Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

MMO (Wow) Clone?Follow

#1 Nov 24 2010 at 5:13 PM Rating: Default
11 posts
Don't get me wrong. I can't wait for this game. It looks awesome. I've been following it for almost a year now. But I want to quote something from their web site for you. "RIFT has all of the traditional quests and deep story arcs you expect from a fantasy MMO role-playing game".

Now I know there are things that it does that other games don't, the dynamic rifts being among them. But I can't help to think, is that all? Yes, with the souls system you can change them at any time so that you will be geared towards wht you're going up against, but it's not like the system is different from WoW's Talent Tree.

Like I said, I can't wait for this game. But... Yes, the graphics are much better, yes they have rifts, but other than that is it really that differnt?

Edited, Nov 29th 2010 4:26am by Bohtauri Lock Thread: Off Topic - Use The Asylum for tangent topics

Edited, Nov 29th 2010 2:34pm by Kaasha
#2 Nov 24 2010 at 5:20 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
100 posts
It's different from WoW in that it allows you to combine talents from all the classes within a same calling, in groups of 3 at a time I believe. So you will have a lot greater customization options than in WoW. But the core concept is very similar, yes.
#3 Nov 24 2010 at 5:21 PM Rating: Decent
*
66 posts
Well, the thing is when you come down to it, yes. The core of all good RPG MMO's are probably going to look very similar- there is a reason for that.

It is tried and tested, and found to be true. Fantasy MMO? Yes, some creatures will be the same either because the team is creating that kind of world, or because they want to make a loving nod to the mythology of their childhood (Elves, fay, werewolves, demons and things). I mean, half of the creatures in WoW are based off of classic mythology, and also D&D. Does that make it a D&D clone? No, because it plays completely different, and has it's own story, and lore.

It's the way the game plays, and how the player plays that makes the difference. I think that Rift will play very different from a lot of MMO's out there because of the setup (open landscape, dynamic instances, SO many potential talents and soul combinations) but the core mechanics will be the same, making it easy for people who have played MMO's previously to pick it up and enjoy it without a horrible amount of 'relearning'.

If you use your argument, you could say WoW is a Diablo clone, and we all know that just isn't the case- they're two very different games.

Edited, Nov 24th 2010 6:25pm by Wolfofthenyght
#4 Nov 24 2010 at 5:29 PM Rating: Decent
*
74 posts
Quote:
But the core concept is very similar, yes.

Imo that's the main and strongest point of Rift. It has new stuff such as dynamic events, mixed class system, etc. But it still conserve a great Lore, Factions with common goals, Raiding, targeting system.

"It's a new classic MMORPG". I know it sounds wierd, but coudn't explain it better :/
#5 Nov 24 2010 at 5:32 PM Rating: Decent
*
66 posts
ravetgn wrote:
"It's a new classic MMORPG". I know it sounds wierd, but coudn't explain it better :/


That's actually a perfectly valid (and well said) way to explain it IMO. It uses classic creatures that have been used through the ages in many Fantasy RPG's, but puts a new twist on it.
#6 Nov 24 2010 at 5:40 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
135 posts
Which personally is exactly what I want. I like the gameplay of classic MMOs. I want a well made MMORPG, that puts some new twists on things, but leaves core gameplay alone. I like the trinity system, and believe there are a lot of shortcomings in any game regardless. WoW is too simple, EQ2 has turned to microtransactions, etc. There is always room for improvement and as long as rift improves on an already solid concept, I will be playing it for a long, long time.
____________________________

Currently playing: EQ2(AB)
#7 Nov 24 2010 at 5:42 PM Rating: Decent
*
66 posts
Cyanix wrote:
Which personally is exactly what I want.


I'd have to agree. This is exactly what I have been looking for in a MMO, which is why I am looking forward to this :)
#8 Nov 24 2010 at 5:51 PM Rating: Decent
*
74 posts
And me too :) I mean, AoC combat system or D&D:O or TERA are curious, but I don't really like them for an MMORPG.
#9 Nov 24 2010 at 5:53 PM Rating: Decent
*
66 posts
Yea, AoC's combat system was cool, but it seemed more like they tried to make a single player system into an MMO system and made it kind of clunky imo.
#10 Nov 24 2010 at 9:54 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
*
114 posts
You figure they will take core elements from games like WoW for a reason. It is the number one MMO out there. You have to start somewhere then improve as you go along. So lots of MMOs are going to look the similar at release.
#11 Nov 25 2010 at 11:12 PM Rating: Good
*
182 posts
ravetgn wrote:
Quote:
But the core concept is very similar, yes.

Imo that's the main and strongest point of Rift. It has new stuff such as dynamic events, mixed class system, etc. But it still conserve a great Lore, Factions with common goals, Raiding, targeting system.

