|
On September 24 2014 08:29 JudicatorHammurabi wrote: The cancellation of Titan is 7 years down the drain, and doesn't reflect well on Blizzard, whose success to this day has entirely benched on the Warcraft and Starcraft franchises they made back in the 1990s.
thanks for the laugh man.
Blizzard has only been around since 1993 .. .so they made good stuff for 6 years and hoave been costing since then. ok
i guess they are doing a great job living off of Lost Vikings and porting educational software over to Windows 3.1.
SC2 holds about 90% of the RTS market share precisely because it has had 2 solid releases in 2010 and 2012.
|
On September 24 2014 11:16 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2014 08:29 JudicatorHammurabi wrote: The cancellation of Titan is 7 years down the drain, and doesn't reflect well on Blizzard, whose success to this day has entirely benched on the Warcraft and Starcraft franchises they made back in the 1990s. thanks for the laugh man. Blizzard has only been around since 1993 .. .so they made good stuff for 6 years and hoave been costing since then. ok i guess they are doing a great job living off of Lost Vikings and porting educational software over to Windows 3.1.
The real laugh is that you're perfectly incapable of reading XD
Warcraft, Diablo, and Starcraft franchises were created in the 1990s. Blizzard hasn't had a new franchise since then, which they were attempting to do with Titan. That's the only thing I said.
Every game Blizzard has released since Warcraft 1 has been either a Warcraft, Diablo, or Starcraft game. That's the only point I was making in my last post. I have no idea where you're pulling all this Lost Vikings and education software stuff from, because it's entirely irrelevant to my original point that since the release of WC1, all of Blizzard's development has been for the SC, Diablo, and WC franchises.
But please, keep up with the dumb comments LOL. Future advice: If you really have to take a dickish jab at someone, at least be intelligent when doing it.
SC2 holds about 90% of the RTS market share precisely because it has had 2 solid releases in 2010 and 2012. And SC2 is part of the Starcraft franchise, is it not? You're only proving my original point.
|
This is actually a *good* thing. Yes, Titan cost a lot up to this point, but it was likely cancelled before all of the staff hiring & ramp-up started. Blizzard chose not to *waste* 100s of Millions on the project. That's good business & good for the gamer. One more project that isn't hyped to all hell that then fails to be that good.
Also, the amount of money put into the project already doesn't matter. That's the "Sunk Cost Fallacy". A very important economic principle.
|
Hmm, somehow I swear there was a third game series in addition to WC and SC. I keep forgetting that the [very successful] Diablo stuff was produced by, oh wait, yeah, it was Blizzard. But yeah, even without Diablo, the whole 'only SC/WC thing' is still wrong...and very easily verified: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blizzard_Entertainment
|
On September 24 2014 11:27 asymptotech wrote:Hmm, somehow I swear there was a third game series in addition to WC and SC. I keep forgetting that the [very successful] Diablo stuff was produced by, oh wait, yeah, it was Blizzard. But yeah, even without Diablo, the whole 'only SC/WC thing' is still wrong...and very easily verified: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blizzard_Entertainment Hmm, forgot that in my first post, but it's in my next one (two above yours). Considering I've played all 3 Diablos and own the second and third, it was an honest brain fart.
However, it doesn't change the fact that Blizzard was looking to create a new franchise and it flopped, which is the entire fact of my original post. Then again, I think some people would rather be smart alecs and pick at literally anything.
Even without Diablo, please tell me all the non-WC/SC games you see in the mid-late 1990s and the 2000s. What do you see? Nothing (except Lost vikings 2, if we really want to be smart alecs).
