GW2 on 'hottest of 2008' list
Sirius-NZ
Starcraft 2 will not be a problem for Guild Wars 2, because they aren't even in the same genre. It's very difficult for there to be any competition like that (save for the "I can only buy one game this year and SC2 happens to be the best" crew).
Meat Axe
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ork Pride
Isn't that what guild wars is? All you do is kill stuff, do missions to get to final boss to kill. IN ALL 4 GAMES! GASP!
|
I agree with Red Sonya. I tried to play Starcraft, and I just found it too boring. I find most RTS boring after a short time. And in Starcraft, it certainly didn't help that you have to start as humans. RTS for me requires other human players to be truly fun, and I'd still much prefer to play an FPS if I had the choice. Maybe one day I'll go back and eventually finish Starcraft (and I should finish WC3... I never did get around to playing through that the whole way either), but it certainly will never draw my attention for too long. One or two missions every couple of days is all I can stomach.
warcrap
this sucks so bad we have to wait a long time for it.
if there gonna keep us waiting so much cant anet at least give us more info like a trailer or a video of the anet guys talking about it.
if there gonna keep us waiting so much cant anet at least give us more info like a trailer or a video of the anet guys talking about it.
Red Sonya
No cause that would kill the suspense and hype and that's what makes you an others impatient to go out and buy it first day upon release or beg borrow and steal to be able to get in the beta test period. All marketers pretty much do this. Impatient people are the easiest to part with their money than anyone else except of course fools. You know Barnum said it a long time ago: "A Fool and His/her money are soon parted".
Nevin
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Cacheelma
And face with, what, Warhammer: Age of Reconning AND WoW: Wrath of the Lich King at the same time?
Genius move, that. |
Oh and by the way, the spiritual successor to Starcraft was already released in my eyes. Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War, not to mention the whole Warhammer 40,000 universe is basically what Blizzard ripped all of its material from.
One last thing... Taken from Gametrailers.com
Warhammer Age of Reckoning - Release Date: Q1/2008
Wrath of the Lich King - Release Date: TBA
Doesn't look anywhere near 2009 if you ask me. You're saying that they're gunna take a whole OTHER year just to develope and expansion, and I doubt they'd put a game back into development for a whole year either.
Harrier's haste
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Meat Axe
It really depends how you play. If you play PvE like most people seem to, not letting themselves get immersed in the story or the quests or the world, than it is just all about killing stuff. Myself, I always watch the cutscenes, because I like my character to be advancing through the story, instead of simply reaching the end (whether that end is titles, or elite endgame areas, or whatever).
I agree with Red Sonya. I tried to play Starcraft, and I just found it too boring. I find most RTS boring after a short time. And in Starcraft, it certainly didn't help that you have to start as humans. RTS for me requires other human players to be truly fun, and I'd still much prefer to play an FPS if I had the choice. Maybe one day I'll go back and eventually finish Starcraft (and I should finish WC3... I never did get around to playing through that the whole way either), but it certainly will never draw my attention for too long. One or two missions every couple of days is all I can stomach. |
) But i understand RTS can be quite hard for certain groups of people(not pointing fingers), as what you do DO have an effect of your base's future, and at times it can be quite.....frustrating shall we say for certain players.
And it can get boring if massively played
Mordakai
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nevin
Oh and by the way, the spiritual successor to Starcraft was already released in my eyes. Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War, not to mention the whole Warhammer 40,000 universe is basically what Blizzard ripped all of its material from.
|
But to be fair, Blizzard has had the best "Warhammer-like" computer games for quite some time. There still hasn't been a decent Warhammer fantasy computer game, IMO. Blizzard took some ideas from Warhammer, and made it their own. The stories are what really hooks you, from Kerrigan in StarCraft to Arthas and Sylvias Windrunner in WarCraft... that's why I keep playing Blizzard games.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nevin
Wrath of the Lich King - Release Date: TBA |
Hoepfully, in 2009 I'll be playing two MMORPGs: Guild Wars 2 and WoW.
Medion
Quote:
| Spring 2009: GW2 is released April, 28, 2009 |
Numa Pompilius
Seriously, howcome there's no WoW2 in the pipeline yet?
Blizzard is swimming in money, howcome they're not channeling it into updating WoW, just into add-ons?
The graphics were retro on release, three years ago, in another two years surely even the "it's supposed to look cartoony" apologists must have noticed that the graphics are really, really, simple?
Is it just that they don't have to to keep swimming in money? Complacency?
Blizzard is swimming in money, howcome they're not channeling it into updating WoW, just into add-ons?
The graphics were retro on release, three years ago, in another two years surely even the "it's supposed to look cartoony" apologists must have noticed that the graphics are really, really, simple?
Is it just that they don't have to to keep swimming in money? Complacency?
Lonesamurai
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Numa Pompilius
Seriously, howcome there's no WoW2 in the pipeline yet?
Blizzard is swimming in money, howcome they're not channeling it into updating WoW, just into add-ons? The graphics were retro on release, three years ago, in another two years surely even the "it's supposed to look cartoony" apologists must have noticed that the graphics are really, really, simple? Is it just that they don't have to to keep swimming in money? Complacency? |
HawkofStorms
Its because the worst thing you could do with a game is to be your own worst competitor. That's why Blizzard's StarCraft 2 wasn't released until Warcraft 3 became so old.
With a game like GW, it wouldn't really matter. You buy it and then you buy the sequel. But with WoW, it would be stupid to release a sequel, because all the people playing WoW would start playing WoW2. Instead of everybody paying $15 a month, you'd have the same people paying $15 a month on a different game, plus the new people it would attract. It would be more of a lateral shift, and wouldn't really cover the cost of production.
