, in his total ignorance regarding Magic the Gathering Online (which accounts for 30~50% of Magic the Gathering business but his friends don't know what it is so it doesn't count) or the history of the RTS genre (this is the funniest. You come to a forum dedicated to the biggest RTS games and think people won't know you are full of shit).
I'll end with a statement repeating what I've been saying all along. I've said this in response to Arrinao numerous times and he has failed to understand it just as many times.
LoL and DotA 2 are not the be all, end all of MOBA gaming. People thought BW would never be surpassed in South Korea. Guess what? It's happening. A game will come along that has the same casual appeal as LoL does in terms of graphics but do it better. A game will come a long that has better server stability and user support than LoL. A game will come a long that has tighter, more responsive controls than DotA 2. A time will come when there is a better league than LCS and a better tournament than TI. If you think none of that will happen in due time, you have a very small and feeble mind.
What we regard as AAA is constantly being redefined. The games we define as leaders within a genre are constantly being replaced with bigger, better games. LoL and DotA 2 are obviously incredibly successful. But, it isn't farfetched to think Blizzard, a company that has continually released games into markets with substantial competition (despite your ignorance) and come out on top, has a chance of creating a MOBA that could challenge and maybe surpass the current competition.
As someone who has clearly read through all the conversations, it actually takes me by a surprise that you called me total ignorant on the MTGO scene even though I clearly stated numerous times that I'm not gonna argue against the MTGO presence as I don't have any data of the outside market. So who's ignorant? Probably still me as I'm going against a crowd here and that's never a win situation. Whatever.
What I'm still gonna argue against though, is the MMO market and WoW/EQ situation. Call me ignorant but I just cannot help but feel some kind of difference between mainstream EQ and mainstream WoW. Holy crap Wow even got it's own SouthPark themed episode. And that's because it reached far and wide outside of the MMO genre borders and grabbed people who never touched an MMO before, not because it stole all the audiences from other MMO's for god sake... EQ was mainstream in the genre that wasn't mainstream. WoW reached out and made itself at least in my eyes *real* mainstream, making the genre more relevant than it ever was before. I'm not saying EQ wasn't succesful or whatever, all of the fuss was about the fact that EQ can't be directly compared to LoL which has already done the job of reaching far and wide leaving Blizzard with the only option to actually steal audience. I hope I made it clear this time.
or the history of the RTS genre (this is the funniest. You come to a forum dedicated to the biggest RTS games and think people won't know you are full of shit).
Dude... after this:
The moment Dune II Battle for Arrakis came into the scene everyone was going for multiplayer play.
are you still able to repeat that with a straight face? I hope not.
And if my stance on the multiplayer communities surrounding C&C is what bothering you than please read those posts again. All what I was trying to prove was that Blizzard had very little competition in the direction it was going for (meaning it didn't have to dethrone aynone) as there is a big difference between a game that is made with multiplayer in mindset, and a game that simply has multiplayer option. Time has proven that multiplayer was the right way to go for RTS and as such Blizzard games won as no other games really put much insight into balancing, optimalizing the pace, and polishing.
LoL and DotA 2 are not the be all, end all of MOBA gaming. People thought BW would never be surpassed in South Korea. Guess what? It's happening.
Well you got me there. You really couldn't come up with more ridiculous example after saying so many times how ignorant I am, and especially in these forums. First of all you're wrong. BW was never in it's lifetime surpassed by any other game in South Korea. It's lifetime was effectively forcefully ended with SC2 release that was direct sucessor to it and was meant to replace it. But people were dissatisfied with it and jumped ship for LoL(http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=414741). Honestly this example is absolutely irrelevent to MOBA situation (altough it's slightly comparable to Evequest situation)
A game will come a long that has better server stability and user support than LoL. A game will come a long that has tighter, more responsive controls than DotA 2. A time will come when there is a better league than LCS and a better tournament than TI. If you think none of that will happen in due time, you have a very small and feeble mind.
Speaking about feeble mind you kinda forgot to factor one important element into your dream: competition. Do you really honestly think that Riot and Valve would just sit on their toes, watching as Blizzard takes the cake away from them? I don't. In fact I pretty much expect that even if HoTS comes up with something revolutionary, it will be soon be featured in LoL/Dota2 in some form. Blizzard isn't the only one who can copy and polish, really. WoW copied a lot of ideas from other MMO's keeping itself fresh too and I see no reason for this situation to happen again. Of course anything can happen. But things you described have very, very small probability, especially that LCS/TI thing. That would require both Valve and Riot to slip up VERY hard plus Blizzard going into a severely risky deal to invest an enormous shitload of money into esports scene with very unclear results. They tread carefully. Don't think they would attempt something like this.
|
So one interesting question I have about this whole thing. Since this name change announcement doesn't show any gameplay footage and I recall previously having heard in a Blizzard interview that they had restarted this project a while ago to be much more ambitious (apologies I'm not sure what interview so I can't find the link) are they still making this as an arcade map for SC2 or have they branched it out into it's own stand alone game perhaps?