You just linked something that proved yourself wrong lol. Do the trolls on this forum even try?
|
On September 24 2014 11:19 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2014 11:16 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On September 24 2014 08:29 JudicatorHammurabi wrote: The cancellation of Titan is 7 years down the drain, and doesn't reflect well on Blizzard, whose success to this day has entirely benched on the Warcraft and Starcraft franchises they made back in the 1990s. thanks for the laugh man. Blizzard has only been around since 1993 .. .so they made good stuff for 6 years and hoave been costing since then. ok i guess they are doing a great job living off of Lost Vikings and porting educational software over to Windows 3.1. The real laugh is that you're perfectly incapable of reading XD Warcraft, Diablo, and Starcraft franchises were created in the 1990s. Blizzard hasn't had a new franchise since then, which they were attempting to do with Titan. That's the only thing I said. Every game Blizzard has released since Warcraft 1 has been either a Warcraft, Diablo, or Starcraft game. That's the only point I was making in my last post. I have no idea where you're pulling all this Lost Vikings and education software stuff from, because it's entirely irrelevant to my original point that since the release of WC1, all of Blizzard's development has been for the SC, Diablo, and WC franchises. But please, keep up with the dumb comments LOL. Future advice: If you really have to take a dickish jab at someone, at least be intelligent when doing it. Show nested quote +SC2 holds about 90% of the RTS market share precisely because it has had 2 solid releases in 2010 and 2012. And SC2 is part of the Starcraft franchise, is it not? You're only proving my original point.
why would they need new franchises? mind blown
|
On September 24 2014 11:33 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2014 11:27 asymptotech wrote:Hmm, somehow I swear there was a third game series in addition to WC and SC. I keep forgetting that the [very successful] Diablo stuff was produced by, oh wait, yeah, it was Blizzard. But yeah, even without Diablo, the whole 'only SC/WC thing' is still wrong...and very easily verified: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blizzard_Entertainment Hmm, forgot that in my first post, but it's in my next one (two above yours). Considering I've played all 3 Diablos and own the second and third, it was an honest brain fart. However, it doesn't change the fact that Blizzard was looking to create a new franchise and it flopped, which is the entire fact of my original post. Then again, I think people would rather be smart asses. No, they didn't make the game because it wasn't viable and their staff didn't want to make it. If you don't think there was a huge push from stock holders to make the next "wow", you are crazy. But after they made Hearth Stone and proved that they didn't need to make an MMO to get 20 million people to try their game, they likely decided that they didn't need to make that game any more. And lets be clear, making video games is a creative process and if your staff isn't into the game you are making, its going to be a pretty shitty game.
http://www.polygon.com/2014/9/23/6834203/blizzard-titan-cancelled-hearthstone-heroes-of-the-storm
You can also read polygon's take on the subject where they go over how amazing it is that Blizzard decided to can the project and move on. Part of the creative process of making things is deciding that what you were working on was crap and moving on. Games are canceled and shelved all the time. Blizzard is just going to move on and make something else.
|
On September 24 2014 11:40 Artok wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2014 11:19 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On September 24 2014 11:16 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On September 24 2014 08:29 JudicatorHammurabi wrote: The cancellation of Titan is 7 years down the drain, and doesn't reflect well on Blizzard, whose success to this day has entirely benched on the Warcraft and Starcraft franchises they made back in the 1990s. thanks for the laugh man. Blizzard has only been around since 1993 .. .so they made good stuff for 6 years and hoave been costing since then. ok i guess they are doing a great job living off of Lost Vikings and porting educational software over to Windows 3.1. The real laugh is that you're perfectly incapable of reading XD Warcraft, Diablo, and Starcraft franchises were created in the 1990s. Blizzard hasn't had a new franchise since then, which they were attempting to do with Titan. That's the only thing I said. Every game Blizzard has released since Warcraft 1 has been either a Warcraft, Diablo, or Starcraft game. That's the only point I was making in my last post. I have no idea where you're pulling all this Lost Vikings and education software stuff from, because it's entirely irrelevant to my original point that since the release of WC1, all of Blizzard's development has been for the SC, Diablo, and WC franchises. But please, keep up with the dumb comments LOL. Future advice: If you really have to take a dickish jab at someone, at least be intelligent when doing it. SC2 holds about 90% of the RTS market share precisely because it has had 2 solid releases in 2010 and 2012. And SC2 is part of the Starcraft franchise, is it not? You're only proving my original point. why would they need new franchises? mind blown
