Starcraft Online?

12346»

Posts

  • DisruptorX2DisruptorX2 Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Molten Core just seemed to come out of nowhere, and it seemed the most at home in the WoW world. Somehow it seems that when they turn to Warcraft 3 for plot devices, it comes out lame. Old naxx I guess was kind of an exception, but then again, I never got to the pre-existing characters in that place. :lol:

    DisruptorX2 on
    1208768734831.jpg
  • ArkanArkan Registered User
    edited April 2009
    Molten Core just seemed to come out of nowhere, and it seemed the most at home in the WoW world. Somehow it seems that when they turn to Warcraft 3 for plot devices, it comes out lame. Old naxx I guess was kind of an exception, but then again, I never got to the pre-existing characters in that place. :lol:

    Yeah, but it fit in its own way- the Dark Iron dwarves had a very strong presence in vanilla wow all the way up the leveling curve, and back then you'd level a lot longer than you do now, giving you more time to get familiar with them. When you hit 60, you probably already knew who ragnaros was and you knew what your motivation would be for killing him.



    I mean, you even get the sort of thing I'm talking about now with Sartharian. They do have a cool little story about him in one of the books, but almost no one reads those, so people constantly are going "Who the fuck is this sartharian guy and why do we give a shit about him?"

    At least, the people I talk to are like this. I wondered it myself.

    Arkan on
    Big, honkin' pile of WoW characters
    I think it's hard for someone not to rage at mario kart, while shouting "Fuck you Donkey Kong. Whose dick did you suck to get all those red shells?"
  • DisruptorX2DisruptorX2 Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Arkan wrote: »
    Molten Core just seemed to come out of nowhere, and it seemed the most at home in the WoW world. Somehow it seems that when they turn to Warcraft 3 for plot devices, it comes out lame. Old naxx I guess was kind of an exception, but then again, I never got to the pre-existing characters in that place. :lol:

    Yeah, but it fit in its own way- the Dark Iron dwarves had a very strong presence in vanilla wow all the way up the leveling curve, and back then you'd level a lot longer than you do now, giving you more time to get familiar with them. When you hit 60, you probably already knew who ragnaros was and you knew what your motivation would be for killing him.



    I mean, you even get the sort of thing I'm talking about now with Sartharian. They do have a cool little story about him in one of the books, but almost no one reads those, so people constantly are going "Who the fuck is this sartharian guy and why do we give a shit about him?"

    At least, the people I talk to are like this. I wondered it myself.

    This is the extent of my knowledge concerning Sartharian: he's a black dragon. That means that he's got lovely loots. So we break into his house and murder him, just like Azuregos! Who, as far as I know, was just minding his own business in Ashzara.

    DisruptorX2 on
    1208768734831.jpg
  • ArthilArthil Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    He's kind of protecting the eggs that Neltharion has been experimenting with to create the Twilight Dragons. Man whenever we come up against Deathwing the instance is going to be fucked up, practically everything will be some kind of experiment on his own damn kind.

    Arthil on
    PSN: Honishimo Steam UPlay: ArthilCwcuLUM.jpg
  • ArkanArkan Registered User
    edited April 2009
    ^^^ yes, but that only comes up in one of the books, which not many people read- that was my point, for a lot of people he came out of nowhere.

    This is another person with a similar veiwpoint to mine.

    Not everyone plays the game for the same reasons you do. To me, loot is secondary to experiencing the boss and whatever the associated storyline may be; the loot's a bonus, not the reason to go out to the instance. A boss whose model is a blank cube with a bunch of nameless attack could drop the best loot in the world, but I'd hate fighting him because that's boring.

    Arkan on
    Big, honkin' pile of WoW characters
    I think it's hard for someone not to rage at mario kart, while shouting "Fuck you Donkey Kong. Whose dick did you suck to get all those red shells?"
  • DisruptorX2DisruptorX2 Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Arkan wrote: »
    ^^^ yes, but that only comes up in one of the books, which not many people read- that was my point, for a lot of people he came out of nowhere.

    This is another person with a similar veiwpoint to mine.

    Not everyone plays the game for the same reasons you do. To me, loot is secondary to experiencing the boss and whatever the associated storyline may be; the loot's a bonus, not the reason to go out to the instance. A boss whose model is a blank cube with a bunch of nameless attack could drop the best loot in the world, but I'd hate fighting him because that's boring.

