×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

WoW Expansion Sells 2.4 Million, New MMOG Planned

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the that-is-a-lot-of-nerds dept.

Role Playing (Games) 161

Computer and Videogames is reporting that 2.4 Million copies of Burning Crusade were sold on the first day of retail sales. Those numbers are just for North American and the EU, too, which totally discounts any sales the box may have had in Asian markets. Even without our eastern brethren, that number pretty much destroys every other launch-day sales number for a PC game. Meanwhile, the same gent that teased us with the next StarCraft game has tossed out this bone as well: Blizzard's next MMOG 'won't be another WoW'. From the article: "'When we announce our next MMORPG it's not going to be another WOW--we're not a company that tends to tread the same ground,' he told British film magazine Empire. 'It'll be something innovative and new that really brings entertainment to another level.' American Blizzard reps declined to expand on Bassat's comments, although the fact that the company began hiring real-time strategy developers last summer might offer a clue." So ... another Blizzard MMOG. Huh.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

161 comments

Suckered me in (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17725302)

I've been staying away from WoW but with the expansion, my friend managed to sucker me in and I now have a lvl 10 Shaman Draenei with a decent name. So Blizzard got me too!

Oh, and FROSTY PISS?
 

Innovative (5, Funny)

0racle (667029) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725340)

"'When we announce our next MMORPG it's not going to be another WOW--we're not a company that tends to tread the same ground,' he told British film magazine Empire. 'It'll be something innovative and new that really brings entertainment to another level.'
Innovative. Not like when they released Warcraft 2 then 3 then a MMO based on Warcraft. It will be new, innovative just like the last time they got innovative.

It will be Universe of Starcraft. New and innovative, never been done before.

Re:Innovative (3, Funny)

fishybell (516991) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725384)

You're missing the real innovation: One company taking in vast amounts of money from two MMO games. It's brilliant!

Re:Innovative (4, Interesting)

Gothic_Walrus (692125) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725472)

I'd say taking a franchise from RTS to MMORPG requires at least some innovation. Innovation doesn't necessarily require an entirely new setting; if the mechanics and the game itself change significantly (as did Warcraft), that could be enough on its own.w

Besides, "MMO" doesn't entail the same thing as "MMORPG." If Blizzard were to release a Starcraft MMORPG, I suspect that it would cannibalize subscribers from WoW more than it would bring in new players. Since we don't know anything yet, why not have a little bit of faith?

Vote no to Starcraft MMO (2, Interesting)

Dan Slotman (974474) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725500)

I sincerely hope that the next Starcraft game is not a MMO. Starcraft is still my favorite Blizzard game because it was a delicious union of sci-fi coolness with three wildly unique races. Blizzard has talented designers, but I hate to see them ignore those of us who prefer real time strategy games. If they want to chase the money pot of another MMO, they should make one from Diablo since I don't care if they whore that franchise out. (Plus I think they'll just be stealing their own customers away from WOW.)

Re:Vote no to Starcraft MMO (1)

(A)*(B)!0_- (888552) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725662)

"If they want to chase the money pot of another MMO, they should make one from Diablo since I don't care if they whore that franchise out."
There's a really convincing argument. Because you (1 guy on the Internet) likes Starcraft, they should push a Diablo MMOG. Yeah, don't study the market and determine what has more potential or anything - that would be crazy!

Re:Vote no to Starcraft MMO (1)

Thansal (999464) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726400)

Well, the reason you are not seeing any RTS games from blizz recently is exactly what you said, they didn't want to steal purchaces of WCIII/WCIII:FT

I am willing to bet we will see a new RTS comming out at some point, if it will be WCIV or SCII or something compleatly different, I dono.

Admitedly what I would love to see is a combination of SC:Ghost and an MMO. My favorite type of game is MMOFPS, think Planetside, then make it not suck some how. And if any one can make an MMOFPS not suck, I am bettign it would be Blizz. Oh, and why do I want it to be from the SC universe? Simple:
1) Massive subscription base. The more poeple there are, the more chances you have of findign some poeple you like playing with, and an MMOFPS NEEDS an massive subscription base to make it not suck (epic battles sorta suck when there are only 100 people anywhere on the server).
2) Awsome universe.

Re:Vote no to Starcraft MMO (1)

Dan Slotman (974474) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727236)

I agree that a Starcraft FPS would be awesome, but don't forget that Ghost got "indefinitely postponed". I feel like FPS fans are fewer in number than RTS fans, and they are certainly given more options to choose from. I'm also skeptical of the wisdom of moving so far from anything Blizzard has done before. However, I do think it would be interesting to see a MMORTS. No one has done that, and I think that tackling that project is something that suits Blizzard's strengths.

Re:Vote no to Starcraft MMO (1)

Thansal (999464) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727458)

Actualy there have been a few MMORTS games out there, of course I can't think of any names, and the only one I remember well never made it out of beta (it was an awsome game, baiscly you started with a plot of land on a planet, build up your resources and everything, then attempted to spread out).

Either way, I would love to see an MMOFPS or MMORTS from Blizz. My reasoning is exactly opposite from yours. I LOVE it when Blizz gets up and does something they have never done before, hell if they stuck only with what they had done before we would just be seeing more variants of scantily clad queens getting killing every one (or gettign eaten by rooks).

Their collection of titles is so eclectic and wonderful because of that.

from a chess game, to puzzle platform hoppers, to arcade beat'em'ups, onto the Diablo Click Fest, and finaly into MMORPGS. And just about every one of their games is deffinative of a genre. So I for one would LOVE to see them step up and make an MMORTS or MMOFPS.