"It's a new classic MMORPG". I know it sounds wierd, but coudn't explain it better :/


No man you explained it quite well and i will have to agree with you on this one.
____________________________
Member of United By Legend currently a AoC guild.
#12 Nov 26 2010 at 10:02 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
41 posts
Well imo many MMO's are similar in many aspects because that's what works. Why fix something that isn't broken? They took the basic MMO style game and added their own twist to it, looks awesome I hope I can get a hold of a vip key.
#13 Nov 26 2010 at 12:57 PM Rating: Decent
*
66 posts
Gyea wrote:
Well imo many MMO's are similar in many aspects because that's what works. Why fix something that isn't broken?


This :D 1000 times.
#14 Nov 28 2010 at 3:20 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
35 posts
World of Warcraft wasn't the first MMORPG. Honestly, when somebody sees a radar, a skill bar, and a stat bar anywhere on the screen, they immediately think it's a WoW clone. If they see you run with the WASD and auto attack, while using skills on said skill bar, it must be a WoW clone.

If you've played any game with RPG elements, you've seen these things before. Well before WoW ever existed, they were in place. Everquest had elements similar in style, so did Neverwinter Nights. Dark Age of Camelot, Ragnarok Online; the list goes on.

Blizzard just uses a familiar layout for their games because it is tried and true, and fitting for the genre. Now if Rift was full of similar locations and familiar raids/back story, you could call it a WoW clone. Just because it shares a common genre does not make it any less than a fantasy game, not a WoW clone.
____________________________
My writings come from a twisted imagination.
My ideas comes from a lifetime of terrifying nightmares.
My inspiration comes from pure madness.
Who said psychosis was a bad thing?
#15 Nov 28 2010 at 7:03 AM Rating: Decent
*
74 posts
I think we shouldn't argue about this. Wow is wow and Rift is Rift.
#16 Nov 28 2010 at 8:11 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*
113 posts
WoW is WoW and Rift is Awesome !! Think everyone agrees with that !!
____________________________
-- Currently playing --

LoL
CoD:MW3
Rift
#17 Nov 28 2010 at 8:35 AM Rating: Decent
*
55 posts
World of Warcraft was obviously not the first MMO, however- and many will disagree, it was the first of it's kind. Now I've heard all of the arguments before, I know EQ came first, I know WoW took a good portion of EQ, but I've played EQ. EQ is not WoW, WoW is not an EQ clone. I remember my first time playing WoW, everything made sense to me, I never felt lost, it was easy to get into. The obvious counter-argument to WoW is an EQ clone is to say, if WoW is EQ, than why wasn't EQ as popular as WoW? That's the jackpot right there. It wasn't because WoW was vastly different than EQ, it's because it was the first MMO that was easy to get into, Blizzard realized this. So why is WoW not an EQ clone, and why was it the first of it's kind? Because it changed the standard. To me this is a natural progression, EQ is a classic MMO, not the first but the first big MMO for sure, of course by todays standards it was not very big at all (WoW is big). It was only a matter of time until a studio like Blizzard, saw opportunity and very much so took advantage of that.

World of Warcraft is the MMO Standard now days. When people say "WoW clone" they are really saying "this game changes nothing". Does Rift follow the MMO Standard? In a lot of ways, yes it does. Perhaps to not be a WoW clone it would have to change the standard, we will have to wait and see. However in my eyes, dynamic content is the obvious place for MMOs to go, if dynamic content is what changes MMOs- thats when a game will break the standard, thus making the MMO NOT a WoW clone.


So which is it? Rift? or GW2?

Personally I'm pumped up for both. As a side note, it's 6:30 in the AM and I haven't slept. If anything here is incoherent, I apologize.

*sh*t I forgot about Ultima Online, still the same applies, WoW changed the MMO standard.

Edited, Nov 28th 2010 9:36am by z0mbi

Edited, Nov 28th 2010 9:36am by z0mbi
#18 Nov 28 2010 at 9:50 AM Rating: Default
17 posts
Quests didn't start with WoW
Skill trees didn't start with WoW
All of these core class are older than WoW
Gear predates WoW..

I'm sorry but what exactly are you getting at? Even back in the paper and dice days of D&D before mudding before MMOs even existed these were concepts. They had skill trees, loot, questing, same classes, mythical races. All MMOs are just a polished and more dynamic version of D&D if you really want to get to the nitty and gritty. I find it ironic that everyone compares everything to WoW when there were many successful games before WoW that had all the same concepts. WoW just took the best thing from each game and put it into theirs which is why it was successful.
#19 Nov 28 2010 at 10:41 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
32 posts
Was anyone else banging their head against the desk while reading this thread?

MMORPG is the genre. WoW and Rift are both part of this genre. Therefore, major elements of both games will be similar, if not identical, much like how FPS games are all first person and have guns, or racing games all have vehicles and tracks. There's no grand conspiracy at work or plagiarism going on. Games in the same genre will have the same core elements.

