World of Warcraft Review

By Kieron Gillen Published 18 February, 2005

Got the whole world in his hands +4.

Version tested: PC

Order yours now from Simply Games.

'World of Warcraft' Screenshot 1

Wasn't expecting this to be a difficult review. Having Played and loved the Beta of World of Warcraft already, I was expecting this to be easy. Play some more on the Euro servers, slap a 9/10 at the end and wander down the pub in time for a swift round before closing.

The problem was that I realised I wasn't quite having the ball of a time I remembered. Something was amiss.

World of Warcraft's runaway success is simultaneously one of the bigger PC gaming stories of the last twelve months, yet no surprise to anyone at all. One of the PC big-boy developers march onto the pitch, a company whose every game is clamoured for by their fanatical fanbases, to... commercial failure? As if. It's clear that, unless they completely made some huge error of judgement, they'd sell more than a couple of copies to their kindly elderly aunts.

It's interesting in another way. Up to this point, while having the larger publisher's money behind them, massively-multiplayer games have primarily been developed by teams who have done nothing but MMOs. There are exceptions, but most MMOs have the stink of people who, on a general game design front, don't quite know what they're doing. Blizzard, more than almost anyone else who works primarily on the PC, know what they're doing. To generalise, their expertise is in sheer polish and finesse. They don't make the world's most imaginative games... but they've got a solidity which is hard to reject. The idea of an MMO being made by people who know what they're doing is especially attractive.

This is, essentially, World of Warcraft. It's not, as some have claimed, a huge step forward from the Fantasy MMO template. It's just the fantasy MMO template made accessible, made driven and made fun. It's sold because it's the old thing, but better.

'World of Warcraft' Screenshot 2

However, it's worth noting that while World of Warcraft is seven-league-boot-steps ahead of most of its competition in its genre, it noticeably lacks the absolute finesse of some of Blizzards other games. To choose some examples, take a couple of quirks from my inventory. I want to pick up a bag, which slots immediately into its own task-bar. I can't, because my inventory is full. I have to drop an item (so destroying it) to make room to pick it up just for a second.

Here's another: I get a few (and only a few) quests and the description differs from the actual task in subtle, yet profound ways. Like the directions are erroneous, so sending you in the wrong direction. Or that the mission-objectives work in a counter-intuitive way, like the one where I had to slaughter a number of minions and a boss. However, while slaughtering the minions was enough, I had to actually loot an item from the head man. With all the plain slaughtering, we forgot to get the item from the big chap. By the time we remembered, the corpse had gone, so we had to wait for the chap to respawn. That we had minutes of queuing for him first time was teeth-gratingly annoying.

These are incredibly minor problems, yes. That's the point. In a Blizzard game, I'm not really used to even noticing incredibly minor problems. This shows exactly how big a challenge that they set themselves.

But why didn't I notice these niggles in my previous trip? Last time, I arrived to the game after a stay at Everquest 2, so was overjoyed to finally be in a place that made more sense. This time, I've come from a month stint in City of Heroes. Now, City of Heroes is a very different game to World of Warcraft. It's a more minor game, in terms of scope. While in World of Warcraft each of the characters and races have a different starting point which vividly renders the situation from their cod-Fantasy mythos, in City of Heroes all heroes start in the same place. While in World of Warcraft you get to develop trade skills, construct items and trade equipment, in City of Heroes you can do none of that, except the third in a cursory way. And there's no chance of ending up in a spangly skin-tight jumpsuit in World of Warcraft.

However, within its small region of effort, City of Heroes gets many things right - things which World of Warcraft barely attempts, and their absence nags terribly. The step of acquiring power in World of Warcraft, while fast compared to most MMOs, still leaves you fairly useless until the late teens, at least. Instanced content, specifically created for your quests, only opens up in the same teen period, leading to overt competition for boss spawns, especially with the game's initial crunch. Most early quests revolve simply around killing a set number of creatures of a certain type, then returning. While the game fiction in the briefings does its best to disguise its falsity, it eventually does grind you down. You're never reduced to killing rats, for example, but sometimes you feel as if you may as well be. And, at lower levels especially, having a monster spawn next to you and immediately aggro when you're already engaged in combat is the cause of most player deaths.

'World of Warcraft' Screenshot 3

Most depressing for me is the teaming. I'm playing with twenty real life friends in my guild, but I've adventured with only one for a significant period when our quests crossed. Not that I haven't been in parties - when I arrive at a place which looks too dangerous, I've arranged an ad hoc group which immediately disassembles once our task is done, due to underdeveloped mission sharing. While the higher level raids are all very nice, I come to an MMO to play with people. Without one or the other sacrificing doing their missions, I can't. And with nothing analogous to City of Heroes' Side-kicking, my friends who are more than five or so levels above or below me may as well be playing different games. It's to its credit that you can Solo the majority of World of Warcraft. It's to its deficit that, sometimes, you feel as if it actively wants you to.

We've been pretty down so far, haven't we? Well, partly because the initial impression feature we wrote was so generally up. And partly because every World of Warcraft review has been a fountain, so I thought some notes of its failings may prove handy.