As a WoW player, I couldn't agree more (1)

jchenx (267053) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727192)

I sincerely hope that the next Starcraft game is not a MMO. Starcraft is still my favorite Blizzard game because it was a delicious union of sci-fi coolness with three wildly unique races. Blizzard has talented designers, but I hate to see them ignore those of us who prefer real time strategy games. If they want to chase the money pot of another MMO, they should make one from Diablo since I don't care if they whore that franchise out. (Plus I think they'll just be stealing their own customers away from WOW.)
As a big fan of pretty much all of Blizzard's games, and a current WoW-addict as well, I couldn't agree more. Why start another MMO? It's not like a Starcraft MMO is suddenly going to convince all the Blizzard fans who don't like MMOs and aren't into WoW ... to now go play an MMO. Plus, you've got a ton of people dedicated to their characters in WoW, so they're not going to switch suddenly to a Starcraft-based one. (And even if you do, well, you're just shuffling subscriptions around) Finally, you're certainly not going to have someone subscribe to both of them, at least for very long.

Re:Innovative (4, Interesting)

CarnivoreMan (827905) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725930)

Innovative. Not like when they released Warcraft 2 then 3 then a MMO based on Warcraft. It will be new, innovative just like the last time they got innovative.
There was a Warcraft 1 as well... ya know, just FYI. =)
.. but anyway, each of those games were innovative(Actually I cant really comment on WC1 vs WC2. I dont know WC1 worth beans). They each take place in the same universe and follow a storyline, but still, the changes from one to the next were not trivial.

Re:Innovative (2, Interesting)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727674)

Warcraft 1 played much like 2, but with much worse graphics and a clunkier feeling interface. Warcraft 2 also introduced naval units and I think flying units (I know WC2 had flying units but can't remember for sure whether or not WC1 had them).

Overall though, WC1 wasn't that bad. I got the Warcraft 1 demo version on a huge CD I bought with all sorts of sample games (I loved when I first got a CD drive and could buy shareware CD's with hundreds of demos for $10. For a kid whose only online access was a 2400 BAUD modem connection to a BBS a CD full o' stuff is a God send :)). Liked that demo so much I decided to go to the store and buy the full version, but when I got there I noticed that Warcraft II was already out and wasn't much more expensive, so I got it instead. Many years later, after the expansion, Starcraft, WC3, and now WoW, I'm still a Blizzard addict . . .

Re:Innovative (0, Troll)

neoform (551705) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726186)

You forgot to point out their expansions..

This $50 expansion is basically a big patch for their game. Look at what they added.. basically they fixed a bunch of problems with the game, does that warrant $50?

Re:Innovative (3, Interesting)

HaloZero (610207) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726258)

This $50 expansion is basically a big patch for their game. Look at what they added.. basically they fixed a bunch of problems with the game, does that warrant $50?

You know nothing. They've added an entire new world, two new races, new professions, extended the existing professions, as well as having fixed a host of issues (and introducing entirely another set!). Of course, the game is not without it's flaws (and deep ones, at that), but Blizzard has actually done a very good job with this expansion. It isn't just more of the same old shit.

Re:Innovative (2, Funny)

eht (8912) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727358)

He truly does know absolutely nothing about Burning Crusade, not even the price, as the MSRP on it is $40 ($39.99).

Re:Innovative (2, Informative)

Wornstrom (920197) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727666)

I agree. I took a couple months off before the expansion, partly due to the growing boredom with the same old content, among other things. This expansion is VERY refreshing, with metric asstons of new content and features. Despite the server crashes... I think there is a lot of juice in this orange they haven't squeezed out yet, and there would be no real logic in releasing another MMO like warcraft, at least until they start seeing a dramatic drop in their subscription base. A starcraft MMO, IMHO would probably be released to coincide with Stargate Worlds [gamespot.com]

You say that.... (1)

IflyRC (956454) | more than 7 years ago | (#17728304)

You say that with all of the passion and zealotry of a person so addicted to WoW that he's lost his wife/gf, barely sleeps at night, rarely calls back friends and without a doubt neglects his job for surfing his guild/WoW internet forums.

Re:Innovative (1)

ajs (35943) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726860)

This $50 expansion is basically a big patch for their game.


In fact, you're entirely wrong. The patch itself was released for "free" to the entire playerbase in early December, and fine-tuned before and after (but not on the day of) the release. The expansion only unlocks new content such as the new continent of Outland, 2 new races, lots of new gear and quests, etc.; it patches nothing. Nothing.

The 2.0.1 patch [worldofwarcraft.com] (link to release notes) was released Dec. 5. The 2.0.6 patch was released today. None of that required that you pay for the expansion, and while we, the player-base, whine about every percieved "nerf" that comes along, we have to admit that the game has gotten substantially better, deeper and richer even without the expansion, in the last month.

What we all got without buying an expansion at all:

  • Honor System Revamp - A major new way of doing player-vs-player (PVP) that improved on the old system by making it far less "play it or lose it"
  • New arena PVP instances
  • A re-tooled UI API that improves security, and thus reduces gold-farming and botting abuses
  • The full level 1-70 talent system revamp (even though you can't level to 70 without the expansion, you can choose to spend your points on getting level-70-ready talents with the patch)
  • A massive improvement to pet-classes in the high-end game by giving bonuses from gear to pets as well
  • A looking-for-group tool that enables a much smoother means of finding others to play with
  • Support for advanced MacOS graphics features that makes WoW much nicer on Macs


Blizzard isn't that other MMO company. They are cold and unresponsive sometimes simply due to the massive number of players, but their overall approach has always been one of giving the community new features and content for their monthly subscription. There's now even more that you can buy, but I think anyone who has played the expansion will have to admit that you get a LOT for your money.