Having said that, it's a very, very good thing that some game elements are the same from MMORPG to MMORPG. Simple commands like /who, /tell, etc, and maps, auto attack/abilities, experience-based level progression, etc. These systems allow for players to move easily between games by keeping the learning curve low. In this era of gamers expecting instant-gratification in their games, keeping the learning curve very fast is simply good for business and good for all players, not just the instant-gratification or migratory players. Take a look at the recent launch of FFXIV. Granted, every game sucks at launch and loses players, but FFXIV took it to near Vanguard levels of player exodus. Not because of bugs or unstable servers like VG, but because the game was so different from all other MMOs (except FFXI of course) and simply difficult/annoying to play. The worst-in-history, slow, clunky keyboard+mouse interface, server-based menus with wretched load times, lack of mob diversity, lack of class diversity, lack of quests, lack of custom chat channels/windows, lack of a traditional guild system, lack of goals, lack of alternate advancement within one class, etc. I could keep going, but there's no reason to. You all know exactly why FFXIV went from 4k per server at peak to 500 per server at peak (they [wisely] removed global player counts in the last patch, so who knows what the numbers are now).

The best games keep the core MMORPG systems intact and expand upon them.
#20 Nov 28 2010 at 2:36 PM Rating: Good
*
182 posts
I think people will always use WoW because its what everyone knows. While some of the long time MMO players use EQ and that to compare games too the new MMO players will use WoW
____________________________
Member of United By Legend currently a AoC guild.
#21 Nov 28 2010 at 2:50 PM Rating: Decent
*
55 posts
Quote:
Quests didn't start with WoW
Skill trees didn't start with WoW
All of these core class are older than WoW
Gear predates WoW..

I'm sorry but what exactly are you getting at? Even back in the paper and dice days of D&D before mudding before MMOs even existed these were concepts. They had skill trees, loot, questing, same classes, mythical races. All MMOs are just a polished and more dynamic version of D&D if you really want to get to the nitty and gritty. I find it ironic that everyone compares everything to WoW when there were many successful games before WoW that had all the same concepts. WoW just took the best thing from each game and put it into theirs which is why it was successful.


What are people supposed to say?

"Is this another evolution of paper and dice D&D? Oh god not another one of those, shoot me now!"

Give me a break.

World of Warcraft is not popular because it took the best thing from each game. If it were so easy that we all could sit atop a mountain and look down on the world, we would analyze and say hey this is exactly what works, we would all be billionaires. I don't know if you read my other post or not, but WoW was popular because how easy it was to get into (there are other factors sure, but this was the greatest). It didn't just appeal to the RPG nerd but to the average person too. You can't say that about any MMO before WoW.

*Edit - forgot to quote.

Edited, Nov 28th 2010 3:51pm by z0mbi
#22 Nov 28 2010 at 2:57 PM Rating: Good
*
52 posts
As others have said, It's an MMORPG which means it will share similar traits to other MMORPGs. However I think there are enough unique things in rift that it wont be a "WoW clone". Though I have no doubts that it will take good aspects from other games and build upon them.
____________________________
Tariuss Antonia Bayle EQ2
#23 Nov 28 2010 at 3:28 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
*
135 posts
There are a lot of divisions within the MMORPG community and a lot of newer people in the community fail to realize this. The disagreements tend to arise between the long time players of the genre and the newer ones, who were introduced by WoW.

I played Everquest when it was owned by Verant. I play Everquest 2 now, its a GREAT game but it is taking a turn for the worse. It is still an amazing game, with amazing mechanics, but lately the direction it is taking will ultimately kill it. Regarding WoW, I have never and will never subscribe to the game. I played the trial, I got bored. I do not think it is the standard. I think it is an example of a well polished game, but I think it is seriously lacking in a ton of aspects, which is why it will never appeal to me.

World of Warcraft was destined to be huge, because its made by blizzard. Blizzard has too much clout to fail at this point, every game they release is guaranteed to be a highly enjoyable, fun game. They have alpha testing phases that the VAST majority of other game companies dream of. They can delay games until the developers think the game is ready to release, something absent from just about every other game company out there. That is the reason for WoWs success. They innovated almost nothing, instead choosing to focus on accessibility, something the genre desperately needed at the time. This resulted in a highly polished product in an already established IP, guaranteeing it would have initial success. The accessibility continues to keep people subscribed, because it has mass appeal. Will Rift be compared to WoW? Of course. But its pointless. Cataclysm will be WoWs peak. You can generally only blow up a game world once and completely re-arrange it. Its a tool that can be used to refresh the game world and make it seem fresh again. It will continue to be a source of revenue for Blizzard, but I doubt it will ever see higher numbers than the next few months. WoW clones will fail, because they bring nothing new to the table.