But this negativity can't tarnish the game too much. Its achievements are simply undeniable.

To chose some of its most obvious... The world itself. Rather than a cutting edge engine, Blizzard has used basic technology but made it beautiful through design sense and talent. The slightly cartoon edge lends the world a sense of realness which more direct aping of realty can't match. The land, rather than being divided into atmosphere-shattering load-zones, forms one smooth streaming landscape. Once you enter the world - barring trips to instanced areas - you're lulled into a continuous fantasy world. Using one of the travelling mechanisms, such as getting a taxi ride between cities on the back of a fantastical monster, is one of the single most atmospheric things I've seen in any fantasy game, let alone an MMO. The expanse of the landscape, with so many different terrains and sights to see, makes it a perfect virtual tourist destination. In a game that's about active exploration as much as knowing exactly where you're going, this is important. What's the point of finding something if it isn't worth seeing, after all? World of Warcraft understands this.

Equally, the game mechanics are carefully constructed. Each of the different character classes is interestingly designed, with even a few quirks added to the most traditional of classes to make them feel different and present alternate challenges. To choose a contentious example, the Warrior having - essentially - an inversed energy bar to everyone else's. Their Energy (or "Rage") is gathered by hitting or being hit, and fades away when not in combat. While everyone else finds themselves exhausted towards the end of a bout, a Warrior who carefully manages their Rage is still potent and ready to insert axe into some ruffian's head. It's something a little different than expected. World of Warcraft is good at little differences.

'World of Warcraft' Screenshot 4

That's enough undeniable achievements for now. Where does that leave us?

Reviews are buyer's guides. To MMOGs a review's categorical nature - this mark is what this game deserves, forever - is pretty much an anathema. The mark you stick on something stays there forever, sitting on Metacritic and glowering at the world. But look at how much - say - Ultima Online changed over its existence. Is the mark reviewers gave then still valid? How about a year down the line? How about in one week when some inevitable technical problem reduced everyone's pleasure to zilch?

In a reviewer's seat, you can't let these thoughts intrude upon your consciousness too much, because - basically - you'll go mad if you do. I'm reviewing it as it would be if you went down the shops and bought a copy this second. In a couple of months, it'll have improved considerably, if only due to the mass dynamics of players altering across the maps and servers a little better.

This is the greatest fantasy MMO in existence, the absolute state of the art in orc-bashing.

But the nagging feeling I can't shake is that, for me, that's not quite enough anymore.

Order yours now from Simply Games.

8 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Kieron.

About Kieron Gillen

Kieron is one of the founders of the lovely Rock, Paper, Shotgun and nowadays writes comics for Marvel starring characters that even his mum has heard of.

Read more articles from Kieron by visiting the Kieron Gillen archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (96) Latest comment 6 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Nemesis #1 7 years ago

    /waits in queue to comment.

  • ChrisOTR #2 7 years ago

    No, I insist - after you!

  • Bertie Verified Senior Staff Writer, Eurogamer.net #3 7 years ago

    I've been playing this since release, and entirely agree :)

    The grouping issue got to me slightly aswell. Sometimes you have so many quests ongoing (not a bad thing) that you get side tracked from meeting up and spending time in groups of friends. I think I've only really been in a full group for an instanced quest, and as soon as that instance was over, so was the group. Whilst this makes groups easy to pick up and drop, it seems it has the same effect on people's attention spans. I do like soloing, however, so I guess I'm suck inbetween.

    I played a lot of DAoC a few years ago, and the differences are vast. I mean this in no detremental way to DAoC, but MMOG gaming has been polished up to a great standard with WoW; I'm definately there for the forseeable future.

    Cheers Kieron :)

    Just read Silke's comment. I'm an RP nut, I have to say; I was torn when the server options came up. I decide to go PvP largely because of the amount of EG forumites heading there, and also because I like a bit of Player Vs. Player action. I suppose that if the RP servers proved to have some kind of PvP to get into, I could very much see myself heading there: the WoW world looks great to RP in.

    Edited by 1 at 18/02/05 @ 14:42

  • Nemesis #4 7 years ago

    Oh.

    Well, I like it. I like it a LOT. Maxed out on the X800 card is something amazingly special. The Guild channels work seamlessly, animations are excellent. I just seem to spend ages wandering around just looking at the world. It's amazing stuff.

    Works equally well on the Mac and doesn't grind everything down like other engines. For supporting the Mac platform and doing such a superb job, I'd add a one.

  • TipTop #5 7 years ago

    /waits in queue with Nemesis. Am having to hold back Halo-esque comments ...

  • BremXJones #6 7 years ago

    "And when i finally joined the RP server Argent Dawn (i'm playing the US version) - among the first things i did was meet more friendly and entertaining people than i've ever had in WoW before."

    I'm going to lose my Broadband next week, and I'm thinking that when I come back, rather than playing catch up with my friends, I'll restart on a RP server.

    My general rule of games - choose the RP server. Because even if you don't RP, the people who want to are smarter.

    KG

  • therev #7 7 years ago

    CoH and WoW are the only two MMORPGs I've played. (If you ignore a couple of hours I spent with Everquest many years ago that was almost enough to put me off the genre for life.)