Re:Innovative (1)

neoform (551705) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727710)

That's cool then, I was reading about it and all I saw as being new in the game was a few updates.. good to know..

I made those comments based on the fact that (I own every blizzard game dating back to warcraft 1) their "expansions" are almost always the same thing: new levels and 2 new characters..

warcraft2: the dark portal
starcraft: brood wars
diablo 2: Lord of Destruction

are all prime examples of this. I was under the impression that this WoW expansion was just that. Then again, a new world is quite a bit of work..

Re:Innovative (1)

warmgun (669556) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726234)

Innovative. Not like when they released Warcraft 2 then 3 then a MMO based on Warcraft.

That's like saying there was no innovation from Super Mario Bros. to Super Mario World to Super Mario 64. Have you even played the Warcraft games? From 2 to 3 there was a major leap in the mechanics of the RTS. From 3 to WoW was a complete change of genre!

Re:Innovative (1)

TobyWong (168498) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726522)

So let me get this straight. Any time a company uses content from their library of IP in a new product that has already seen the light of the marketplace, that product is automatically "non-innovative"?

That would mean it would be impossible to make an innovative game that had any characters/content from existing books, movies, music, etc.

Sorry, I'm not buying it.

Re:Innovative (1)

Endo13 (1000782) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727366)

It will be Universe of Starcraft. New and innovative, never been done before.
Shouldn't that be something like "System of Starcraft"?

So, who's up for some SoS?

Re:Innovative (1)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727462)

It will be Universe of Starcraft. New and innovative, never been done before.

Wrong - Star Wars Galaxies. Shows how much you know.

(Damn fanboys, it's like they think Blizzard redefined the whole genre or something. And that sycophantic praise gets modded "insightful"!)

Re:Innovative (1)

Orozco (639667) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727800)

Oh no! Your sarcasm detector is broken! Better fix it before you read any more Internets. ;)

Re:Innovative (1)

brkello (642429) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727486)

You can create something of the same genre and still have innovation. Even if it is a sequel. But if you don't think WoW is innovative, then you are a moron. It has nothing to do with Warcraft 2 or 3 other than it being in the same universe. Blizzard takes popular genres and adds innovations that make them better. Innovation doesn't have to be Katamari Damacy (which of course has a sequel). People on here whine too much about lack of innovation when they have no idea what they are talking about. You can't expect innovation to keep up from 20 years ago. It was impossible not to innovate then because nothing else existed.

Re:Innovative (1)

Jesterboy (106813) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727520)

I think it may well be a MMO Diablo game; it shares more in common with World of Warcraft than Starcraft does, and it seems that Sci-Fi based MMOs as a whole haven't gone over as well as Fantasy based ones.

Of course, you could be right, it could be a Universe of Starcraft and possibly Planetside-esque. Everquest->WoW, Planetside->UoS; another chance to beat SOE at their own game, no pun intended. ^_^ It would also explain the whole Starcraft:Ghost fiasco; UoS wouldn't look nearly so innovative if that game came out...

Treading the same ground? (2, Insightful)

Samus (1382) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725392)

we're not a company that tends to tread the same ground

This from the company that brought us Diablo, Diablo 2, Warcraft, Warcraft 2, Warcraft 3, Starcraft and World of Warcraft?

Re:Treading the same ground? (1)

Enselic (933809) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725594)

If you define "same ground" as "same name and same concept" then yeah.

But the differences between those titles are quite major if you see to the differences in features.

Re:Treading the same ground? (4, Insightful)

MeanderingMind (884641) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725778)

Contrary to popular belief, you can make a game within the same world and context without treading the same ground.

This isn't Team Ninja where they keep rereleasing Ninja Gaiden in new, prettier forms. The differences between Diablo 1 and 2, between WarCraft 2 and 3, and between WoW and anything else Blizzard has done are huge.

Most companies would have taken Diablo and stuck exactly to the formula. Diablo 2 would have had the same three classes, the same book system with a few new skills, some reason to revisit tristram and kill Diablo again, and maybe prettier graphics. Instead we got 5 new classes (and none of the old ones, unless you count killing them), a completely different skill system, socketed items, an expansive world across multiple acts, waypoints, and even more in the expansion. The only thing that remained the same was the clickfest.

While Lord of the Clans died, and StarCraft: Ghost may never see the light, Blizzard is known to tread new ground in familiar worlds. Simply listing off game titles without the context of how different each was is disingenuous.

Re:Treading the same ground? (1)

markov_chain (202465) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725890)

The only thing that remained the same was the clickfest.

Since both games have Tristram, it is possible with Diablo and Diablo 2 literally to tread the same ground, albeit virtual.

Just nitpicking ;)

Let's see how long it is before I'm proved wrong. (4, Insightful)

Gothic_Walrus (692125) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725402)

Between the hiring of RTS developers, the constant hints about Starcraft, and the fact that the game's tenth anniversary is coming up...well, it's just a hunch, really, but it's starting to sound more and more likely that this project is some kind of Starcraft MMOG, however that would work.

I know that I'm not the only one considering this, and that there have been thousands - if not millions - of wrong predictions about gaming. That said, considering how popular Starcraft still is today, if Blizzard doesn't bring the franchise back in some form in the future it would be a horrendously bad business decision. As long as the game isn't terrible (and Blizzard's track record is still very solid, lest we forget), it'd sell like hotcakes and would help to bring in money from the crowd that's not up for the time commitment and fees that MMORPGs require.

Re:Let's see how long it is before I'm proved wron (1)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726148)

I could see an MMORPG a la Planetside, but I doubt they'd do that.