    I was agreeing with you. Sartharian is horribly boring.

    At least Azuregos had the novelty of being a raid boss that wasn't in an instance. And apparently some AQ40 quests that I never did related to him.

    DisruptorX2 on
    1208768734831.jpg
  • ArkanArkan Registered User
    edited April 2009
    On Azuregos, I believe he actually makes fun of the whole "he's a dragon, we must kill him for his loot" thing when you talk to him during the Scepter of the Shifting Sands line, which I found hilarious.

    edit: yes, he does indeed:
    Amusingly, the Spirit of Azuregos talks as if it is the real corporeal dragon, and tells players on the scepter quest that "I walk amongst savages in this cursed land! I cannot take five steps without some crazed orc or human trying to thrust a sharp stick into my hide. At any given time you could very well be speaking to my ghostly spirit."

    from wowwiki

    Arkan on
    Big, honkin' pile of WoW characters
    I think it's hard for someone not to rage at mario kart, while shouting "Fuck you Donkey Kong. Whose dick did you suck to get all those red shells?"
  • Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Arkan wrote: »
    Perhaps we're not interpreting each other correctly.
    I think that's the case
    What I'm saying is that there's no reason to make an expansion devoted to content that has no bearing with the current storyline. Yeah they pull some crazy stuff, but virtually everything so far has been relevant to something existing in the storyline already, and the one exception (AQ40) really set the pace for where the overall storyline is going with the old gods is such. So yeah, they could do that if need be, but it wouldn't be an expansion by itself- it'd be a side thing, sort of like Sartharian is to WoTLK.

    Again, the entire first two teirs of raiding in classic was created SPECIFICALLY for WoW. Ragnoros and all his minions DID NOT EXIST PRIOR TO WOW. Onyxia DID NOT EXIST PRIOR TO WOW. Neltharion.. well you get the idea. However, they had new stories created for them, and were woven into the surrounding areas of the game, making them viable and quality. That's what I'm suggesting they do alongside bringing to life concepts like Najatar and Queen Azhara.
    What you are saying (or seem to be saying) is that if blizzard was so inclined they could churn out expansion after expansion of stuff they just made up for the sake of filling the boxes to sell,
    Where did I say that? I said that the concept of the South Seas, Malestrom and Sunken Kalimdor areas could fill an entire expansion (repeat AN, as in ONE), between the content and storylines that Blizzard has already established in various media, AS WELL as new storylines that they can and would generate. Look at Burning Crusade. Prior to BC, all outland was was a red, mudcaked wasteland. Blizzard created MASSIVE ammounts of new concepts for zones (like Nagrand and the Netherstorm), new races (like the Arrakoa and the Gronn), and other fun stuff. They blended this with existing concepts and stories to create a full expansion. Had they NOT created new stuff, BC would have been pretty darn hollow.
    which is not only retarded, but against blizzard's policy of putting out quality content.
    Again, I'm not suggesting they just churn out random shit. I'm suggesting they do the same thing they did when they made classic WoW, BC & Wrath; which is to take established concepts and storylines and put them alongside NEW concepts and storylines. I mean, seriously, this boils down to me saying Blizzard should do what they've done the past three releases: create brand new stuff alongside bringing old stuff to life.
    At one point you said something that to me was something like "Yeah we can have the nazjatar expansion, and then another expansion with undersea stuff of suchandsuch"... I get the feeling you're saying "expansion" when you mean "content patches".
    I think you misread what I said. Not only did I list a WHOLE crapton of various locals (including Najatar) for a SINGLE expansion when I first brought up all this stuff, I said something in complete opposite to what you're suggesting I'm saying in the post right before yours one. (I'm guessing it showed up while you were making the post and you just missed it however.). Nowhere did I suggest that Najatar would be it's own expansion. That's just silly. It'd be a smaller part of an undersea expansion. I don't know what I said to make you think I meant otherwise.
    There really needs to be this 'core' of stuff in the expansion that has some continuity with what came before- they're not going to just go "Oh, and now magical negaunicorns attack azeroth and we have to invade their home plane!". Otherwise it's just meaningless content.
    The Naga are core. The maelstrom is core. The tomb of Sargeras is core. (and seriously, if you don't think they'd find an way to allow players to explore such an important part of WoW lore, dispite it having collapsed, you're fooling yourself. :D). Kul'tiras is core. Undermine is core.