    I'm not really qualified to judge, having only played WoW for a week so far, but I only played CoH for a couple of weeks before never touching it again. My main problems with CoH were -

    1) Inability to solo. I do like a good team-up, but if friends aren't available I generally prefer to do things alone. This is probably the factor that killed CoH for me, given that it was impossible for my Defender to quest alone.

    2) Nothing to do but fight. Now fighting in CoH was fun with a group of people, no denying it, but that's all there was.

    3) Sidekicking system not working properly. This was near launch, but when I did try to SK with a friend of mine a couple of times, we couldn't find any enemies that would give us both XP.

    4) Lack of rewards. In CoH each new ability (and that's about all you got to play with) came a long way apart. The last time I played CoH was when I learned flight. After that I just didn't have any goal left to play for and the game wasn't fun enough to keep me playing any longer.

    Now, compare that to WoW where my Warlock's got up to level fifteen without teaming with anyone for more than five minutes. I've learned to make shirts and become addicted to the auction house. And it's giving me shiny new toys of various kinds every few minutes.

    One of my friends got the game a few days after me and we've never seen each other, because there's no point in meeting up. If the SK system in CoH has been debugged (or if I could work out something I was doing wrong) that's one advantage CoH has. But, not to be harsh, I have more than one friend.

    And a further plus for WoW is the way it looks. I'd much rather stare at WoW for five hours (about how long my PC lasts before overheating and forcing me to do something less boring instead) than CoH.

    Oh, yes, and my pet Voidwalker rocks.

    But, yes, CoH was a two week wonder, which I enjoyed greatly until all my friends either started lagging behind or overtaking me in levels. Will I still be playing WoW in a month?

  • Psi #8 7 years ago

    on thunderhorn, having a laugh

  • lost_soul #9 7 years ago

    Good post therev, I've been wondering whether I should get WoW or CoH; I think you've just convinced me to go for WoW.

  • TipTop #10 7 years ago

    So it's as good as Halo then.

    Well in this case that sums it up for me. I think you got it wrong then and I think you got it wrong now. There are a lot of forum regulars that have many, many, many (just look at Blerk!) different tastes and opinions on games. I have not seen a game unite a group of gamers I respect like WoW. It is a tremendous piece of work (a little more entertaining then Mr. Pants!) and stamped with the Blizzard attention to detail. That aside it is all about opinions and clearly I have a differing view. If 8/10 is good for Halo then it's good enough for me.

    (Silke has summed up the CoH vs WoW thing pretty well for me!)
    Edited by 1 at 18/02/05 @ 14:58

  • rauper Verified Managing Director, Eurogamer Network #11 7 years ago

    WoW has been nice to play a bit more occasionally than you would expect for a MMORPG - sure there are a bunch of people level 30 and above already that mean you start thinking "What's the point?" - but I don't get much time to play games and I've managed to creep up to level 12 at my own pace, taking things slowly, exploring as I go.... It's a good MMORPG for non-MMORPG geeks, if that is possible :)

  • BremXJones #12 7 years ago

    Don't disagree with too much there. Defenders (possible exception: Controllers) are the hardest to solo with in City of Heroes, at least at lowish levels.

    KG

  • ave #13 7 years ago

    1) Area's & graphics are terribly generic and derivative, while you could level the same criticism at WC3, it just seemed different.

    2) Interface is basic, and pretty much exactly apes Horizon's

    3) Chat system is pretty poor compared to other MMOG's

    4) Crafting is basic, especially compared to Horizons & EQ2

    5) NPC & Player trading is again, extremely basic, and poor.

    6) PVP is dull & lacklustre(same as EQ2, Horizons, Eve and pretty much every other game)

    7) Too many quests are "Go forth and kill 100000000 Snow Wolves"(Again, same argument can levelled at most other mmog's)

    8) Balance is pretty bad

    9) Crafting & PVE is fairly boring compared to some other games.


    It's polished, but derivative, boring & on the whole, soulless.

    Much rather play CoH, Eve, or even Neocron(*spits*) to this.

    Considering I didnt really like CoH, actively disliked Eve, and hated what Neocron became, that about sums up what I think of WoW.
    Edited by 1 at 18/02/05 @ 15:00

  • BradlayLaw #14 7 years ago

    I'm finding the social thing to be not to bad. I play with my flatmate most of the time and we speak via teamspeak. We are also in the rllmuk horde guild which must have 30-40 members or so and most nights we are up to some kind of grouped quest.

    On the flip side, it's possible to go do quests on you own, which is something I appreciate. I tried FFXI for a while and doing something similar was a lot harder. You almost always had to find a party to complete quests. It was also much more of a grind.

    As the second MMORPG I've played, I'm finding that I am enjoying WoW greatly and hope to continue playing it for a long while yet.

  • BremXJones #15 7 years ago

    The one bit I didn't write in the review was an analysis of how different sorts of people are responding to WoW, depending on their experience with MMOs, etc. The fact it's getting so many people who *haven't* played MMOs is of definite note.