A way to do an MMO that would be cool would be to flesh out the scope of the conflict and expand it to a wider scale, while holding on to the RTS nature of it...Think Rise of Empires but with planets...There is a zone you want to invade, so you start an attack there against either a computer opponent or a real opponent...Other people who are cruising your game "universe" see that there is a fight kicking up there and join in.

Win the battle, and gain resources/technology options, which would let you build higher tier units, or give you production bonuses. Lose the battle, and maybe lose some bonuses.

Remember, MMO doesn't have to be MMORPG...A big persistent universe with dynamic opportunities for tactical combat that actually has a strategic impact on the whole conflict...Damn, that would be cool.

Re:Let's see how long it is before I'm proved wron (1)

ajs (35943) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727516)

There are many things that Blizzard needs to do in a new MMO:

  • Distinguish it from WoW (an RTS MMO would certainly do that)
  • Remove the "realms" or "servers" division while not throwing 8 million players into one virtual room (hard problem, but whoever solves it first pretty much wins the market)
  • Remove the "I'd like to play with my friends, but I'd have to level for 2 months first" problem without trivializing the value of leveling (another hard problem, but City of Heroes had what sounds like a passable solution)


I'd personally like to see a "Universe of Starcraft" or the like, but I'd *really* like to see something like a MMO Diablo with the above problems solved. I liked the Diablo storyline and world much more than Warcraft, but that's just a matter of taste.

Consider the huge number of starcraft games played (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17727072)

- or even being played right now - and even I start using words like "monetize" and having Scrooge McDuck dreams even though I'm not a exec or marketroid.

It might not be an MMORPG, but you can bet anything you like that when the next starcraft game shows up there will be some form of extra, recurring charge over and above buying the box.

Misleading.. (1)

zyl0x (987342) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725420)

TFA doesn't actually say anything about them releasing another MMO. It's just saying that their next game isn't going to be in the Warcraft universe. Also, the guy just said the next MMO they make (he didn't say if they're going to make another one or not) won't be another WoW. Duh. That would be foolish. WoW 1 attracted more than 8 million players, WoW 2 will only bring back the people that canceled their accounts after playing the game for 5 years.. maybe.

Carefully (1)

El Lobo (994537) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725442)

Making something "new and innovative" is not enough sometimes. History shows many cases of companies that have changed a winning formula for some "new fresh ideas" with catastrophic results.

That said, WoW is a great game. Million of people (including me) love it, so the expectations for the "next big thing" from Blizzard will be just too big, I think.... Changing the winning formula could be a big misstake. Look at Heroes of Might and Magic IV. It changed the way a HoMM game should have been with the result of users don't buying it. The next version V, came back somehow to the roots. The sales were just again better...

Re:Carefully (1)

markov_chain (202465) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726004)

How right you are. Heroes V is nice, but it is so slow that playing it is an exercise in frustration. I'm again back to Heroes III with the awesome WOG patch basically because 1) the graphics are incredibly well done: vivid, clear, stylish, and 2) the gameplay is lightning fast! I can't believe how important the second point is, but once I came back to it it was like jumping out of a pool of molasses or having a heavy, stupefying alcohol fog lift off my brain.

That and the hot-seat multi-player model is a lot of fun; I wish there were more RP games that allow it.

Re:Carefully (1)

the_humeister (922869) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726964)

Making something "new and innovative" is not enough sometimes. History shows many cases of companies that have changed a winning formula for some "new fresh ideas" with catastrophic results.


Am I the only one who liked New Coke?

Treading the same ground (1)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725444)

"'When we announce our next MMORPG it's not going to be another WOW--we're not a company that tends to tread the same ground,'

Heh, no, "we" just did WoW after the third Warcraft game... Which is now followed by an expansion.

I personally feel that Blizzard need to clarify this these days, as it's far from obvious. Unfortunately. :-(

Re:Treading the same ground (1)

plalonde2 (527372) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725520)

Sure, because as a company, when I have a license to print money, I just throw it away in the name of "innovation".

Blizzard are doing everything right as far as cashing in on their IP. They should continue. If that means another expansion, or another revision of a hugely popular, best-selling game, then they should do it.

I hate these whiners who would have you believe that Blizzard is doing it wrong because it's not tickling their particular itch.

Re:Treading the same ground (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725670)

Sure, because as a company, when I have a license to print money, I just throw it away in the name of "innovation". Blizzard are doing everything right as far as cashing in on their IP. They should continue. If that means another expansion, or another revision of a hugely popular, best-selling game, then they should do it.

Yep, they're doing everything right, but I think the one issue people have here is they're being a bit dishonest about the "treading new ground" thing, that's all. They should just be upfront and honest about their tendency to stick with formulae.

Re:Treading the same ground (1)

mikkelm (1000451) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725760)

And in turn there are quite a few people, including me, who grow tired of people like you complaining without getting the gist of the discussion at hand. The issue here is that the interviewee described Blizzard as a wildly innovative company that never does the same thing twice, and these people are casually pointing out that all of their major releases have been parts of the same three series of games.

Re:Treading the same ground (1)

plalonde2 (527372) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726988)

And you need to read too: there is substantial re-work in all their new products, even when based on the same gameplay mechanism. I hate to tell you, but that's not just a "rehash" a la NHL 2005->NHL 2006.

Re:Treading the same ground (1)

mikkelm (1000451) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727238)

I don't believe that I need to read anything. No matter how you put it, following lore, ideas and artwork as religiously as Blizzard did with the Warcraft series will always be "treading the same ground".

Re:Treading the same ground (1)

plalonde2 (527372) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727318)

I guess no writer is ever original in dealing with his established characters and worlds. I pity your worldview.

Re:Treading the same ground (1)

mikkelm (1000451) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727388)

And I pity your inability to discern the difference between conceptual similarity and original functionality.