I was wondering the same thing. Why are you asking me? I don't work at Blizzard. Maybe ask Blizzard why they were only trying to make a new franchise for 7 years? mind blown
On September 24 2014 11:40 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2014 11:33 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On September 24 2014 11:27 asymptotech wrote:Hmm, somehow I swear there was a third game series in addition to WC and SC. I keep forgetting that the [very successful] Diablo stuff was produced by, oh wait, yeah, it was Blizzard. But yeah, even without Diablo, the whole 'only SC/WC thing' is still wrong...and very easily verified: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blizzard_Entertainment Hmm, forgot that in my first post, but it's in my next one (two above yours). Considering I've played all 3 Diablos and own the second and third, it was an honest brain fart. However, it doesn't change the fact that Blizzard was looking to create a new franchise and it flopped, which is the entire fact of my original post. Then again, I think people would rather be smart asses. No, they didn't make the game because it wasn't viable and their staff didn't want to make it. If you don't think there was a huge push from stock holders to make the next "wow", you are crazy. But after they made Hearth Stone and proved that they didn't need to make an MMO to get 20 million people to try their game, they likely decided that they didn't need to make that game any more. And lets be clear, making video games is a creative process and if your staff isn't into the game you are making, its going to be a pretty shitty game. http://www.polygon.com/2014/9/23/6834203/blizzard-titan-cancelled-hearthstone-heroes-of-the-stormYou can also read polygon's take on the subject where they go over how amazing it is that Blizzard decided to can the project and move on. Part of the creative process of making things is deciding that what you were working on was crap and moving on. Games are canceled and shelved all the time. Blizzard is just going to move on and make something else. You're saying that Blizzard was at the overwhelming pressure by stockholders for 7 years to develop Titan? That sounds even crazier that the company would have been "held hostage" for that long.
I think the biggest issue was they didn't have the same degree of creativity with Titan that they had in formulating the Diablo, Starcraft, and Warcraft franchises. I can see why they were having issues with Titan. And fortunately, the early Starcraft, Diablo, and Warcraft games were extremely good, and Starcraft was one of the biggest professional sports in South Korea. When you have that solid foundation, it's really easy to continue on it, and there isn't much motivation to create something new. So yeah, I understand why you say that the staff didn't have too much heart in it.
An analog: id Software is still making shittons of royalties from id Tech, and if you haven't noticed, the legendary FPS creator has really toned down their game development operations since Doom 3 (besides Rage and a Q3 remake), because id Tech is doing well. Still, I honestly prefer the Unreal engine.
|
Guess they will work on Warcraft4 next then, they already have expansions planned for Starcraft and wow among with Diablo3, unless they start with a new game concept AGAIN or decide to strengthen one of the already existing teams.
|
On September 24 2014 11:41 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2014 11:40 Artok wrote:On September 24 2014 11:19 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On September 24 2014 11:16 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On September 24 2014 08:29 JudicatorHammurabi wrote: The cancellation of Titan is 7 years down the drain, and doesn't reflect well on Blizzard, whose success to this day has entirely benched on the Warcraft and Starcraft franchises they made back in the 1990s. thanks for the laugh man. Blizzard has only been around since 1993 .. .so they made good stuff for 6 years and hoave been costing since then. ok i guess they are doing a great job living off of Lost Vikings and porting educational software over to Windows 3.1. The real laugh is that you're perfectly incapable of reading XD Warcraft, Diablo, and Starcraft franchises were created in the 1990s. Blizzard hasn't had a new franchise since then, which they were attempting to do with Titan. That's the only thing I said. Every game Blizzard has released since Warcraft 1 has been either a Warcraft, Diablo, or Starcraft game. That's the