    (Part of it relates to the "Big Boy" element. And the reason why they *are* a Big Boy is that they know how to make a game which really really makes the early game work well)

    And people who *do* love Fantasy MMOs love it because it does most of the Fantasy MMO stuff better than virtually anyone else.

    KG

  • #16 7 years ago

    "It's a good MMORPG for non-MMORPG geeks, if that is possible :) "

    Exactly why I'm giving it a chance... Total MMORPG n00b... And I find myself excited at the prospect of WoW...

    PvP or RP or PvE or whatever it is confuses me, but as I've never played the beta, or anything like this before, I'm hoping I'm going to enjoy whichever 'style' I end up playing... And enjoy making the choice.

  • ave #17 7 years ago

    I guess that's partly true KG.

    An awful lot of people I've played with in eve, neocron & CoH bought WoW, tried it, and found it terribly lacking.

    There are also quite a lot who liked it, but from my experience, they are outnumbered.

    It's kind of sad though, that's its the Blizz name that attracts so many newcomers, and not that it's a super mmog.

  • p3rks #18 7 years ago

    Sorry, but.... 'meh'.

  • therev #19 7 years ago

    Oh, and Cosmos is great.

    http://www.cosmosui.org/

    It improves the WoW interface in a great many ways and all the bits can be turned on or off as you see fit. I wouldn't be without it.

    And I've noticed my earlier post indicated that I hadn't teamed up but then talked about having more than one friend. It reads strangely. To clarify, I got to level fifteen early yesterday evening without having teamed up with anyone (except for two occassions where I'd joined a temporary team for a quick boss-kill), but then spent three or four hours with a group of four friends trying (and failing) to do an elite quest.

    And that was more fun that soloing, but that's like saying Guinness is nicer than Spitfire. They're both fine pints and I'll quite happily spend time with either.

    But, yes, the question still remains, how much WoW can I drink before I'm sick? I don't want to start talking about "best game ever" until I've spent more time with it.

    (And just for the record, I'm no Blizzard fan. I didn't like Diablo II or Starcraft - was always more of a TA man. I did install Warcraft 3, but only did a couple of tutorial missions, as far as I remember.)
    Edited by 1 at 18/02/05 @ 15:21

  • Bezzy #20 7 years ago

    I get the same feeling with this as I got with Quake 3: certainly, it's not really doing anything new within the genre. It's not even trying to. It's taking what exists, and refining it as much as possible.

    It's attempting to be the definition OF a genre.

    ...A genre which, unfortunately, I cannot stand (and yet I have the highest level character in the office. Go figure).

  • BremXJones #21 7 years ago

    "But, yes, the question still remains, how much WoW can I drink before I'm sick? I don't want to start talking about "best game ever" until I've spent more time with it."

    I really don't think it's even vaguely in "Best game Ever" region.

    KG
    Edited by 1 at 18/02/05 @ 15:20

  • therev #22 7 years ago

    "I really don't think it's even vaguely in "Best game Ever" region."

    Well, I don't, either... at least not yet. I was really just saying I don't want to seem to be recommending it too much, given my limited play time with it. (A little over twenty hours, which is a lot for a week, but still only twenty hours.)

  • Megapocalypse #23 7 years ago

    Meh, I'm enjoying EQII when i get the chance to play it and don't have the time for a second MMORPG.

  • countlippe #24 7 years ago

    Team Fortress mixed with WoW and i'm there!

    /rocket jumps out of thread

  • UncleLou #25 7 years ago

    It's kind of sad though, that's its the Blizz name that attracts so many newcomers, and not that it's a super mmog.

    I think you are misunderstanding something here very, very deeply. Is WoW lacking compared to EVE? Yes, insofar as it's not nearly as complex. Hell, the ship configuration in EVE was more complex than WoW as a whole. But that's exactly why so many people bought WoW - not because it was made by Blizzard (though it certainly helped), but because you can "pick up and play" it. Remember the first time you booted up EVE? It's intimidating. Whereas you can boot WoW and don't need the manual even once if you've ever played an action-adventure/RPG before.

    It's not nearly as "hardcore" as EVE, but to turn this into an argument against it, and to bemoan that it attracts so many people that would never have touched an MMORPG otherwise is ridiculous.


    1) Area's & graphics are terribly generic and derivative, while you could level the same criticism at WC3, it just seemed different.

    Funnily enough, I always hated the Warcraft games and their generic cartoon style, but find that the landscapes in WoW are insanely beautiful, with tons of character and charme. Horses for courses etc.
    Edited by 2 at 18/02/05 @ 15:41

  • ave #26 7 years ago

    I think you are misunderstanding something UncleLou, how can people who have never tried other MMORPG's find them inaccessable at the start, or WoW easy to get started?

    It's not even the easiest mmog to get started in, all that seperates it from EQ2, CoH and quite a few others, are the two names on the box "blizzard" and "warcraft".

    "Funnily enough, I always hated the Warcraft games and their generic cartoon style, but find that the landscapes in WoW are insanely beautiful, with tons of character and charme. Horses for courses etc."
    They are nice, but when riding a gryphon between towns, and being able to spot which game each area seemed to be an almost carbon copy replica of, kind of took away the shine
    Edited by 1 at 18/02/05 @ 15:44

  • UncleLou #27 7 years ago

    I think you are misunderstanding something UncleLou, how can people who have never tried other MMORPG's find them inaccessable at the start, or WoW easy to get started?