Re:Treading the same ground (1)

MortimerV (896247) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727692)

You're looking for the word "innovative", not "original". Blizzard doesn't lack for innovation, but they've been sticking to what they know, which is hardly being original.

Re:Treading the same ground (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17725958)

Because World of Warcraft is pretty much the same game as Warcraft 3?

impressive (1)

MatthewAnderson (1005607) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725466)

Good job Blizzard! I was at my local Best Buy (Richfield, MN near their HQ) for their midnight release and even though it was a blistering 1 degree (F) out, they managed to draw approximately 250 people standing in line for over an hour and probably 400-500 people that arrived near midnight. I was there for 2 hours or so personally since I wasn't aware of the number of collector's edition copies they'd have. (I later learned they had about 300.)

I wished they would have at least given me a choice in CE pets personally.. The in-game benefit for this collector's edition pales in comparison to the original title's offering. Panda!

My distaste for 40 man raids aside, I have very little I can gripe about EXCEPT the f___ing collectable card game garnering in-game rewards. It's bad enough that it exists in any capacity, but for Christ, leave me out of it, and stop nickel-and-diming these kids whom you KNOW are spending a lot of money on this CCG. The insult to it all is having to stare at that awesome baby hippogryph every time I visit Booty Bay. Of course it has no benefit beyond cosmetics, but come on. It's both awesome and unattainable without luck or significant dollar investment. I heard $200 for a code on eBay? :(

Re:impressive (1)

andy9701 (112808) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725574)

My distaste for 40 man raids aside, I have very little I can gripe about EXCEPT the f___ing collectable card game garnering in-game rewards. It's bad enough that it exists in any capacity, but for Christ, leave me out of it, and stop nickel-and-diming these kids whom you KNOW are spending a lot of money on this CCG. The insult to it all is having to stare at that awesome baby hippogryph every time I visit Booty Bay. Of course it has no benefit beyond cosmetics, but come on. It's both awesome and unattainable without luck or significant dollar investment. I heard $200 for a code on eBay?


My wife actually just bought the card for the hippogryph off of eBay for about $5. When she originally looked for it, it was $30 (I think...or maybe more like $100-200? I don't recall), which is more than she wanted to spend on it, but she kept at it and eventually found a good deal on one.

Re:impressive (1)

PingSpike (947548) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725588)

Wow, I didn't actually release they were you getting you guys that bad. I guess I can't blame them, but I understand your complaint.

I've often wondered, with all the effort blizzard puts into stopping gold farmers from selling gold...why doesn't blizzard just start selling it themselves and undercut the competition? Sure, it would piss everyone off a bit, but its not like they've eliminated the practice of gold being sold by going the other way.

Re:impressive (1)

MatthewAnderson (1005607) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725826)

Well, the reason they discourage selling gold is due to their concern about the in-game economy. The cost of Stuff in the game is based upon the average rewards of a player whose goal is to take their character from bottom to top. When the normal player grows their character, gold comes into the game at a rather predictable rate. When you alter that goal to simply make as much in-game gold as possible, you're going to do 2 things: you'll find the weakest point of the game design with regards to collecting money and exploit it, and, you'll stop participating in the "normal" game economy because you won't be spending the gold you do get on furthering your character. Basic economics regarding inflation should be able to take this story the rest of the way. Thus, it is suggested that Blizzard isn't upset about their in-game currency making some chinese kid money, but rather that they're concerned about the game economy crashing.

Re:impressive (1)

Kynmore (861364) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726132)

I've often wondered, with all the effort blizzard puts into stopping gold farmers from selling gold

What effort does Blizzard put into stopping gold farmers? Not nearly as much as they might want you believe. So far, the most they've done is ban accounts. But what does that really mean? All they do is freeze the acct permanently, they don't block the account holder from opening up another 100 or so accounts on a new CC.

I know for a fact that they do not take action aginst the sites that actually sell the gold, only the accounts that farm it. And you know why? They know that gold reselling is a very important secondary market to their game. They know that if they killed it completely, they would lose a portion of their playerbase.

Sad but true.

Re:impressive (1)

Doug-W (165055) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726586)

That's why the price of 1000 gold has gone from $18 to $314 on my server right? Almost a 20x increase in price because Blizzard hasn't put much effort into stopping the farmers. If you track the price per gold over time you can see the price doubling with each set of changes blizzard has done. I'd think about dropping $20 on gold, it's less then a bargain game and will last me longer, there's no way in hell I'd drop the cost of a new console on gold however.

Re:impressive (1)

Kynmore (861364) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726748)

Price changes per reseller and per server, and they fluctuate all the time.

One thing you have to remember is Burning Crusade just came out, so the lull in buying gold is over for a short time, as people now was all the new weapons and skills and professions. It will go back down.

And yes, you will see it spike up after Blizzard flushes out a batch of accounts, because thye have to resetup all their accounts and rebuild their farmers, which takes time.

Don't take my first post as standing up for gold farmers, I hate them just as much as everyone else. I was merely stating the fact that Blizzard talks a big talk, but behind the curtain, they're not doing more to stop the farmers.

Re:impressive (1)

mmalove (919245) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726882)

Well, you pick your battles. Blizzard could attempt to go to court and present before a judge that someone wasn't playing their game the way they wanted. And they might win, after laying out millions in court costs, lawyers, GM time collecting evidence, etc. Or, they could continue to attack the gold farmers by denying them accounts, which costs very little, and lets them fight where they are basically gods. They can see everything, they can track transactions like the government could only wish, they can make people not exist, etc. Either way the idea is to make gold selling unprofittable, and gold buying unattactive. And I think it's working. The "price" of gold has shot up from some 7 dollars / hundred gold, to about 40 dollars / 100 gold, based on IGE pricing. Yes, for enough money you can get anything, but the higher the price on the black market, the less it's going to occur, and the less impact it has on the game company.