only point I was making in my last post. I have no idea where you're pulling all this Lost Vikings and education software stuff from, because it's entirely irrelevant to my original point that since the release of WC1, all of Blizzard's development has been for the SC, Diablo, and WC franchises. But please, keep up with the dumb comments LOL. Future advice: If you really have to take a dickish jab at someone, at least be intelligent when doing it. SC2 holds about 90% of the RTS market share precisely because it has had 2 solid releases in 2010 and 2012. And SC2 is part of the Starcraft franchise, is it not? You're only proving my original point. why would they need new franchises? mind blown Why are you asking me? I don't work at Blizzard. Maybe ask Blizzard why they were only trying to make a new franchise for 7 years? mind blown Show nested quote +On September 24 2014 11:40 Plansix wrote:On September 24 2014 11:33 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On September 24 2014 11:27 asymptotech wrote:Hmm, somehow I swear there was a third game series in addition to WC and SC. I keep forgetting that the [very successful] Diablo stuff was produced by, oh wait, yeah, it was Blizzard. But yeah, even without Diablo, the whole 'only SC/WC thing' is still wrong...and very easily verified: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blizzard_Entertainment Hmm, forgot that in my first post, but it's in my next one (two above yours). Considering I've played all 3 Diablos and own the second and third, it was an honest brain fart. However, it doesn't change the fact that Blizzard was looking to create a new franchise and it flopped, which is the entire fact of my original post. Then again, I think people would rather be smart asses. No, they didn't make the game because it wasn't viable and their staff didn't want to make it. If you don't think there was a huge push from stock holders to make the next "wow", you are crazy. But after they made Hearth Stone and proved that they didn't need to make an MMO to get 20 million people to try their game, they likely decided that they didn't need to make that game any more. And lets be clear, making video games is a creative process and if your staff isn't into the game you are making, its going to be a pretty shitty game. http://www.polygon.com/2014/9/23/6834203/blizzard-titan-cancelled-hearthstone-heroes-of-the-stormYou can also read polygon's take on the subject where they go over how amazing it is that Blizzard decided to can the project and move on. Part of the creative process of making things is deciding that what you were working on was crap and moving on. Games are canceled and shelved all the time. Blizzard is just going to move on and make something else. You're saying that Blizzard was at the overwhelming pressure by stockholders for 7 years to develop Titan? That sounds even crazier that the company would have been "held hostage" for that long. I think the biggest issue was they didn't have the same degree of creativity with Titan that they had in formulating the Diablo, Starcraft, and Warcraft franchises. I can see why they were having issues with Titan. Stockholders hold a ton of power and most of Activisions earning reports focused a lot on WoW. There is nothing crazy about it. And MMOs take around 5-7 years to develop, so canceling one isn't a shocker. At least they didn't shit out a crappy game just to try and recoup some of their loss.
|
On September 24 2014 11:50 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2014 11:41 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On September 24 2014 11:40 Artok wrote:On September 24 2014 11:19 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On September 24 2014 11:16 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On September 24 2014 08:29 JudicatorHammurabi wrote: The cancellation of Titan is 7 years down the drain, and doesn't reflect well on Blizzard, whose success to this day has entirely benched on the Warcraft and Starcraft franchises they made back in the 1990s. thanks for the laugh man. Blizzard has only been around since 1993 .. .so they made good stuff for 6 years and hoave been costing since then. ok i guess they are doing a great job living off of Lost Vikings and porting educational software over to Windows 3.1. The real laugh is that you're perfectly incapable of reading XD Warcraft, Diablo, and Starcraft franchises were created in the 1990s. Blizzard hasn't had a new franchise since then, which they were attempting to do with Titan. That's the only thing I said. Every game Blizzard has released since Warcraft 1 has been either a Warcraft, Diablo, or Starcraft game. That's the only point I was making in my last post. I have no idea where you're pulling all this Lost Vikings and education software stuff from, because it's entirely irrelevant to my original point that since the release of WC1, all of Blizzard's development has been for the SC, Diablo, and WC franchises. But please, keep up with the dumb comments LOL. Future