An important thing people need to remember is that there is a lot of market share currently out there(Using 2008 statistics, 38%, most likely more now). There are a lot of other long-time people in the community I come from(EQ2) that want nothing to do with WoW, but are fed up with SoE. A lot of them will immediately adopt Rift. It is not a WoW clone, and if you listen to some of Scott Hartsman's interviews, you will realize that this game will not be more of WoW at all. If anything, it will resemble Everquest and Everquest 2 far more in terms of gameplay dynamics.

Back to topic, it is impossible for Rift to be a WoW clone. It is designed from the ground up to deliver dynamic content. Will there be elements that resemble WoW? Of course. But saying Rift is a WoW clone is like saying Call of Duty is just another half-life clone. Its a silly statement.
____________________________

Currently playing: EQ2(AB)
#24 Nov 28 2010 at 4:38 PM Rating: Decent
*
55 posts
Cyanix wrote:
There are a lot of divisions within the MMORPG community and a lot of newer people in the community fail to realize this. The disagreements tend to arise between the long time players of the genre and the newer ones, who were introduced by WoW.

I played Everquest when it was owned by Verant. I play Everquest 2 now, its a GREAT game but it is taking a turn for the worse. It is still an amazing game, with amazing mechanics, but lately the direction it is taking will ultimately kill it. Regarding WoW, I have never and will never subscribe to the game. I played the trial, I got bored. I do not think it is the standard. I think it is an example of a well polished game, but I think it is seriously lacking in a ton of aspects, which is why it will never appeal to me.

World of Warcraft was destined to be huge, because its made by blizzard. Blizzard has too much clout to fail at this point, every game they release is guaranteed to be a highly enjoyable, fun game. They have alpha testing phases that the VAST majority of other game companies dream of. They can delay games until the developers think the game is ready to release, something absent from just about every other game company out there. That is the reason for WoWs success. They innovated almost nothing, instead choosing to focus on accessibility, something the genre desperately needed at the time. This resulted in a highly polished product in an already established IP, guaranteeing it would have initial success. The accessibility continues to keep people subscribed, because it has mass appeal. Will Rift be compared to WoW? Of course. But its pointless. Cataclysm will be WoWs peak. You can generally only blow up a game world once and completely re-arrange it. Its a tool that can be used to refresh the game world and make it seem fresh again. It will continue to be a source of revenue for Blizzard, but I doubt it will ever see higher numbers than the next few months. WoW clones will fail, because they bring nothing new to the table.

An important thing people need to remember is that there is a lot of market share currently out there(Using 2008 statistics, 38%, most likely more now). There are a lot of other long-time people in the community I come from(EQ2) that want nothing to do with WoW, but are fed up with SoE. A lot of them will immediately adopt Rift. It is not a WoW clone, and if you listen to some of Scott Hartsman's interviews, you will realize that this game will not be more of WoW at all. If anything, it will resemble Everquest and Everquest 2 far more in terms of gameplay dynamics.

Back to topic, it is impossible for Rift to be a WoW clone. It is designed from the ground up to deliver dynamic content. Will there be elements that resemble WoW? Of course. But saying Rift is a WoW clone is like saying Call of Duty is just another half-life clone. Its a silly statement.


It's the standard whether or not you want it to be. It's the biggest MMO and most MMOs after WoW try and replicate that experience.

WoW definitely had a nice player base to fall back on, however- tell that to variety of age groups I've played with in WoW. 40-60 year olds, 10-13, 16-25, you are telling me all of these people were anticipating the next Blizzard title? Nah, that doesn't work here. Again, WoW changed MMOs, it made the point of entry easy and thats what all MMOs try and do now. Problem is, most of the new MMOs lack the polish that WoW has.


Edited, Nov 28th 2010 5:42pm by z0mbi
#25 Nov 28 2010 at 4:43 PM Rating: Good
*
182 posts
When WoW launched tho it was far from polished
____________________________
Member of United By Legend currently a AoC guild.
#26 Nov 28 2010 at 4:57 PM Rating: Excellent
*
52 posts
z0mbi wrote:
Cyanix wrote:
There are a lot of divisions within the MMORPG community and a lot of newer people in the community fail to realize this. The disagreements tend to arise between the long time players of the genre and the newer ones, who were introduced by WoW.

I played Everquest when it was owned by Verant. I play Everquest 2 now, its a GREAT game but it is taking a turn for the worse. It is still an amazing game, with amazing mechanics, but lately the direction it is taking will ultimately kill it. Regarding WoW, I have never and will never subscribe to the game. I played the trial, I got bored. I do not think it is the standard. I think it is an example of a well polished game, but I think it is seriously lacking in a ton of aspects, which is why it will never appeal to me.