Re:impressive (1)

Gerad (86818) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726736)

FYI, Starcity Games (a relatively reputable store that sells Magic: The Gathering and similar cards) is selling the Hippogryph pet for $40 here [starcitygames.com] . $200 sounds completely out of line.

Re:impressive (1)

Evangelion (2145) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726982)


If you find 40 man raids distasteful, then the expansion should be good news. The largest raid instance is capped at 25.

Blizzard actually *gasp!* listened to their customers (in aggregate) and tried to find ways to reduce the "contiguous time block" and "guild member herding" requirements for end-game raids.

I ended getting sucked back into playing when the expansion came out. Fortunately, I was able to walk into a best buy at random and pick up a CE. My BE Paladin (named Netherwhelp) likes his pet very much.

Re:impressive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17726996)

I think you're missing the point - a CCG is all about nickel and diming people.

Re:impressive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17727834)

I was at my local Best Buy (Richfield, MN near their HQ) for their midnight release and even though it was a blistering 1 degree (F) out

Sorry, I have to say this: GET A LIFE! Damn, I know a lot of people that admit having an addiction to this game, but this just beats it all. You're standing in the freezing cold to buy the collectors edition of a video game, and then you gripe because Blizzard screwed you over on the pet?

The insult to it all is having to stare at that awesome baby hippogryph every time I visit Booty Bay. Of course it has no benefit beyond cosmetics, but come on. It's both awesome and unattainable without luck or significant dollar investment. I heard $200 for a code on eBay? :(

And you're just itching to grab your credit card and buy it. Blizzard owns you more than the guys raiding 40 hours / week. Ever notice how nobody used those collectors edition pets from the first game after 2 weeks? Hope you enjoyed your long wait in the cold. :-D (Yes, press "Buy" on that ebayed card game code. Do it! Blizzard commands you!!!!!)

Innovative and new? (-1, Troll)

Hellpop (451893) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725502)

Hmmm, right out of Blizard's own people we get to hear what I knew all along... That WOW was neither new nor innovative.
<i>"'When we announce our next MMORPG it's not going to be another WOW--we're not a company that tends to tread the same ground,' he told British film magazine Empire. '<b>It</b>'ll be something innovative and new that really brings entertainment to another level.'"</i>

Good luck with that innovation thing on your next batch of sequels!

New from Blizzard! Starcraft Idol! (4, Funny)

RyanFenton (230700) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725604)

Currently Embargoed Press Release for late 2007:

-------------------

New from Blizzard! Starcraft Idol!

Primp your Protoss! Fire up your firebat's singing voice! Practice your zerglings' choreography! It'll all be worth it when your peers decide who is the new...

STARCRAFT IDOL!

Tired of resolving ancient animosities, genetic imperatives, and vital resource conflicts through a bloody battlefield? Change those horrific screams to cheers of joy, as the new name of the game is style! Choose from over 40 dance moves, 15 voice styles, and 5 sets of 'attitudes' to make your perfect performance. Win contests, and earn accessories. Learn crafting skills and dress to impress! You'll be amazed what a little makeup and elbow-grease will do for an ultralisk.

Bring out the beautiful alien in you!

----------------

You *don't* want to see the screenshots.

Ryan Fenton

Re:New from Blizzard! Starcraft Idol! (1)

UED++ (1043486) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727978)

That is just too funny! I've got another one. Pimp my battlecruiser!

Blizzard, bring back Diablo!! please!! (0)

Wingfat (911988) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725612)

Star Craft is fine and all.. but you already have a "Craf" game... World of Warcraft.. hmm lets see.. should we make a game that is pretty darn the same thing as what we already have? migth seem like a good business model right now, becasue of all the people that love WoW. But as an avid Diblo 1 & 2 player i would love to see a new update to an already MMORPG. It is all there. just needs some graphic tweaks and allow a ton of people in the same "world". I think that waisting time and money on Star Craft is a bad idea. and one big reason why is that Star Trek MMORPG will be out soon. how many star based MMORPGs do we need? Star wars Star Trek adn now Star Craft? i think not.

Re:Blizzard, bring back Diablo!! please!! (1)

OoZz (997149) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725824)

Star Wars Galaxies is hardly an MMORPG anymore, you cannot put it in the same category as any other games anymore since it is probably one of the worst games on the market today. Frankly, I'm astonished that people still pay to play.

Re:Blizzard, bring back Diablo!! please!! (1)

Wingfat (911988) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726092)

True very True about the Star Wars mess. after the NGE they did it messed the whole thing up. i played it for a bit becasue a friend really wanted me on his server. I have been playing City of Heroes though since it came out.. i also have a FFXI account, but i am thinking of selling that one now that i am married i dont have as much time to devote to online games. so now my PSP is saving me. :) a cool MMORPG for the PSP would be cool i think. lol

Re:Blizzard, bring back Diablo!! please!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17725850)

So... let me get this straight:

A StarCraft MMOG would be a bad idea because there are too many space themed MMOs out there, so we need Blizzard to release a Diablo MMO, since there aren't enough fantasy MMOs? Ok. Makes sense to me.

Yeah... (4, Funny)

j0nkatz (315168) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725618)

Those numbers are just for North American and the EU, too, which totally discounts any sales the box may have had in Asian markets. Even without our eastern brethren, that number pretty much destroys every other launch-day sales number for a PC game.
Yeah can't leave out the Asians. How else am I supposed to buy my in-game gold?