    I don't know, ask them. The sales numbers speak for themselves. And you can't say it's just because it's Blizzard name - if anything, it's because Blizzard are known to make extremely accesible games.

    And it's not like Everquest is published by an especially obscure and unknown company.

  • Zond3 #28 7 years ago

    I dont get what the big deal is with this game. Sure its fun to play n all, but so are most mmo's when you first start. i havent really seen anything new here that i havent already seen done in other mmo's, but it is more polished and less complicated than other games.

  • ave #29 7 years ago

    I don't know, ask them. The sales numbers speak for themselves. And you can't say it's just because it's Blizzard name - if anything, it's because Blizzard are known to make extremely accesible games.
    That's contradictory.
    Either is is because of the name, or it isnt.

    I'm not arguing that Blizz have a good name unjustly or anything like that.

    And it's not like Everquest is published by an especially obscure and unknown company.
    So, how many non-mmorpg players have heard of the world of Everquest, and know other games by its dev, SOE,

    compared to:

    Warcraft(1,2,3 and expansion packs), Diablo 1+2(and expansion packs), and starcraft(and expansion pack), and their developers, Blizzard?

  • #30 7 years ago

    "I think you are misunderstanding something UncleLou, how can people who have never tried other MMORPG's find them inaccessable at the start, or WoW easy to get started?

    It's not even the easiest mmog to get started in, all that seperates it from EQ2, CoH and quite a few others, are the two names on the box "blizzard" and "warcraft".

    "Funnily enough, I always hated the Warcraft games and their generic cartoon style, but find that the landscapes in WoW are insanely beautiful, with tons of character and charme. Horses for courses etc."
    They are nice, but when riding a gryphon between towns, and being able to spot which game each area seemed to be an almost carbon copy replica of, kind of took away the shine "

    I am one of those people who:
    1. Bought this game
    2. Never played a MMORPG before
    3. Looked at eve, found it *WAY* too confusing (Also, these days, I just don't have that kind of time to invest in learning a new game.. Just want to play!).
    4. Never played any Warcraft, or C&C type games (not interested in that genre)
    5. Heard of Blizzard, but that wouldn't influence me (either for or againt) when buying a game made by them.
    6. Always wondered if I would ever have enough time to play a 'persistant world' game... And ever stand a chance of 'surviving'.

    I still bought WoW...
    Edited by 2 at 18/02/05 @ 16:14

  • UncleLou #31 7 years ago

    I'm not arguing that Blizz have a good name unjustly or anything like that.

    It did sound like that. Or at least that they lured gamers into buying a crappy MMORPG with their good name.


    That's contradictory.
    Either is is because of the name, or it isnt.

    Because of the reputation that is (justly) connected with that name.

    Aynway, I still don't quite get your point. You bemoan that it's, of all great MMORPGS out there, the crappiest one of them all to attract a new audience? Instead of EVE, for example? Come on, I loved EVE, but it's easy to see why it's not for everyone. Correct me if I misunderstand you.

    And don't try to tell me that EQ is less generic than WoW, please. ;)


    Edited by 1 at 18/02/05 @ 15:58

  • ave #32 7 years ago

    WoW is a good starter mmog, it's basic, simple, accessable but highly polished.

    Quite like a lot of Blizz's games :)

    But being a mmog fan for four years, and pretty much trying them all, I'm dissapointed it took a high profile name, and a fairly bland MMOG to break out of the traditional market and lure in new blood(something even the Star Wars name failed to do, although Galaxies is infinitely inferior to WoW)

    BTW, I dont like eve :p

  • UncleLou #33 7 years ago

    It's not that I don't understand where you're coming from, but, as I've said before, I think it's exactly the things you criticise that attracted so many people: namely the fact that many things are a lot simpler than in other MMORPGs, and that you can play it a lot more "casually".

    You've now said though that you didn't like EVE, WoW, CoH, SW:G and Neocron. Which MMORPG do you like, ffs? ;)
    Edited by 1 at 18/02/05 @ 16:23

  • Megapocalypse #34 7 years ago

    "I mean, people typing how they think a dwarf would speak? Come on now...."

    That role playing. Its what many people do in role playing games surprisingly.

  • ave #35 7 years ago

    It's not that I don't understand where you're coming from, but, as I've said before, I think it's exactly the things you criticise that attracted so many people: namely the fact that many things are a lot simpler than in other MMORPGs, and that you can play it a lot more "casually".
    Well, from the people I've talked to in-game(Azjol-Nerub & Warsong), most of the MMOG newbies bought it for being warcraft, not because of reviews or it being accessable :/

    You've now said though that you didn't like EVE, WoW, CoH, SW:G and Neocron. Which MMORPG do you like, ffs? ;)
    I loved Neocron for about 6 months, then the total lack of support, Reakktor's laughing at the games problems, zero high end content other then PVP, patches that unbalanced and broke more then they fixed/solved, and blatant racism from the german community - all caught up.