I mean, I'm sure they could re-use a lot of the engine and physics work from SC2 as the framework but if they're going as big with this as they're hinting, as in to compete with the current MOBA giants, I'm wondering if it makes sense as an Arcade map for them still. They wouldn't be able to do ladder matchmaking and store items and such if it was an Arcade map whereas they would with a new game client. Just a thought I guess.
|
It will be a stand alone.
|
On October 23 2013 19:24 Nausea wrote:
I don't think the quality of the gameplay itself will be a problem at all. What I wonder is if Blizzard will be able to compete against dotas feats such as speccing ladder games, downloading replays from ladder, allowing people to create their own armors/weapons/uis, in-game tournament observing and so on. If they can handle that then I see no limit on how successful the game might become.
Oh hey look, an on topic point!
I don't think they can afford to not release the game with a lot of this stuff included. They need to be able to either do everything that one of the 2 powerhouses do, or they need to do enough of a mix of the important things. I don't necessarily think that they need to allow users to create their own armor/weapons/ui, but they need in game tournament observing, some form of reasonable options for things to pay for through their client, and a clear ladder system. I also think a good method of reporting and addressing horrible behavior is necessary. As far as I'm concerned, LoL does the purchases and ladder relatively well, and DotA does the spectating/tournament implementation extremely well. They need to emulate these aspects of the game to have a good shot at success.
Additionally, they need to figure out what extra stuff they want to do to stand out. The in game sc2 moba... Hero Attack I think it's called, does a lot of neat things on their maps that I'd love to see implemented. Things like the mining bases in the desert map that have huge benefits if kept alive but are destructible for instance would add interesting gameplay elements that would stand out. Do they want to implement denying into the game, something that really intimidates new players who are perhaps not great at games in general (like myself). Will they go with the one single map or try to balance multiple maps (personally I think multiple maps are important for new mobas, but not map types, just the maps themselves)? Will they add achievements, which would do a lot to keep new players interested and going for a goal. What about their ability to pull the model from an existing character in another game into HotS? I'd actually play d3 again if I knew that how my witch doctor looked would affect the witch doctor I played in HotS.
I think the most important thing they can do is release the game as a money-making venture and allow the competitive scene to evolve from there. LoL had the right mindset here. I still think SC2's balance is good, and think the balance teams in place at blizzard have been awesome in general, so I trust in their ability to go back and balance as necessary. The interesting thing about having so many champions (heroes) is that you can make them imbalanced and all you're doing is denying AD Lulu from competitive play because there are better options. I'm just worried they're going to want to completely balance every champion (hero) before releasing or patching and that's going to be it's biggest downfall. We don't need a crazy super competitive game yet, let us get a feel for it first and then we can decide what we want to do.
|
On October 23 2013 23:33 Kokokoz wrote:
It will be a stand alone.
Oh really? That would be awesome! Was this announced somewhere? I haven't been following this particular game super closely (pretty much when something like this crosses the path of the SC2 forums) so I'm sure I've missed some of the news.
|
feel some kind of difference between mainstream EQ and mainstream WoW. Holy crap Wow even got it's own SouthPark themed episode. And that's because it reached far and wide outside of the MMO genre borders and grabbed people who never touched an MMO before, not because it stole all the audiences from other MMO's for god sake...
History disagrees with you. In the first year of WoW's release, EQ numbers dropped by three fifths, and by a further fifth over the next few years. You can see the same shape to the graphs of Dark Age of Camelot and Ultima Online, and indeed to the graphs of almost all MMORPGs that pre-dated WoW. Also note that prior to WoW all these games were increasing their subscription numbers, pulling in new players, growing the scene. Then WoW came out, did the genre 'properly', and the overwhelming majority of subscribers jumped ship.
|
On October 23 2013 23:31 Achaia wrote:
So one interesting question I have about this whole thing. Since this name change announcement doesn't show any gameplay footage and I recall previously having heard in a Blizzard interview that they had restarted this project a while ago to be much more ambitious (apologies I'm not sure what interview so I can't find the link) are they still making this as an arcade map for SC2 or have they branched it out into it's own stand alone game perhaps?