World of Warcraft was destined to be huge, because its made by blizzard. Blizzard has too much clout to fail at this point, every game they release is guaranteed to be a highly enjoyable, fun game. They have alpha testing phases that the VAST majority of other game companies dream of. They can delay games until the developers think the game is ready to release, something absent from just about every other game company out there. That is the reason for WoWs success. They innovated almost nothing, instead choosing to focus on accessibility, something the genre desperately needed at the time. This resulted in a highly polished product in an already established IP, guaranteeing it would have initial success. The accessibility continues to keep people subscribed, because it has mass appeal. Will Rift be compared to WoW? Of course. But its pointless. Cataclysm will be WoWs peak. You can generally only blow up a game world once and completely re-arrange it. Its a tool that can be used to refresh the game world and make it seem fresh again. It will continue to be a source of revenue for Blizzard, but I doubt it will ever see higher numbers than the next few months. WoW clones will fail, because they bring nothing new to the table.

An important thing people need to remember is that there is a lot of market share currently out there(Using 2008 statistics, 38%, most likely more now). There are a lot of other long-time people in the community I come from(EQ2) that want nothing to do with WoW, but are fed up with SoE. A lot of them will immediately adopt Rift. It is not a WoW clone, and if you listen to some of Scott Hartsman's interviews, you will realize that this game will not be more of WoW at all. If anything, it will resemble Everquest and Everquest 2 far more in terms of gameplay dynamics.

Back to topic, it is impossible for Rift to be a WoW clone. It is designed from the ground up to deliver dynamic content. Will there be elements that resemble WoW? Of course. But saying Rift is a WoW clone is like saying Call of Duty is just another half-life clone. Its a silly statement.


It's the standard whether or not you want it to be. It's the biggest MMO and most MMOs after WoW try and replicate that experience.

WoW definitely had a nice player base to fall back on, however- tell that to variety of age groups I've played with in WoW. 40-60 year olds, 10-13, 16-25, you are telling me all of these people were anticipating the next Blizzard title? Nah, that doesn't work here. Again, WoW changed MMOs, it made the point of entry easy and thats what all MMOs try and do now. Problem is, most of the new MMOs lack the polish that WoW has.

Edited, Nov 28th 2010 5:42pm by z0mbi



IMO WoW used their massive playerbase from a massivly successful game (Warcraft) and made an easy to play MMO. Warcraft 3 was popular all over the world, to say that had no effect on its success is short sighted. Not only did they release a game that was easy to get into, they had a very large demographic of people who were waiting for the next big thing from Blizzard. This in turn fueled it's rapid growth, it started with a large population of fans from previous Blizzard titles and that large population drew in more people.

WoW didnt do anything super unique, instead they used ease of play and a large fan base to jumpstart their game and get it to the giant it is now.

IMO a large population isnt always equal to a good game. I tried WoW and after 10 minutes the graphics and sheer ease of play made me quit and go back to EQ2.

While WoW players may consider it the "standard" for MMOs, I do not. I consider it good marketing and mass appeal, while it has some good things, there are many better games from a mechanics standpoint than WoW.

All just my opinion though.
____________________________
Tariuss Antonia Bayle EQ2
#27 Nov 28 2010 at 5:24 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
*
135 posts
z0mbi wrote:

It's the standard whether or not you want it to be. It's the biggest MMO and most MMOs after WoW try and replicate that experience.

WoW definitely had a nice player base to fall back on, however- tell that to variety of age groups I've played with in WoW. 40-60 year olds, 10-13, 16-25, you are telling me all of these people were anticipating the next Blizzard title? Nah, that doesn't work here. Again, WoW changed MMOs, it made the point of entry easy and thats what all MMOs try and do now. Problem is, most of the new MMOs lack the polish that WoW has.
Edited, Nov 28th 2010 5:42pm by z0mbi


No, but I am willing to bet the majority of those people were referred to the game and already knew someone inside the game when they decided to try it.

Also, the most numerous does not imply that it is the standard. By that logic Call of Duty is the standard for FPSs. And if it is, its an increasingly low standard.

Wow alienates a significant portion of MMO players due to the fact that a ton of people see it as too easy, myself included. The game is far too simple for my tastes. Personally, I think the genre has become too populated now to lump everything together that simply, and I think WoW ends up competing against games like guild wars and the next popular thing, whereas rift will draw on the established EQ/EQ2 dissatisfied MMO playerbase which have been looking for a new game for years now, unsuccessfully. Rift will appeal to a different demographic than WoW, just like EQ2 does.
____________________________