    CoH was enjoyable enough, and I could see why people liked it, but it wasnt my cup of tea.

    Eve was great for 3 or 4 months, but by then I'd done, seen and achieved most things.
    All that was left, was to either
    1)Keep making money for no real purpose
    2)Partake in PVP which I found foul after neocron & planetside
    3)Hunt down every item in the game and make a collection

    Usually any MMOG I play only entertains me for a few months at most :|

  • UncleLou #36 7 years ago

    and blatant racism from the german community - all caught up

    Really? How did that manifest itself? :/

    Usually any MMOG I play only entertains me for a few months at most :|

    That's hardly a problem, though, is it? I don't think I could ever play a game for much more than a few months.

  • ave #37 7 years ago

    Really? How did that manifest itself? :/
    Being part of the largest international clan on Uranus(teehee), we had almost every single german clan declare war on us(at least 20) at the same time, had their resident GM's harassing and threatening us, and had them making racist slurs in german at us :)(which they didnt think we could understand)



    That's hardly a problem, though, is it? I don't think I could ever play a game for much more than a few months.
    Honestly, a proper MMOG should be able to hold your attention for years, if not longer.

    However, in this generation they havent been able to get right the mix between balance, content, player content & player effect on the game

  • terminalterror #38 7 years ago

    I played it during the open beta and concluded that it was far too good and addictive for me to contemplate buying it until I've finished this term of university.

  • Psi #39 7 years ago

    mmo's need more end bosses and instances make them more like phantasy star online and your heading in the right direction.

    And a bloody story line to get into! (if you decide you want to play that way)

    excuse me while i grind mob's constantly will you :)

  • Boom #40 7 years ago

    I'm basically a new MMORPG player, however, I had played the Galaxies beta which was pants at the time (haven't played it since then so obviously I don't know what Sony has done since then).

    I bought WoW cause:

    1) I played the beta and enjoyed it.
    2) I now have the time to play an MMO which I didn't have 2 years ago (playing CoH as well which isn't really that caparable to WoW, but enjoying nonetheless)
    3) Had friends who play EQ and EQ2 and heard their pros and cons about that game and their comparisons to WoW, UO and others.
    4) Have played Starcraft (which I still rate is one of my all time favs) and have played Warcraft(2,3)
    5) Thought the WoW was fantastic in beta (obviously need to see about longevity in retail) and has killed time like no other game in sometime.
    6) Think Blizzard are a great company with a good rep, but bought it cause I wanted to experience a MMORPG beyond a beta for once.
    7) Found the beta easy to get to grips with though I bemoan the standard WoW UI (obviously there are add-ons), cause CoH's built-in UI wees on WoW's from a great height IMO (apart from map ui)

    Think 8/10 is harsh, but it's the reviewer's opinion. At the moment I'd give the game a 9/10 and I feel I'm being unkind with that score.

  • ozzit #41 7 years ago

    right, well rather than argue which is the fairest MMOG of them all, I shall simply say that that was a pretty damn good review.

    /gets coat and leaves

  • Whizzo #42 7 years ago

    Sk/Exemplar certainly adds a hell of a lot to the ease of getting new players into the game, it's rather handy to pay off debt as well. Not that I ever suffer any. *cough*

    An additional thing that CoH does very well is the upgrades to the game through the different issues. PvP arena combat is coming up in the next issue and you can go to where they're going to be and see the construction being done which is a nice touch. It's also realistic as well as there never seems to be more than about half a dozen blokes doing any work...

    WoW is probably a great game but I'm burnt out on fantasy gaming, in fact burnt out isn't strong enough, sick to death of it would be more accurate.

  • Pirotic #43 7 years ago

    Wow, one of the few reviews i have to disagree with on EG. maybe its just because i feel so passionate about the game, but it sounds like you solo'd until level 10 then just couldn't be bothered. by the sounds of it you've been playing three MMORPGS pretty much one after another, so have you really devoted enough time to write a fair review on one of them?

    a MMORPG isnt like your standard console game, you dont fork out your Ł40 in exchange for a fixed amount of content and plot. with WoW you very much get back what you put into it, which is where your two biggest critisms become invalid.

    Yes - it is very shallow creating a party just to complete a mission, and then never speaking to them again. but if you're in a guild but have only ever teamed with one other player for any deal of time - thats more your fault than the games, its by no means stopping you doing it other than your probably to lazy to get on a blimp to find them ;)

    And your other critism is that the 'quests' can sometimes be misleading. Yes, i've been mislead a few times - but i've started to realise half the time they mislead you into new areas in order to force you to explore, sure i feel stupid when i realise i was just ment to go around the corner. but even if you wander off in the totally wrong direction you'll normally always find something just as entertaining to distract you, and by the time you get back to the 'correct' place you've got some extra EXP which you can't really moan about.

    If the quests told you in perfect detail what to do, it'd be about as much fun as playing Final Fantasy with a 'Complete Walkthrough' sitting on your lap at all times.

    and finally (i'll stop being nasty soon, i promise!) the warrior isnt based around rage, its usefull for doing the specials but the warriors main strenght is his ability to take obscene amounts of damage before croaking it, compared to poor little Rogue who can dish it out like no man, but can't take it very well.