    Here's an issue I think we're going to have to agree to disagree. "Core" Warcraft exists beyond Warcraft 3.

    EDIT: And yes, Sartharion is terribly done as far as lead up is concerned. Hell, all of the raids in Wrath little to no leadup. I'd perfer less of that, and more stuff like how BRD lead into the MC storyline and BRS lead in to the Neltharion storyline (not to mention the wonderful Onyxia leadup.)

    Undead Scottsman on
  • ArkanArkan Registered User
    edited April 2009
    Here's an issue I think we're going to have to agree to disagree. "Core" Warcraft exists beyond Warcraft 3.

    Uhhh, yes? If I thought it was only warcraft III I would be bitching about Karazhan, which appeared only in Warcraft I, just to name the first thing that comes to mind.

    I definitely think we've misinterpreted each other, because what you're saying there is not what I understood you to be saying earlier at all.

    Arkan on
    Big, honkin' pile of WoW characters
    I think it's hard for someone not to rage at mario kart, while shouting "Fuck you Donkey Kong. Whose dick did you suck to get all those red shells?"
  • Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Arkan wrote: »
    Here's an issue I think we're going to have to agree to disagree. "Core" Warcraft exists beyond Warcraft 3.

    Uhhh, yes? If I thought it was only warcraft III I would be bitching about Karazhan, which appeared only in Warcraft I, just to name the first thing that comes to mind.

    I definitely think we've misinterpreted each other, because what you're saying there is not what I understood you to be saying earlier at all.

    Basically someone suggested that the "water" expansion doesn't have established content. I retorted with the fact that Blizzard can make up new content (like they did with classic and both expansions). That was the point I'm trying to get across. If they do a water expansion, they're not just limited to stuff that has already been written down in lore.

    I mean, shit, we as a people on EARTH are still finding new shit underwater. :D No reason to think that Azerothians wouldn't either. Except their stuff wouldn't be quite as freaky as ours. :)
    EDIT: Also, as for my core comment, I apologize. I've run into more than one person who thinks if it didn't happen in War3, nobody gives a shit. (Followed up by the opinion that since we're about to kill all the of the major War 3 players, WoW has nowhere to go.)

    Undead Scottsman on
  • ArkanArkan Registered User
    edited April 2009
    I retorted with the fact that Blizzard can make up new content (like they did with classic and both expansions).

    Which is retarted. They can take the nazjatar and expand on it, but why make up all-new shit? They can certainly expand on the stuff with nazjatar, but why make up new shit?

    Arkan on
    Big, honkin' pile of WoW characters
    I think it's hard for someone not to rage at mario kart, while shouting "Fuck you Donkey Kong. Whose dick did you suck to get all those red shells?"
  • DisruptorX2DisruptorX2 Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Well, honestly, Warcraft 3 was mostly terrible from a setting standpoint. Especially compared to 2.

    Background created for WoW, such as Blackrock Mountain, is far cooler than anything taken from Warcraft 3.

    DisruptorX2 on
    1208768734831.jpg
  • ArkanArkan Registered User
    edited April 2009
    ...I think my confusion is that when you say "new", I think "completely new thing unrelated to everything else", not "something on top of the rest which is linked to it that we just haven't seen before".

    Arkan on
    Big, honkin' pile of WoW characters
    I think it's hard for someone not to rage at mario kart, while shouting "Fuck you Donkey Kong. Whose dick did you suck to get all those red shells?"
  • Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Arkan wrote: »
    I retorted with the fact that Blizzard can make up new content (like they did with classic and both expansions).

    Which is retarted. They can take the nazjatar and expand on it, but why make up all-new shit? They can certainly expand on the stuff with nazjatar, but why make up new shit?

    To fill in the gaps. There's not enough established stuff to fill in an entire expansion. Look at the Vykrul.. did not exist prior to Wrath, but helped fill in a LOT of content in the game. Nazjatar is a SINGLE CITY. You can't build an entire expansion on that alone.

    EDIT: That could explain some confusion.