Currently playing: EQ2(AB)
#28 Nov 28 2010 at 5:29 PM Rating: Excellent
*
182 posts
Honestly I'm ok with that as i would rather play with EQ/EQ2 player types then WoW. Not saying all WoW players are bad its just from the few servers i tried it was ugly.
____________________________
Member of United By Legend currently a AoC guild.
#29 Nov 28 2010 at 5:31 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
*
113 posts
Over the years that WoW existed it was changed, but for the worse. While it first started in the MMO world WoW was rly one of the best in its kind, it was hard to lvl up and gather gear and was medium to its complexity. Now it's so easy that even my 12 year old cousin who doesn't speak that good english can play it. Still as mentioned above it has players who are and were fans from other BLizzard related products, but in the last 3 years its player population base hasn't increased in the slightest and many tend to abandon it and search for new ones (like RIFT).
____________________________
-- Currently playing --

LoL
CoD:MW3
Rift
#30 Nov 28 2010 at 5:42 PM Rating: Default
*
55 posts
TariussRift wrote:
z0mbi wrote:
Cyanix wrote:
There are a lot of divisions within the MMORPG community and a lot of newer people in the community fail to realize this. The disagreements tend to arise between the long time players of the genre and the newer ones, who were introduced by WoW.

I played Everquest when it was owned by Verant. I play Everquest 2 now, its a GREAT game but it is taking a turn for the worse. It is still an amazing game, with amazing mechanics, but lately the direction it is taking will ultimately kill it. Regarding WoW, I have never and will never subscribe to the game. I played the trial, I got bored. I do not think it is the standard. I think it is an example of a well polished game, but I think it is seriously lacking in a ton of aspects, which is why it will never appeal to me.

World of Warcraft was destined to be huge, because its made by blizzard. Blizzard has too much clout to fail at this point, every game they release is guaranteed to be a highly enjoyable, fun game. They have alpha testing phases that the VAST majority of other game companies dream of. They can delay games until the developers think the game is ready to release, something absent from just about every other game company out there. That is the reason for WoWs success. They innovated almost nothing, instead choosing to focus on accessibility, something the genre desperately needed at the time. This resulted in a highly polished product in an already established IP, guaranteeing it would have initial success. The accessibility continues to keep people subscribed, because it has mass appeal. Will Rift be compared to WoW? Of course. But its pointless. Cataclysm will be WoWs peak. You can generally only blow up a game world once and completely re-arrange it. Its a tool that can be used to refresh the game world and make it seem fresh again. It will continue to be a source of revenue for Blizzard, but I doubt it will ever see higher numbers than the next few months. WoW clones will fail, because they bring nothing new to the table.

An important thing people need to remember is that there is a lot of market share currently out there(Using 2008 statistics, 38%, most likely more now). There are a lot of other long-time people in the community I come from(EQ2) that want nothing to do with WoW, but are fed up with SoE. A lot of them will immediately adopt Rift. It is not a WoW clone, and if you listen to some of Scott Hartsman's interviews, you will realize that this game will not be more of WoW at all. If anything, it will resemble Everquest and Everquest 2 far more in terms of gameplay dynamics.

Back to topic, it is impossible for Rift to be a WoW clone. It is designed from the ground up to deliver dynamic content. Will there be elements that resemble WoW? Of course. But saying Rift is a WoW clone is like saying Call of Duty is just another half-life clone. Its a silly statement.


It's the standard whether or not you want it to be. It's the biggest MMO and most MMOs after WoW try and replicate that experience.

WoW definitely had a nice player base to fall back on, however- tell that to variety of age groups I've played with in WoW. 40-60 year olds, 10-13, 16-25, you are telling me all of these people were anticipating the next Blizzard title? Nah, that doesn't work here. Again, WoW changed MMOs, it made the point of entry easy and thats what all MMOs try and do now. Problem is, most of the new MMOs lack the polish that WoW has.

Edited, Nov 28th 2010 5:42pm by z0mbi



IMO WoW used their massive playerbase from a massivly successful game (Warcraft) and made an easy to play MMO. Warcraft 3 was popular all over the world, to say that had no effect on its success is short sighted. Not only did they release a game that was easy to get into, they had a very large demographic of people who were waiting for the next big thing from Blizzard. This in turn fueled it's rapid growth, it started with a large population of fans from previous Blizzard titles and that large population drew in more people.

WoW didnt do anything super unique, instead they used ease of play and a large fan base to jumpstart their game and get it to the giant it is now.

IMO a large population isnt always equal to a good game. I tried WoW and after 10 minutes the graphics and sheer ease of play made me quit and go back to EQ2.

While WoW players may consider it the "standard" for MMOs, I do not. I consider it good marketing and mass appeal, while it has some good things, there are many better games from a mechanics standpoint than WoW.

All just my opinion though.


10million+ subs, 6 years, it's not like we are talking about Halo or Call of Duty here. Warcraft is pretty big amongst PC gamers but again, 6 years later, over 10million subs, your argument is a little out dated I think.