I mean, I'm sure they could re-use a lot of the engine and physics work from SC2 as the framework but if they're going as big with this as they're hinting, as in to compete with the current MOBA giants, I'm wondering if it makes sense as an Arcade map for them still. They wouldn't be able to do ladder matchmaking and store items and such if it was an Arcade map whereas they would with a new game client. Just a thought I guess.
Although it will be stand alone, I would not be surprised if they use a modified SC2 for it. SC2 is really solid compared to dota 2, lol or anything else I have seen. However, the problem with the SC2 game is that it is too easy to hack (compared to dota 2, for example), so I am not sure if they will make some changes to how many calculations is done by the client, etc.
|
On October 24 2013 00:50 Umpteen wrote:Show nested quote +feel some kind of difference between mainstream EQ and mainstream WoW. Holy crap Wow even got it's own SouthPark themed episode. And that's because it reached far and wide outside of the MMO genre borders and grabbed people who never touched an MMO before, not because it stole all the audiences from other MMO's for god sake... History disagrees with you. In the first year of WoW's release, EQ numbers dropped by three fifths, and by a further fifth over the next few years. You can see the same shape to the graphs of Dark Age of Camelot and Ultima Online, and indeed to the graphs of almost all MMORPGs that pre-dated WoW. Also note that prior to WoW all these games were increasing their subscription numbers, pulling in new players, growing the scene. Then WoW came out, did the genre 'properly', and the overwhelming majority of subscribers jumped ship.
IIRC it was similar for lineage and L2, which between them had 2.5 million subs pre-wow, and less than a million in 2006.
|
Russian Federation40190 Posts
On October 24 2013 02:32 hzflank wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2013 23:31 Achaia wrote:
So one interesting question I have about this whole thing. Since this name change announcement doesn't show any gameplay footage and I recall previously having heard in a Blizzard interview that they had restarted this project a while ago to be much more ambitious (apologies I'm not sure what interview so I can't find the link) are they still making this as an arcade map for SC2 or have they branched it out into it's own stand alone game perhaps?
I mean, I'm sure they could re-use a lot of the engine and physics work from SC2 as the framework but if they're going as big with this as they're hinting, as in to compete with the current MOBA giants, I'm wondering if it makes sense as an Arcade map for them still. They wouldn't be able to do ladder matchmaking and store items and such if it was an Arcade map whereas they would with a new game client. Just a thought I guess. Although it will be stand alone, I would not be surprised if they use a modified SC2 for it. SC2 is really solid compared to dota 2, lol or anything else I have seen. However, the problem with the SC2 game is that it is too easy to hack (compared to dota 2, for example), so I am not sure if they will make some changes to how many calculations is done by the client, etc.
Hack problems are mainly related to p2p stuff and syncing the state of game IIRC. Should that game use server-to-client ala Dota 2 and LoL hacking will be much easier to kill.
|
On October 24 2013 00:50 Umpteen wrote:
feel some kind of difference between mainstream EQ and mainstream WoW. Holy crap Wow even got it's own SouthPark themed episode. And that's because it reached far and wide outside of the MMO genre borders and grabbed people who never touched an MMO before, not because it stole all the audiences from other MMO's for god sake...
History disagrees with you. In the first year of WoW's release, EQ numbers dropped by three fifths, and by a further fifth over the next few years. You can see the same shape to the graphs of Dark Age of Camelot and Ultima Online, and indeed to the graphs of almost all MMORPGs that pre-dated WoW. Also note that prior to WoW all these games were increasing their subscription numbers, pulling in new players, growing the scene. Then WoW came out, did the genre 'properly', and the overwhelming majority of subscribers jumped ship.
Nice graph. Now let's look at it together, shall we? From 2004 to 2006 I can see the biggest drop was Everquest with 350 000 loss, followed up by EQ 2, UO and Dark Ages Of Camelot with each one around say 125.000. Now correct me if I'm wrong but as much I'm trying to look at it and counting them all together, I'm not able to squeeze more than (heavily rounded up) one million. And that is of course assuming they ALL went to WoW, which they most likely didn't as there is a steady rise of EVE online: Tranquility in that era.
Even if I add Lineage and Lineage 2 numbers, which someone else mentioned and which are missing from your graph, I can only add at most 500.000.
Now take a look at this: url=http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/128323/Seven_Years_Of_World_Of_Warcraft.php. Where did those additional 3.500.000 people come from?
And that's because it reached far and wide outside of the MMO genre borders and grabbed people who never touched an MMO before, not because it stole all the audiences from other MMO's for god sake...
Has "history" changed it's mind yet?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