With a game like GW, it wouldn't really matter. You buy it and then you buy the sequel. But with WoW, it would be stupid to release a sequel, because all the people playing WoW would start playing WoW2. Instead of everybody paying $15 a month, you'd have the same people paying $15 a month on a different game, plus the new people it would attract. It would be more of a lateral shift, and wouldn't really cover the cost of production.
Numa Pompilius
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by HawkofStorms
It would be more of a lateral shift, and wouldn't really cover the cost of production.
|
You're right that developing a new game does cut into the profit margin, though - it's certainly more profitable if the customers keep paying-to-play the old game instead. A penny saved (on development) is a penny earned... but it's a risky way to make money in the computer sector, they do run the risk of a new game stealing their thunder.
HawkofStorms
Yeah... but they also get to sell WoW expansions at full or near full price. Its cheaper to make Wrath of the Lich King and add new models and quests to an existing game and sell that for a few more years then to have to program a whole new game engine.
mrvrod
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Numa Pompilius
You're forgetting that they sell WoW for full price. $40 per box does cover production and server upkeep indefinitely, with enough left over to buy the CEO a new jet. The $15 is pure profit.
You're right that developing a new game does cut into the profit margin, though - it's certainly more profitable if the customers keep paying-to-play the old game instead. A penny saved (on development) is a penny earned... but it's a risky way to make money in the computer sector, they do run the risk of a new game stealing their thunder. |
when you have that kind of blindly loyal fanboy mindset, why not keep sucking their wallets dry while offering them a few extra shiny trinkets at $40 a pop.
Cacheelma
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nevin
They did it with Nightfall, dunno if you remember but Nightfall and Blizzard's first expansion were head to head, Blizzard backed out and stayed in development due to technical issues. But both seemed willing to duke it out.
|
The Burning Crusade: January 2007
Duke what out?
Besides, GW1 and WoW are kinda different in so many level. Even if both of them came out at the same time, direct competition wouldn't occur still.
But GW2 is a new game. I suspect that both Anet and NCSoft expect the game to be successful. And by that I mean more successful than any of the four GW1 game (or at least more than Nightfall or Eye of the North). For that to happen, you need more buyers (while also make sure all those who bought EtoN or NF still buy GW2). And you won't get it if you have to compete with ANY (and I mean ANY) other games.
Otherwise, the plan would be a failure; why start a new game when you can make an expansion to the old one and still have a similar sale figure?
Red Sonya
Because everyone won't rush out to buy an expansion like they would a new chapter or a sequel. I know I didn't. I waited until GWEN was less than $20 before I purchased it and didn't fall for the promotional hype of the BMP and it saved me loads of cash.
I Dont Do Coke
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mrvrod
I don't see a wow2 for a real long time. Most of the wow crowd reminds me of apple users. I'm so superior to you because i play wow (buy apple).
when you have that kind of blindly loyal fanboy mindset, why not keep sucking their wallets dry while offering them a few extra shiny trinkets at $40 a pop. |
Zinger314
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mrvrod
Iwhen you have that kind of blindly loyal fanboy mindset, why not keep sucking their wallets dry while offering them a few extra shiny trinkets at $40 a pop.
|
therangereminem
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Cacheelma
And face with, what, Warhammer: Age of Reconning AND WoW: Wrath of the Lich King at the same time?
Genius move, that. |
warhammer release date is june 9th 2008
aion is apirl 29th 2008
wow :wrath of thel ich king is somone in octber
hows that at the same time
Malice Black
GW2 would never compete with WotLK anyway. They'd embarass themselves if they did release it on the same day.
Master Ketsu
I'd believe a public BETA by winter 08, but not the full game.
I Dont Do Coke
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Master Ketsu
I'd believe a public BETA by winter 08, but not the full game.
|
Xx_Sorin_xX
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by I Dont Do Coke
And you'd be living in the southern hemisphere? I live in northern and it has *been* Winter '08.
|
I Dont Do Coke
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Numa Pompilius
Seriously, howcome there's no WoW2 in the pipeline yet?
Blizzard is swimming in money, howcome they're not channeling it into updating WoW, just into add-ons? The graphics were retro on release, three years ago, in another two years surely even the "it's supposed to look cartoony" apologists must have noticed that the graphics are really, really, simple? Is it just that they don't have to to keep swimming in money? Complacency? |
Nevin
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by I Dont Do Coke
I guess they're afraid of doing something new, since WoW is such a success. Kind of like why StarCraft2 looks just like StarCraft but with a new paint job.
|
But yeah, why would WoW want to make any advancements that could potentially damage its already endless success.
Cacheelma
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by therangereminem
warhammer release date is june 9th 2008
aion is apirl 29th 2008 wow :wrath of thel ich king is somone in octber hows that at the same time |
Nope. Not even the GW2 ones.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nevin
But yeah, why would WoW want to make any advancements that could potentially damage its already endless success.
|
I agree, though.
mrvrod
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zinger314
And how much did you pay for GW:EN, hmm?
|
mrvrod
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Malice Black
GW2 would never compete with WotLK anyway. They'd embarass themselves if they did release it on the same day.
|
Master Ketsu
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Numa Pompilius
Seriously, howcome there's no WoW2 in the pipeline yet?
Blizzard is swimming in money, howcome they're not channeling it into updating WoW, just into add-ons? The graphics were retro on release, three years ago, in another two years surely even the "it's supposed to look cartoony" apologists must have noticed that the graphics are really, really, simple? Is it just that they don't have to to keep swimming in money? Complacency? |
They wont start baking a WOW2 untill the current WOW starts sliding.