I get what you are saying, that it's not your standard MMO, but it is for majority of MMO players.
#31 Nov 28 2010 at 6:04 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
*
135 posts
z0mbi wrote:

10million+ subs, 6 years, it's not like we are talking about Halo or Call of Duty here. Warcraft is pretty big amongst PC gamers but again, 6 years later, over 10million subs, your argument is a little out dated I think.

I get what you are saying, that it's not your standard MMO, but it is for majority of MMO players.


Yes. If you look at overall market share. However, that will not apply to rift players, and here's why:

People are reluctant to leave an MMO behind once they are established. What makes this easier is changes in management, lack of new content, bored with the same gameplay, etc. The real hooks that keep people in are people and progression, which is why often its more likely for entire guilds to swap MMOs rather than individual players. Existing social networks are preferable for people to stick with. So current WoW subscribers are unlikely to move to rift, unless they are already looking.

Assuming wow has 60% of the market for easy math(and its a fairly accurate estimate), that leaves another 40% out there that do not play wow. That's a lot of people. Those people are the real market for rift, simply due to MMO dynamics. People have been highly disappointed with every most MMO releases lately, Everquest 2 had a massive exodus this year. WoW is releasing a major expansion and world change, enabling them to retain many people for at least the next 6 months.

So... for the prospective rift playerbase, wow is absolutely not the standard that people moving to rift will be looking at. They will be looking at Aion, WAR, AoC, EQ2, EQ1,, FF11. But not WoW.

Edit:
Wanted to add this fact, quoted from the press release:
"World of Warcraft subscribers include individuals who have paid a subscription fee or have an active prepaid card to play World of Warcraft, as well as those who have purchased the game and are within their free month of access. Internet Game Room players who have accessed the game over the last thirty days are also counted as subscribers. The above definition excludes all players under free promotional subscriptions, expired or cancelled subscriptions, and expired prepaid cards."

That 12 million number includes accounts that have lapsed, but remain "active" due to time cards or cata beta access. Also 6-7 million of those are likely in asia, where the game is played via pre-played time cards rather than subscriptions(Internet game room, its a weird system). The actual subscription rate will never be released by Blizzard.

Edited, Nov 28th 2010 7:14pm by Cyanix

Edited, Nov 28th 2010 7:18pm by Cyanix
____________________________

Currently playing: EQ2(AB)
#32 Nov 28 2010 at 6:32 PM Rating: Default
*
55 posts
Cyanix wrote:
z0mbi wrote:

10million+ subs, 6 years, it's not like we are talking about Halo or Call of Duty here. Warcraft is pretty big amongst PC gamers but again, 6 years later, over 10million subs, your argument is a little out dated I think.

I get what you are saying, that it's not your standard MMO, but it is for majority of MMO players.


Yes. If you look at overall market share. However, that will not apply to rift players, and here's why:

People are reluctant to leave an MMO behind once they are established. What makes this easier is changes in management, lack of new content, bored with the same gameplay, etc. The real hooks that keep people in are people and progression, which is why often its more likely for entire guilds to swap MMOs rather than individual players. Existing social networks are preferable for people to stick with. So current WoW subscribers are unlikely to move to rift, unless they are already looking.

Assuming wow has 60% of the market for easy math(and its a fairly accurate estimate), that leaves another 40% out there that do not play wow. That's a lot of people. Those people are the real market for rift, simply due to MMO dynamics. People have been highly disappointed with every most MMO releases lately, Everquest 2 had a massive exodus this year. WoW is releasing a major expansion and world change, enabling them to retain many people for at least the next 6 months.

So... for the prospective rift playerbase, wow is absolutely not the standard that people moving to rift will be looking at. They will be looking at Aion, WAR, AoC, EQ2, EQ1,, FF11. But not WoW.

Edit:
Wanted to add this fact, quoted from the press release:
"World of Warcraft subscribers include individuals who have paid a subscription fee or have an active prepaid card to play World of Warcraft, as well as those who have purchased the game and are within their free month of access. Internet Game Room players who have accessed the game over the last thirty days are also counted as subscribers. The above definition excludes all players under free promotional subscriptions, expired or cancelled subscriptions, and expired prepaid cards."

That 12 million number includes accounts that have lapsed, but remain "active" due to time cards or cata beta access. Also 6-7 million of those are likely in asia, where the game is played via pre-played time cards rather than subscriptions(Internet game room, its a weird system). The actual subscription rate will never be released by Blizzard.

Edited, Nov 28th 2010 7:14pm by Cyanix

Edited, Nov 28th 2010 7:18pm by Cyanix


Why would it matter if they are in Asia? Players are players. Even if half of them were in Asia, name another pay to play MMO with 6 million subs.

I see what you are saying but none of this information is factual. Games like WAR, AoC and Aion are by definition, a WoW clone, the experience from game to game was not different enough to establish a strong player base, excluding Aion I suppose, I'm pretty sure that game is big in some part of Asia. There are an incredible amount of ex-wow players looking for something new, they are time and time again disappointed because every new MMO they play is no different than the last.