Starcraft version of Tabula Rasa (1)

Isca (550291) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725686)

I think this is what they've got planned. If you don't know what Tabula Rasa is, go here: http://www.playtr.com/index.html [playtr.com] Sort of FPS, sort of MMORPG... The battlegrounds inside WOW have proved hugely popular, and with the new release have hinted at some possibilities of actually having seige weapons and tanks and such in future expansion battlegrounds. If they can beta test that system in stages now, then they can pop off an announcement next year about a Starcraft MMO for xmas 2008, soon to be delayed to early 2009 (This is blizzard we are talking about)

Diablo MMORTS (2, Funny)

fyrie (604735) | more than 7 years ago | (#17725878)

They turned a RTS into a MMORPG, so why not take an RPG and turn it into a MMORTS?

Re:Diablo MMORTS (1)

dsraistlin (901406) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726674)

Diablo Epic or World of Warcraft Epic, not just 1000pt armies anymore it is 10000pt armies clashing on a 5mm scale... wait a minute.... Doh! wrong gameverse.

warcraft vs. starcraft (1)

Triv (181010) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726474)

So here's the thing: I play WoW casually but it's really not holding my interest, not because the game mechanics aren't interesting, they are (although there's a certain repetitiveness to the whole thing that's getting to me, but I guess every computer game can be reduced to pressing a limited series of buttons over and over) it's because I'm not that big a fan of the game world. I like fantasy, but I love hard sci-fi, with bigass guns and technology and, you know, Outer Space. IF Blizzard came out with a Starcraft MMORPG, I'd be first in line. Take THAT, Zerg scum.

--Triv

Re:warcraft vs. starcraft (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17726752)

Same here, always loved Sci-Fi, I don't hate fantasy, but never really liked it either (never watched any of the LOTR movies *ducks), and as the vast majority of (MMO)RPGs out there are fantasy based, I've never found one I could really get into. That could indeed change if this turns out to be true.

Re:warcraft vs. starcraft (1, Interesting)

ajs (35943) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727124)

I like fantasy, but I love hard sci-fi, with bigass guns and technology and, you know, Outer Space.


I don't have a good screenshot of the many, many kinds of guns from muskets to shotguns to massive canons that are in the game, but:

Technology: http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/burningcrusade/imag eviewer.html?/burningcrusade/,images/screenshots/, 227,241,http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/burningcrus ade/screenshots.html?2@27 [worldofwarcraft.com]

Space: http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/burningcrusade/imag eviewer.html?/burningcrusade/,images/screenshots/, 222,241,http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/burningcrus ade/screenshots.html?3@27 [worldofwarcraft.com] , http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/burningcrusade/imag eviewer.html?/burningcrusade/,images/screenshots/, 205,241,http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/burningcrus ade/screenshots.html?5@27 [worldofwarcraft.com]

Remember that Warcraft is a hybrid of science fiction and fantasy elements. The orcs, in this world, are an alien species that was banished from their homeworld. The new race, the Drenai, are literally a spacefaring race whose homeworld was blown up.

You probably want to get the expansion and explore it.

Re:warcraft vs. starcraft (1)

Triv (181010) | more than 7 years ago | (#17728080)

Doesn't matter to me. It's still a fantasy world, and given a choice between draining an enemy's mana with a spell or with an Electromagnetic Pulse, the science wins.

I like, you know, spaceships and lasers, not demonic horses and bows and arrows. Starcraft's a more involving world for me, is all.

Triv

MMOFPS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17726628)

I would like to see an MMOFPS for Starcraft. Sort of like Planetside.

New Game ? not WoW? (1)

HAVOC0301 (991818) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726668)

Did any 1 see the screen shots? its the same game. its like getting WoW w/ a mod for char skinning. the UI is the same, radar is square not round and all the buttons are spot on the same. The quest giver even has the same icon above his head. How can they talk about making game that is diff but show 2.4 million ppl the same game just w/ diff color UI ?

Re:New Game ? not WoW? (2, Informative)

MeanderingMind (884641) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726922)

The screenshot was from an april fool's day joke by Gamespot, it has nothing to do with any projects Blizzard may actually be working on.

Maybe a RTS/MMOG hybrid? (1)

Churla (936633) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726826)

Imagine an MMOG where once you get to the end game level you start to command troops and units. Engage in real time, world scale warfare. Build up so that a guild is a "nation" where each playing in the guild is commander of a squad/battalion/battlegroup. Set up towns and fortifications with Player directed NPC AI for defenses when the players weren't around.

The worlds would have to be far FAR larger to accommodate the same number of players per server if each were commanding a squad.

Pretty much Wow/Starcraft + shadowbane + CnC

Re:Maybe a RTS/MMOG hybrid? (1)

brendanoconnor (584099) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727322)

As awesome as that sounds, and I would definitely buy it, Blizzard will never make a game that cool. The reason I say this is blizzard will want to pander to the lowest common denominator (good business really) and hardcore pvp and actual lose is not what the majority wants. I mean, in wow, pvp is almost entirely locked in a little box and kept away from anyone who doesn't want to see it. They even make the pvp servers carebearish compared to shadowbane and Dark Age of Cammy.

An awesome server idea for WoW would be a full pvp server where guilds could take over towns. There would be no alliance or horde player faction per say, though humans would certainly be welcomed in IF and SW, and orcs in UC and thunderbluff. They could leave the questing in but say a horde sakes an alliance faction town, all the npcs switch to horde offering the same quest for hordies and alliance couldn't use it. This would immediately cause the faction to really care about its towns, and it would make being part of a guild actually mean something. Of course this won't ever happen, but I can dream.