    Easily 9 out of 10, but i suppose MMORPGS are a very personal experiance - i wouldn't recommend it to everybody despite being so fond of it myself.
    Edited by 2 at 18/02/05 @ 19:22

  • MikeD #44 7 years ago

    Guys did you actualy read the last lines? Where he calls it the best mmog?

    Come on, people!

    Stop comparing the scores to sites/magazines that do honeyglaced reviews only.

  • Pirotic #45 7 years ago

    Dont get me wrong, i respect the poor chap for having to review a game which is still very much evolving - but seriously, if this is the 'greatest fantasy MMO in existance' yet only merits 8/10, maybe they should of got somebody who enjoys fantasy MMO's to write the review.

    i'm just concerned people will jump to the score and think "well, i wont bother with that then" and miss out. The sheer amount of work which has gone into WoW, and the amount of enjoyment people can get out of that if they put the effort in is huge!
    Edited by 1 at 18/02/05 @ 19:32

  • therev #46 7 years ago

    Anyone who looks at an 8/10 score, thinks that's a bad score and doesn't read the review needs their brain looking at. I'm not saying people won't do it, just that they shouldn't. And it was a good review, too, even though I probably disagree with it on some matters of opinion.

    (I'm actually one of these crazy fools who doesn't think reviews should have scores, but I know I'm a tiny, crazed minority there.)

  • MikeD #47 7 years ago

    "i'm just concerned people will jump to the score and think "well, i wont bother with that then" and miss out. The sheer amount of work which has gone into WoW, and the amount of enjoyment people can get out of that if they put the effort in is huge!"

    I don't think that will happen. the review is very positive. It's a review on Eurogamer, so people should know better. And people that just do a google search will find gamespot/ign. Everyone I know that was interested (and those were quite a few) already have it, most entered the betas and wouldn't have given a monkey's arse what EG's score would be. Someone said earlier that people buy this because it's blizzard/warcraft and they were right.

    Sure the amount of enjoyment you can get out of it is huge. Is that a reason for Kieron to ignore what he thinks are faults? Does that mean it should autmatically get a 9? Of course not. The best mmog according to kieron deserves a 8/10 score and that's fine. People now have a good way of measuring the other mmog reviews he does on here (and I'm sure he will do more) based on it. (hehe, better than Halo turned into better than WoW)

    If you want to convince someone to play WoW just show them the game or link to a different review.

    Also, saying kieron doesn't like mmog's is a bit ridiculous, he has already reviewed a bunch for EG and seems to enjoy them a lot.

    Also, I wouldn't be surprised if they did a followup article in a few months.

  • TardKommando #48 7 years ago

    Nobody can accuse KG of not being honest. Explained precisely the reasons for the 8 in a frank manner. Very good review.

  • O-Fox #49 7 years ago

    I think the main conern people have had with the game is that the 'social' bit is mainly up to the player to sort out. I played City of Heroes for about 3 months, and you were pretty much forced to team - so the game really did fill up your friends list for you. whether you liked it or not, you were going to meet new people and make new in-game friends.

    World of Warcraft allows you to solo pretty much at any level, and so it is possible to go through the game without being the slightest bit social. If you want to be social, it is up to the player to sort all of this out on his own, get involved with a guild, etc.
    Of course, the game is far, far more rewarding if you do get involved with the social aspect - if it were not for the Elite Guard, I would most certainly not be enjoying this game as much as I am, and luckily for me I was involved with that guild right from it's birth.
    I think this has also made World of Warcraft more enjoyable for me than City of Heroes - I form a party with people because these are people I want to form a party with, not because I have no choice but to form a party.
    Only concern I personally have is the bullet-train rate of progress through the game - I know I have been playing it a lot since launch, but I am already level 18, which is nearly a third of the way towards the level cap (as compared to city of heroes, which took a good 2 months to get to level 20). Anyone who has levelled to a higher level able to tell if the rate of levelling slows down at all, or do you carry on steaming ahead?
    A note on the review: although I disagree with the score, it was still exellently explained and justified.
    Edited by 2 at 19/02/05 @ 01:07

  • Pirotic #50 7 years ago

    Woot, i started a flame by the sounds of it.

    I did indeed read the review, despite populour belief - and its not a poor review by any means, but if i strongly disagree with something thats what the comments section is for right? I'm normally always moaning the scores are too high (Halo2, PGR2, etc) so it's nice to be able to vent praise on a game i thinks been underated for once. and yes, 8 is a very good score but my critism is more down to his review comments than the final number which means very little nowadays anyway, and while 8/10 is a pretty good score - when you consider the subscription charge it wont be good enough for some many.

    I tend to solo a great deal in MMORPGS, and especially in the first few months of a MMORPG being released the social side really does take a back seat while all the fantatics try to reach lvl 60 first. once everybodys a much higher level, teaming up not only becomes far more important but its also made easier (Mage getting his teleport spells for instance). In order to fairly review a MMORPG you really have to lost yourself in it, and if this poor reviewer has had to play City of Heros, EverQuest II and WoW it either means he's operating on a 90 hour day or playing at low levels.