    Undead Scottsman on
  • Fig-DFig-D Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Arkan wrote: »
    -We've fought Kael'thas twice, Baron Rivendare twice, and the entire contents of Naxxramas twice if you were lucky enough to raid Naxx back in classic. And all those guys we actually killed.

    Yeah, and look how much ridicule it generated on the forums. Especially Kael'thas. "Yeah, I hear he's gonna be the next headless horseman! He just can't stay down!" After that, something tells me they probably won't keep repeating that and repeatedly having the same NPC be bosses in multiple raids. Possible... but it seems silly after that.

    Puttin' on the nerd hat:

    When you turn in the quest item gained from defeating Kael in Tempest Keep the game makes it perfectly clear that he will return. Same with Kel'Thuzad in Naxx. Upon turning in the phylactery to Father Inigo Montoy in Light's Hope Chapel there's a bit of flavor text stating that you feel uneasy about giving him the item. With Wrath they tied it into the return of Naxx with Montoy gaining the powers of a Lich from Kel as payment for being instrumental in allowing Kel to regain his corporeal form. Baron Rivendare... well... I'll give you that. The general rule of thumb is that if you don't collect someone's head for a quest, they're not dead, but you do actually collect Baron Rivendare's head for a quest so he kinda breaks that rule.

    Fig-D on
    SteamID - Fig-D :: PSN - Fig-D
  • Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    'course it is an interesting question of where WoW will go in the future.. I think there's definantly at least one more expansion left in them (the aforementioned Great Seas/Maelstrom/Sunken Kalimdor), and possibly another one after that. Additionally, I think we'll see at some point a major revamp of classic content. (Updating geometry and monsters with better graphics, possibly redoing land to allow for flying mounts in classic; possibly make that part of the game fun and relevant again, rather than just a roadblock to whatever expansion content is currently out.)

    They've mentioned they'd like to do a graphical upgrade in the next expansion, so if they stick to their current development speeds, we'd probably see Expansion #3 sometime in late 2010. At this point, WoW will be six years old, but have a new coat of paint (paint quality to be determined). While that is REALLY friggen old, I can see it still have a satisfactory playerbase. Another expansion in 2012 would REALLY be stretching things, but possible; especially as a sort of "end game" expansion, where the cap is raised to 100 (which, I think you'll admit, it a good place to end.) and finally the cosmic threats come down to bare.

    But even then, even after all that content and time... I honestly can't see Blizzard just letting WoW die.. or slip off into a coma of no new content. (I mean, EVERQUEST 1 still gets new content). But I'm at a loss of what they could honestly keep adding (unless they DO go with the "other world through the Outland portals" idea, which would essentially mean they could add content until there was no people to add content for.) Eventually they WILL run out of established things to kill, though. Period. As you said, we'll have to be fighting negaunicrons from another planet at some point.

    It's like a weird paradox. I can't imagine WoW ending, but I also can't see it lasting for that long...

    Undead Scottsman on
  • AresProphetAresProphet I see a darkness in my fate I'll drive my car without the brakesRegistered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Fair enough, though the scuttlebutt I've heard is that while they wanted to go all out and reinvent the entire genre, they eventually settled on something more traditional during the conceptual meeting. That's mostly hearsay though.

    I heard this about both EQ2 and Vanguard during their development, for what it's worth.

    The MMO genre is pretty resistant to change, because you aren't just selling a box with "new and improved!" on it you're selling a $15/month commitment with "not guaranteed to be worth it!" on it. The EverQuest-style MMO is hard to avoid, because it's proven to be profitable. People like it. They like to bitch about it too, but people like to bitch about everything. Me most of all.

    The StarCraft setting lends itself well to a hypothetical MMOFPS just because it's got a lot of guns and shit in it in the first place. But a persistant world that revolves around players fighting each othercan be extremely tough to maintain. Look at any RTS that has had a "persistance" system where you take over terrtitory; they need to be periodically reset because eventually one side rules everything and it's not interesting anymore.

    And if the game world is static, like WoW, why bother with the FPS trappings in the first place? It'd be a PvE FPS, which is just a short hop from your traditional MMO. With guns and laserswords instead of bows and swords.