Brendan

I already know which MMORPG I'm waiting for... (1)

HerculesMO (693085) | more than 7 years ago | (#17726944)

Darkfall Online -- http://www.darkfallonline.com/ [darkfallonline.com]

I'm tired of the level treadmill and carebear-land where nobody is attackable. It's a fantasy world, kill or be killed. Darkfall looks great for that :)

Re:I already know which MMORPG I'm waiting for... (1)

Tekninja_Hawk (961855) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727852)

You must not have tried a PVP server. thats kill or be killed, for the most part. theres about 8 areas out of 50 you cant attack people randomly.

Re:I already know which MMORPG I'm waiting for... (1)

HerculesMO (693085) | more than 7 years ago | (#17728022)

PvP in WoW takes almost zero skill. I played a PvP server for the entire time I played, it just paled in comparison to Ultima Online. I prefer a PvP game where it takes skill to be good, which is why I'm playing only FPSes lately, no good MMOs for PvP :(

Fun? Probably. Innovative? Probably not. (2, Interesting)

hellfire (86129) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727030)

I have to say the development/testing/design team is pretty good. I've had my issues with them in the past but over all they are well above most.

That being said, I'm really sick and tired of Blizzard super media hype attitude. I'm tired of anyone in the computer industry using the word "innovative" to describe their next itteration of software. World of Starcraft will be fun, if that's what they do, but it will not be "innovative." You keep using that fucking word! I do not fucking think it means what you think it goddamn means!

(apologies to Mandy Potenkin)

Blizzard tries to do everything better than the next guy in terms of design, gameplay, and quality. Trying hard to make the game balance out while giving people lots of options and strategies. Trying hard to have good quality graphics that won't break machines not sold by alienware. Trying to kill as many bugs as possible. Trying to make sure the game isn't dominated by one trick ponies. Providing an background to the game so that players can feel more immersed.

It's better, yes, but more of the same. Warcraft was their first success. They made a second one. then they tried their hand at Diablo. Good game, that was reasonably innovative. Then they made Starcraft and the innovation stopped. Starcraft was fun, but it was orcs in space, stop kidding yourself. It wasn't "all new." It was only "all new" in that "All new 2007 Toyota Camry" kind of way. Then Diablo 2, then WC3. Then they saw two of their successful francises and merged the idea of the two together and now you have WoW. Recycling old ideas with improvements, and giving people the same thing as before.

I'm not belittling Blizzard or their games, I'm just really tired of their marketing department making sound like they are going to sell software that will give you instant multiple orgasms.

Re:Fun? Probably. Innovative? Probably not. (1)

brkello (642429) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727600)

Just because it is the same genre doesn't mean it can't be innovative. Seriously, play warcraft 1 and then play startcraft and tell me it isn't innovative. But really...who pays attention to PR anyways. Wait for the game to come out, see if it gets good reviews, if so, then play it. Everything else is just noise.

The difference between Diablo/Starcraft and an MMO (1)

Gavin Scott (15916) | more than 7 years ago | (#17727386)

...is simply that an MMO carries a monthly fee whereas the traditional games like Diablo and Starcraft included free online play once you bought the game.

Blizzard/Vivendi have gotten a taste of blood from the monthly revenue from 8 million WoW players and I predict they will not be introducing any new games that do not have a pay-per-month component.

So I would expect Starcraft/Diablo 3 to come out as online games where you pay $5-$10/month or something and in exchange you get a more dynamic multi-player environment than the standalone games but nothing quite as elaborate as WoW.

G.

Retreads? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17727762)

Okay, how's this for a thought: It'll be "Starcraft Galaxies" and they'll just dump all of the storyline that was supposed to be going into ghost into an MMOG instead. Seems like a very efficient use of IP.

With regards to creativity vs. retreads, World of Whatevercraft has been begging borrowing and stealing from whatever IP hasn't been properly nailed down -- or haven't you seen the Drain-o, Outland and Silithus lately? Seriously, the Diablo 2 "storyline" boils down to "you're a day late and a dollar short, now go get some loot." Blizzard has taken on a great pretense of lore, but the decision was made -- and contributes greatly to the success of WoW -- that fun is more important than lore. (This is in contrast to Warcraft 3 or Starcraft where you could get mission objectives that were patently dumb and transparently foolish and yet be forced into doing them to make the game continue for the sake of The Lore.) And given the track record that Blizzard has of making even quasi-interactive events in which the choices that the player makes have a tangible effect on long-term storyline, I definitely believe that it was the right choice.

If WoW were a better game, all of the characters would be pursuing different parallel quests that would change the characters' worlds as they progressed through them. Bosses, for example, would stay frikkin' dead. But I would rather have the option to complete the same dang quests with each of my WoW characters than have Blizzard tell me that I have to perform this Really Bad Idea because That's How Things Are -- that's not a game, it's a movie and a cheesy one where the audience is shouting advice at the screen to boot.

New and Innovative (1)

thebagel (650109) | more than 7 years ago | (#17728168)

I think the majority of slashdotters have the wrong perspective on what "new and innovative" means; a lot of people have pointed out that Blizzard has put out mostly the same type of games with the same concepts. I can't vouch for Diablo vs. Diablo 2 because I never played them, but here's an example: Warcraft III introduced the idea of "heroes" into an RTS game, adding an element of RPG play to it. No longer was the game based wholly on spamming the same type of unit. Now players get to figure in what heroes to use, what order, and how many, as well as what other units mesh well with that hero's abilities. What I think they mean by new and innovative in terms of MMOG is gameplay *style* - how the game feels and the game mechanics. Just as WoW wasn't the same as Diablo, their new MMOG might be more akin to, for instance, Planetside? Just a thought. I might be off my rocker, who knows.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...