I'm a WoW player looking forward to Rift. SOME people are reluctant to leave is what you should say. There have been countless times I've ran into the scorned ex-WoW player (you know the ex-WoW addict who used to play the game daily but now hates it like a drug), or others who just got tired of the game. Rift will be a lot like WoW, the dynamic content will be the largest difference and hopefully a change from the standard MMO.
#33 Nov 28 2010 at 6:55 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
135 posts
Regarding asia, those numbers come from "game rooms" They are not subscribers, but rather unique account IDs that sign in from a licensed location with a time card. It could be for 2 mins or 20 days. The whole point is that its in reality an incredibly inflated number.

And no, those are not WoW clones. They are poorly made MMOs. There is a big difference. You can't call something a clone just because it exists in the same genre. That is unfair to those games.

Also, using your logic, WoW is just an Everquest clone. After all, it was the first.

Edited, Nov 28th 2010 8:19pm by Cyanix
____________________________

Currently playing: EQ2(AB)
#34 Nov 28 2010 at 7:03 PM Rating: Excellent
*
182 posts
I will agree AoC was/is not a WoW clone.
____________________________
Member of United By Legend currently a AoC guild.
#35 Nov 28 2010 at 7:44 PM Rating: Default
*
55 posts
Cyanix wrote:
Regarding asia, those numbers come from "game rooms" They are not subscribers, but rather unique account IDs that sign in from a licensed location with a time card. It could be for 2 mins or 20 days. The whole point is that its in reality an incredibly inflated number.

And no, those are not WoW clones. They are poorly made MMOs. There is a big difference. You can't call something a clone just because it exists in the same genre. That is unfair to those games.

Also, using your logic, WoW is just an Everquest clone. After all, it was the first.

Edited, Nov 28th 2010 8:19pm by Cyanix


Again, even if we took it the extreme and said 6 million of the 12million was inflation, that is still top dog. AoC, WAR, Aion are definitely WoW clones... read on

you are not using my logic at all sir. I've already talked about what makes what a clone here:

Quote:
World of Warcraft was obviously not the first MMO, however- and many will disagree, it was the first of it's kind. Now I've heard all of the arguments before, I know EQ came first, I know WoW took a good portion of EQ, but I've played EQ. EQ is not WoW, WoW is not an EQ clone. I remember my first time playing WoW, everything made sense to me, I never felt lost, it was easy to get into. The obvious counter-argument to WoW is an EQ clone is to say, if WoW is EQ, than why wasn't EQ as popular as WoW? That's the jackpot right there. It wasn't because WoW was vastly different than EQ, it's because it was the first MMO that was easy to get into, Blizzard realized this. So why is WoW not an EQ clone, and why was it the first of it's kind? Because it changed the standard. To me this is a natural progression, EQ is a classic MMO, not the first but the first big MMO for sure, of course by todays standards it was not very big at all (WoW is big). It was only a matter of time until a studio like Blizzard, saw opportunity and very much so took advantage of that.

World of Warcraft is the MMO Standard now days. When people say "WoW clone" they are really saying "this game changes nothing". Does Rift follow the MMO Standard? In a lot of ways, yes it does. Perhaps to not be a WoW clone it would have to change the standard, we will have to wait and see. However in my eyes, dynamic content is the obvious place for MMOs to go, if dynamic content is what changes MMOs- thats when a game will break the standard, thus making the MMO NOT a WoW clone.


So which is it? Rift? or GW2?

Personally I'm pumped up for both. As a side note, it's 6:30 in the AM and I haven't slept. If anything here is incoherent, I apologize.

*sh*t I forgot about Ultima Online, still the same applies, WoW changed the MMO standard.




#36 Nov 28 2010 at 7:54 PM Rating: Good
**
405 posts
OP is a fantastic troll or a rah tard, either way this thread is making my head hurt. DnD inspired nerds to be able to play rpgs by themselves because who the **** likes social interaction? So then the spergs eventually got bored and decided to add more people, only to slay bigger dragons not to talk or have friends because thats ***. So really you can trace any mmo back to DnD which came from like 45yr old dudes who played with world war 2 themed warhammer like games....... so in the end were all *****
#37 Nov 28 2010 at 8:03 PM Rating: Default
*
55 posts
moelester wrote:
OP is a fantastic troll or a rah tard, either way this thread is making my head hurt. DnD inspired nerds to be able to play rpgs by themselves because who the @#%^ likes social interaction? So then the spergs eventually got bored and decided to add more people, only to slay bigger dragons not to talk or have friends because thats ***. So really you can trace any mmo back to DnD which came from like 45yr old dudes who played with world war 2 themed warhammer like games....... so in the end were all *****



spot on, especially about the *****
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 30 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (30)