advice: If you really have to take a dickish jab at someone, at least be intelligent when doing it. SC2 holds about 90% of the RTS market share precisely because it has had 2 solid releases in 2010 and 2012. And SC2 is part of the Starcraft franchise, is it not? You're only proving my original point. why would they need new franchises? mind blown Why are you asking me? I don't work at Blizzard. Maybe ask Blizzard why they were only trying to make a new franchise for 7 years? mind blown On September 24 2014 11:40 Plansix wrote:On September 24 2014 11:33 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On September 24 2014 11:27 asymptotech wrote:Hmm, somehow I swear there was a third game series in addition to WC and SC. I keep forgetting that the [very successful] Diablo stuff was produced by, oh wait, yeah, it was Blizzard. But yeah, even without Diablo, the whole 'only SC/WC thing' is still wrong...and very easily verified: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blizzard_Entertainment Hmm, forgot that in my first post, but it's in my next one (two above yours). Considering I've played all 3 Diablos and own the second and third, it was an honest brain fart. However, it doesn't change the fact that Blizzard was looking to create a new franchise and it flopped, which is the entire fact of my original post. Then again, I think people would rather be smart asses. No, they didn't make the game because it wasn't viable and their staff didn't want to make it. If you don't think there was a huge push from stock holders to make the next "wow", you are crazy. But after they made Hearth Stone and proved that they didn't need to make an MMO to get 20 million people to try their game, they likely decided that they didn't need to make that game any more. And lets be clear, making video games is a creative process and if your staff isn't into the game you are making, its going to be a pretty shitty game. http://www.polygon.com/2014/9/23/6834203/blizzard-titan-cancelled-hearthstone-heroes-of-the-stormYou can also read polygon's take on the subject where they go over how amazing it is that Blizzard decided to can the project and move on. Part of the creative process of making things is deciding that what you were working on was crap and moving on. Games are canceled and shelved all the time. Blizzard is just going to move on and make something else. You're saying that Blizzard was at the overwhelming pressure by stockholders for 7 years to develop Titan? That sounds even crazier that the company would have been "held hostage" for that long. I think the biggest issue was they didn't have the same degree of creativity with Titan that they had in formulating the Diablo, Starcraft, and Warcraft franchises. I can see why they were having issues with Titan. Stockholders hold a ton of power and most of Activisions earning reports focused a lot on WoW. There is nothing crazy about it. And MMOs take around 5-7 years to develop, so canceling one isn't a shocker. At least they didn't shit out a crappy game just to try and recoup some of their loss.
Well, let's be frank. WoW's earnings have been plummeting over the last 4 years. I don't understand who over at Activision or among their stockholders thought the proper response was to continue forcing the development of a game that the developer saw wasn't going anywhere. Then again, this wouldn't be the first time that Activision was twisting Blizzard's arm.
Still, I don't think we can put all the blame for these shortcomings on Activision and the stockholders. Some game devs make honest mistakes (3DR is a famous example). I also don't think that if Valve became publicly traded tomorrow, that somehow ignorant stockholders would force them into developing games they don't want to or would receive a lot of criticism (like Diablo 3 did).
Still, do we even know for sure that Activision was forcing Blizzard to develop Titan all this time, when Blizzard knew it was a failing endeavor? Or are you speculating?
Honestly, if I was Blizzard, from the start I would have said, "I have 3 really solid franchises, so I'm going to continue with that."
Just look at Bethesda's Elder Scrolls series that has been around since 1994, or id's Wolfenstein, DOOM, and Quake series that are alive and well to this day and originated in the early-mid 90s. Dare I even mention Final Fantasy? I wouldn't expect Blizzard to make an entirely new franchise for a very long time.
|
It's not the first time Blizzard cancels games that's been in production for a prolonged period of time, Starcraft:Ghost had an entire in house team, and a secondary team that was hired from the outside much like how Diablo 1 was created. Then we have Warcraft:Warlord of the clans which pretty much got finished before it was cancelled.
|
I hope they go yolo with LoTV and make it MUCH more like brood war, then get to work on Warcraft 4. The free to play model can certainly work for an RTS; Blizzard was just too lazy/didn't realize the potential pile of money they could have made with sc2.
