http://www.gamespot.com/news/show_blog_ent...907&sid=6152718

 

 

I couldn't care less.

Why make a thread then?

'Cause people care.

This is bad news.

Whut are you talking about? This is grreat news!!!1

I think the gaming market would be best if it didn't get any more MMOGs. There are too many as it is. I don't see how this is a good thing.

I think the gaming market would be best if it didn't get any more MMOGs.  There are too many as it is.  I don't see how this is a good thing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I was waiting for this. Now all we need is the I DUN LIKE MMORPGS comment from you, hades.

'Cause people care.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not really?

Yeah, people care what Blizzard is doing. Don't they?

 

My problem with MMOs is the monthly fee. Call me an old fashioned guy but paying montly fee for an already bought game is not logical for me.

Diablo's already a MP-focused game. If it becomes a MMRPG, big deal. Tho they will piss a lot of people off if it's a monthly fee thing. Not that Blizzard cares about that.

 

I don't mind MMRPG's, or on-line games, fee or not...but if every single game starts to become one, eventually the audience (and their pocketbooks) will be spread too thin and most won't make any money.

 

The next several years will be interesting.

Maybe they're trying to corner the MMOG audience before others do.

Yeah, people care what Blizzard is doing. Don't they?

 

My problem with MMOs is the monthly fee. Call me an old fashioned guy but paying montly fee for an already bought game is not logical for me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Most MMORPGs add new content on a regular basis in order to justify the monthly fee. City of Heroes for instance has added 2 new archetypes, tons of new missions, new mission types, new areas, new enemies, new costume options, new power sets, etc. They used to also send you an issue of the official City of Heroes comic every month as well, until Devil's Due took over and wanted to sell it in stores.

 

Anyway, a Diablo MMOG is the next logical step. Heck, they could even call it Diablo 3 and it would probably feel like an actual sequel unlike FF XI.

 

Starcraft... I'd have to see how its done. WoW is really good, but there are some things that really annoy me. Like level limits on equipment. I understand why its there... but it still doesn't make any sense from an RP standpoint. "Gee, I'm just not skilled enough to put on this hat."

 

I would love to see a Starcraft single player RPG. Not enough Sci-Fi RPGs, and I think that world would lend itself to some good stories.

Edited June 14, 200619 yr by Oerwinde

So how do they justify charging for new xpacs, then?

So how do they justify charging for new xpacs, then?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

There would have to be a lot of added content to justify a full blown retail xp. Like the new XP for WoW is adding two new races, and with the amount of equipment in the game thats a pretty big undertaking. Each of those races gets a capital city, which are pretty big in WoW, they're adding new instance missions, new enemies, new equipment, new quests, new professions, new areas... their regular patch updates I think pretty much just added a new area and "fixed" some balance issues.

One day every single game will be either MMO or episodic. Two perfect ways to milk gamers.

So how do they justify charging for new xpacs, then?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

There would have to be a lot of added content to justify a full blown retail xp. Like the new XP for WoW is adding two new races, and with the amount of equipment in the game thats a pretty big undertaking. Each of those races gets a capital city, which are pretty big in WoW, they're adding new instance missions, new enemies, new equipment, new quests, new professions, new areas... their regular patch updates I think pretty much just added a new area and "fixed" some balance issues.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So where's this new content on a regular basis? You mean, balance fixing? <_<

IMO the Guild Wars model is awesome.

 

You get all the minor updates - regular balance fixes, bug fixes, new weapons, small to moderately large new areas, special events, etc. - for free as part of the $50 you paid for one game.

 

You get to buy the major new content - new continents, professions, skills, etc. - as independent Guild Wars games ("chapters") released every few months.

 

Regardless of what chapters you own, you can interact with the entire community across all chapters in co-operative and competitive settings.

 

No monthly fees, of course. Incidentally, IIRC some of the Asian countries have the option to pay monthly fees for GW, in which case they don't have to pay the $50 up front. Makes perfect sense to me.

Edited June 14, 200619 yr by angshuman

Or, they could screw their customers twice over and charge for both monthly fees and expansions, all for the sake of 'new content'. But hey, if people are dumb enough to bite, it makes perfect business sense.

I think Blizzard isn't creative enough to make new series. Warcraft, Starcraft, Diablo, Warcraft, Starcraft, Diablo....

 

Make a new Lost Vikings game Blizzard!

Yeah, that's going to happen.

Massive Multiplayer Online Puzzle Game: Lost Vikings 3! :D Think of the possibilities.

You know that if there was ever a new Lost Vikings game it would be 'Lost Vikings: Brotherhood of Steel'.

You mean, Lost Vikings: Ghost.

"I believe this was a misquote. We haven't announced any specific development plans beyond the upcoming expansion for World of Warcraft, and we don't have any intentions to focus on only one genre or platform with our future games. "

 

"Nothing in that rumor is true in regards to Blizzard. If I had to guess, there was some confusion between what Vivendi has planned for its its game division versus what Blizzard has planned. While Blizzard is owned by Vivendi, their game division operates seperately from Blizzard. "

 

Source

First off, the major difference between Guild Wars and MMORPG's is the servers. You are technically in a large graphical chat room in Guild Wars, and all combat is handled with instances. It's a much simpler way of handling a multiplayer game, and hence the server and admin costs are kept to a minimum. It is much more similiar to Diablo than WoW.

 

Secondly, monthly costs for MMORPG's have been explained ad nauseum on these boards. If you still don't get the economic model behind it, then you are just looking for reasons to dislike these types of games. Also, WoW has yet to release a single expansion. They have over 100 servers running with admin teams, GM's, and testers, as well as programmers and artists churning out new content every month. They would either be broke, or not be able to offer this support, without a monthly fee.

 

Now Everquest 2, on the other hand, does seem to milk its customers. But then again, the content they release is for the nutcases that play 10 hours a day, so the cost per hour is probably pretty good for the gamer.