Blizzard on the future Comments by Kieron Gillen
Is a cold wind gonna come and blow us all away?
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Comments: 1-23 of 23 in total
Poster
|
0
WoW is great until you hit 60, after that it becomes a power player game (basically grinding for your epic gear). If Blizzard can transform WoW into a game where even the high level content is fun and do-able for casual players, they might have found the holy grail of MMORPGs. They seem to be commited to trying this.
What can be next? I am betting on World of Starcraft in 2-3 years. The next logical thing for Blizzard and what a great idea it would be! 3 sides instead of 2, some amazing Battlegrounds and possible space travel/combat. /hopes that the next game wont be another crappy mmo, but a good rocksolid singleplayer game with good mp elements. You can argue that WoW *is* a good singleplayer game until 60. It actually has everything Diablo has and most quests can be considered solo-able (except for the instances and elite quests). I think a fair amount of players are coming from the "single-player" side, having enjoyed Warcraft and Diablo.
Edited 2 times,
most recently on 07/11/05 @ 10:15
|
|
0
I don't think World of Starcraft so likely. Science fiction generally doesn't sell much - to genre hardcore, yes, but Blizzard is after the large masses. (Star Wars Galaxies is the exception to the rule, and naturally it can't be used as an example due to the enormous name recognition it has.)
World of Warcraft didn't sell so much simply because people knew their Warcraft (the masses don't), a lot of it had to do with the very easily graspable fantasy elements common to most bulk fantasy. Then again, I think *I'd* enjoy World Of Stracraft over Warcraft. |
|
shamblemonkee
07/11/05 @ 13:18
0
If anyone can do a good cg movie it's Blizzard. They've had the best cut scenes for as long as i care to remember :)
|
|
0
Glitch: they have 4.5 million people playing on their servers. Are you seriously suggesting they should make that available for free? For years? To everyone who bought their game?
You're mad. And frankly, it's astoundingly good value for money since this is the only game I've played (or wanted to play) for months and months. It's actually saved me money ;-) |
|
0
WoW could well be a great game etc etc but monthly payments? rofl sack that right off!
Guild Wars is free (once you have purchased the game) and makes me want to ask the question, why the monthly payments for WoW? robbing b*st*rds imo How many times have you seen a party bigger than 5 people do something in GW? Oh, never? Because you can only get together in a few selected zones that are restricted to finding a party and trading, while the real game is multiplayer, not massively multiplayer? Exactly. The servers GW needs cost a tiny fraction from what the WoW servers cost. Well, you did ask. :) |
|
speedstars13
08/11/05 @ 01:32
0
Forget Blizard, just go buy Hellgate and Warhammer! I lost my patience.
|
|
0
Damn it with that Starcraft2. We have waiting too long! Relic did great job with warhammer making exactly I have waited for. Well, not exactly. That's different. But with that sweet flavour Blizzard titles do have (if only it had tyranids).
Now Blizzard will have some hard time trying to make Starcraft2 be such success like first game was. Didn't they say marines were made after space marines from warhammer universe? And zergs seem to have some relationships withs nyds. Anyway, if next title won't be Starcraft, bye, guys - my money are with Relic! |
Comments: 1-23 of 23 in total
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Advertisement