|
Wow. Blizzard
|
On September 24 2014 11:19 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2014 11:16 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On September 24 2014 08:29 JudicatorHammurabi wrote: The cancellation of Titan is 7 years down the drain, and doesn't reflect well on Blizzard, whose success to this day has entirely benched on the Warcraft and Starcraft franchises they made back in the 1990s. thanks for the laugh man. Blizzard has only been around since 1993 .. .so they made good stuff for 6 years and hoave been costing since then. ok i guess they are doing a great job living off of Lost Vikings and porting educational software over to Windows 3.1. The real laugh is that you're perfectly incapable of reading XD Warcraft, Diablo, and Starcraft franchises were created in the 1990s. Blizzard hasn't had a new franchise since then, which they were attempting to do with Titan. That's the only thing I said. Every game Blizzard has released since Warcraft 1 has been either a Warcraft, Diablo, or Starcraft game. That's the only point I was making in my last post. I have no idea where you're pulling all this Lost Vikings and education software stuff from, because it's entirely irrelevant to my original point that since the release of WC1, all of Blizzard's development has been for the SC, Diablo, and WC franchises. But please, keep up with the dumb comments LOL. Future advice: If you really have to take a dickish jab at someone, at least be intelligent when doing it. Show nested quote +SC2 holds about 90% of the RTS market share precisely because it has had 2 solid releases in 2010 and 2012. And SC2 is part of the Starcraft franchise, is it not? You're only proving my original point.
which point? this point right here? is that the point?
On September 24 2014 08:29 JudicatorHammurabi wrote: The difference is that the last time Blizzard made a solid game was arguably 2004.
after several posts you're now babling in circles.
Blizzard has made solid games that are post 2004 including WoL and HotS. Let's compare these releases to SCs closest competitor in the RTS genre.. C&C and EA's latest RTS masterpiece.. .C&C4... or how about CA's Rome2. I like Blizzard making very few games.. and i like the autonomy Blizzard management has to cancel games that have been under development for several years.
Every game Blizzard cancels costs me $0 and zero time deciding whether or not to buy it.
On September 24 2014 12:04 Integra wrote: It's not the first time Blizzard cancels games that's been in production for a prolonged period of time, Starcraft:Ghost had an entire in house team, and a secondary team that was hired from the outside much like how Diablo 1 was created. Then we have Warcraft:Warlord of the clans which pretty much got finished before it was cancelled.
I think SC:Ghost had 3 development teams work on it. first it was Nihilistic, then Swingin' Ape, and then 1 other internal Blizzard team.
I learned 2 things from the cancellation of SC:Ghost.
1. Blizzard's top execs really really wanted to make a 1st person tactical shooter in the SC universe work. 2. Blizzard's top execs were eventually willing to admit it was not up to standard no matter how many ways they tried to skin this cat.
Blizzard's "feedback loop" is pretty amazing for such a big company.
|
Cancelling a game that would of probably sucked out loud because it never came together isn't bad.
It does beg the question of what does blizzard do down the road now, clearly they have Hearthstone now. Heroes of the Storm will be a hard sell because LoL is just so damn big, but who knows.
|
On September 24 2014 04:32 absinthfee wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2014 04:20 Zealously wrote: I'd love to know more about what Titan would have been and looked like, now that it will likely never come together. They spent so much time talking about their next-level goals for the game that I was preparing for something groundbreaking. It would be a shame to never at least see what it could have been.
Also, I'd actually like to applaud Blizzard for identifying the problem (albeit very late) and not just pushing something mediocre out. People like to talk about how they don't care about quality anymore, but sinking (I assume) millions of dollars into a game that ends up being cancelled due to the quality and "fun" not being what they were aiming for says to me that they still care a lot about the things they put out. Just this!! Yeah, they should totally hand over the ultra-innovative MMO ideas they couldn't put into a game.
|
Diablo, RTS, MMO, MOBA, and TCG genres are all up to date. They don't really have anything else to do short of a new IP (or a WoW 2 but that'd be kinda dumb, particularly considering the recent WoW expansion)
I guess there's Ghost; but short of plot they'd need to restart that from scratch, and single player games aren't really as profitable (I guess they could add multiplayer and make it like a Half Life)
Seems like a poor decision to waste all the work they put into that new IP (Although they could have kept the world/setting I guess)
|
Considering that Jay Wilson was in the development team of that game... Thank GOD ! We saw his "innovative" ideas, that almost killed 18 years old franchise. I wonder what will be the next project now. Right now Blizzard are not developing anything new. WoW is getting old... Their next thing should be big and I'm not sure that WC4 can be that.
|
It amazes me when people says that's good news. So what do you wanna play in the future? Why do we need something like Warcraft 4? A new RTS? And what about mmorpg? Is it dead genre?
|
|
|
|