    It seems like it'd be easy for Blizzard to take a risk, but the MMO market is not the kind of place you want to be sticking your neck out. In the ten or twelve short years it's been around it's had more spectacular failures, smoldering ruins of games that were going to be huge, had multi-million dollar budgets and powerhouse development teams slaving away on them, than the entire rest of the game industry.

    Every year, at least one hugely-anticipated MMO launches which then proceeds to crash and burn spectacularly. Last year it was Age of Conan, which is only proving that MMOs still breathe long after they're dead. In 07 it was Vanguard, which is little more than a walking corpse animated by SoE's corporate necromancy. Tabula Rasa before that, Shadowbane long ago, Anarchy Online way back when, Enter the Matrix, the list of MMOs that didn't even recoup development and maintenance costs is longer than the list of those that have succeeded.

    The ones that are still around in North America have decided that "go big or go home" is suicide in the MMO market. CoH did alright, on a limited scale. EVE Online is a niche product (a perfect case study in what happens when you defy the traditional genre). EQ2 has fewer subscribers than EQ1 did at its peak eight years ago, when the entire MMO market was a tenth the size it is now.

    It's in this kind of unforgiving landscape that WoW towers as an anomalous success, and Blizzard can't be so naive as to think that they can achieve unbridled success with another MMO like they could with an RTS every couple of years. It just doesn't work that way in this genre.

    AresProphet on
    oh, gimme some time
    show me the foothold from which I can climb
    yeah, when I feel low
    you show me a signpost for where I should go
  • Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Registered User regular
    edited April 2009
    Fair enough, though the scuttlebutt I've heard is that while they wanted to go all out and reinvent the entire genre, they eventually settled on something more traditional during the conceptual meeting. That's mostly hearsay though.

    I heard this about both EQ2 and Vanguard during their development, for what it's worth.

    The MMO genre is pretty resistant to change, because you aren't just selling a box with "new and improved!" on it you're selling a $15/month commitment with "not guaranteed to be worth it!" on it. The EverQuest-style MMO is hard to avoid, because it's proven to be profitable. People like it. They like to bitch about it too, but people like to bitch about everything. Me most of all.

    The StarCraft setting lends itself well to a hypothetical MMOFPS just because it's got a lot of guns and shit in it in the first place. But a persistant world that revolves around players fighting each othercan be extremely tough to maintain. Look at any RTS that has had a "persistance" system where you take over terrtitory; they need to be periodically reset because eventually one side rules everything and it's not interesting anymore.

    And if the game world is static, like WoW, why bother with the FPS trappings in the first place? It'd be a PvE FPS, which is just a short hop from your traditional MMO. With guns and laserswords instead of bows and swords.

    It seems like it'd be easy for Blizzard to take a risk, but the MMO market is not the kind of place you want to be sticking your neck out. In the ten or twelve short years it's been around it's had more spectacular failures, smoldering ruins of games that were going to be huge, had multi-million dollar budgets and powerhouse development teams slaving away on them, than the entire rest of the game industry.

    Every year, at least one hugely-anticipated MMO launches which then proceeds to crash and burn spectacularly. Last year it was Age of Conan, which is only proving that MMOs still breathe long after they're dead. In 07 it was Vanguard, which is little more than a walking corpse animated by SoE's corporate necromancy. Tabula Rasa before that, Shadowbane long ago, Anarchy Online way back when, Enter the Matrix, the list of MMOs that didn't even recoup development and maintenance costs is longer than the list of those that have succeeded.

    The ones that are still around in North America have decided that "go big or go home" is suicide in the MMO market. CoH did alright, on a limited scale. EVE Online is a niche product (a perfect case study in what happens when you defy the traditional genre). EQ2 has fewer subscribers than EQ1 did at its peak eight years ago, when the entire MMO market was a tenth the size it is now.

    It's in this kind of unforgiving landscape that WoW towers as an anomalous success, and Blizzard can't be so naive as to think that they can achieve unbridled success with another MMO like they could with an RTS every couple of years. It just doesn't work that way in this genre.

    Well, if they can't risk doing something off the beaten path, and also can't risk treading on WoW's ground... then, what do you think they're doing? We know they're making a new MMO not based on one of their existing IP's, but you seem dead set on not entertaining any scenario where that would be something Blizzard would actually do, even though they are doing it.

    Undead Scottsman on
Sign In or Register to comment.