    I feel sorry for the poor chap, as no matter how much time you put into a MMORPG review you'll get people who've played it longer who think they know the game better - but, for me, WoW is probably going to be 'Game of the Year' and most of his critism is very harsh.

    On a lighter note, now that they've given WoW 'the best MMO' an 8/10, they are going to have to seriously piss off all the EQII fantatics by giving it a lower score upon review!
    Edited by 1 at 19/02/05 @ 10:29

  • Pirotic #51 7 years ago

    Well said, i tried CoH back when i was helping with the UK beta but couldn't get into it at all, but it's truely unique in comparison to WoW's polished but predictable. much prefere WoW mind you - CoH just confused me.

  • BremXJones #52 7 years ago

    Have only skimmed the thread* but am glad many people have already argued the central point: 8/10 is in no way a bad score.

    It really was a choice between not admiting that I wasn't enjoying it as much as I did on the Beta, and explaining why, or just slapping a 9/10 and joining the standard choir.

    I decided to try honesty. Never a clever idea, but - well - y'know.

    KG

    *Have been busy. Moving house and all that.
    Edited by 1 at 19/02/05 @ 15:47

  • Pirotic #53 7 years ago

    Moving house eh? - that brings back memorys of sitting on box's eating domino's pizza takeaway.

    What level did you reach in the end?

  • ElephantMonkey #54 7 years ago

    What's the difference between PvP and RP ?

    Anyway I think I'm playing PvP, and its quite enjoyable. And I was really suprised by the amount of women playing the game.

  • ElephantMonkey #55 7 years ago

    Well I don't ask everyone I see, but I spoke to a lot. And I've only teamed up with girls so far for quests (I'm on my 7th quest now I think), without me really trying to team up with girls (it just happened that the first person that I found that was going for the same quest as me was a girl).

  • Pirotic #56 7 years ago

    My wife plays, so i suppose its possible - but just be carefull, that hot dancing nightelf could easily be a 40 year old man called Bernie.
    Edited by 1 at 19/02/05 @ 22:25

  • SleepyMagpie #57 7 years ago

    Hear, Hear Quale. My sentiments exactly lately.

    It seems in Eurogamers' expansionist rush, they've lost a great deal of their indie sensibilities, and I find myself taking in the reviews with not a few pinches of salt. Shame.

    As for WoW: Being an old hand at MMORPG's it holds no interest for me. I tried it during beta, and Quale agains sums it up nicely calling it a meat and potatoes MMORPG. It is also very forgiving to newbies and other pushovers/wimps. Meh.

    Also. It's fugly. There's no way it can be described as anything else, but people keep doing so. It's graphics and polygon count is as dated as the ones in the engine of Anarchy Online. Which first saw use in, oh, 2000?

    I love WoW tho, it took all the newbs and noobs away from my favorite games. ^^

  • HoraceGoesSquiffy #58 7 years ago

    Ah Magpie... Sorry all the noobs get in your way. God forbid that just 'anyone' can enjoy themselves. Enjoy your big cup of ennui....

    For what it's worth, I'm enjoying WoW. I'd been playing Eve earlier which is great, but there's only so much virtual economics a man can take.

    I can't stand genre fantasy, or as Mrs Horace calls it "Orcs and big-titted fairies", but I wouldn't let that get in the way of a fun game.

  • Pirotic #59 7 years ago

    the problem is, unless every review starts giving 5/10 to 'average' games - you'll get bitchslapped by the publishers who want to know why you gave their game 5 and all the other sites gave it a 7, and therefore you're either forced to adopt the '7 average' again or have to put up with not being sent review copys in future.

    Personally i'd say scrap the review score, and just have some sort of "Eurogamers Choice" badge for a game which is the best of its genre.

  • Macross #60 7 years ago

    As a verteran of a few (6) MMOGs I thought I'd give WoW a blast, and despite what all the critics are saying I reckon its bloody good fun. (and no im not a total saddo i only play them one at a time and im not totally hardcore)

    Yeah to doesnt have as much potential as some other games like EVE and Starwars Galaxies, but by god its fulfilled so much more of it then they have (or seemingly, ever will). ITs refreshing and highly pleasent to playa polished MMOG then a half finished peice of crap that is pushed on players most of the time.

    I am playing WoW, I am enjoying WoW, if you don't like it I frankly don't care as I'm going to play it for a while.

    PS I play on Zenedar (brand new PvP server) and I wussed out of horde and went alliance, see you in there!
    Edited by 1 at 21/02/05 @ 09:46

  • Pirotic #61 7 years ago

    Something which winds me up is when people say that WoW is a 'noobs' MMORPG, i've been playing "hardcore" MMORPGS for ages (Eve, Everquest, Korean stuff you wont of heard of) and the only difference is that WoW has more cheerfull artwork design and is generally more welcoming with a better introduction sequence which doesn't leave you feeling totally alienated as soon as you create your character.

  • rauper Verified Managing Director, Eurogamer Network #62 7 years ago

    Also you should read our review score guide so you can find out a bit more about what each score really means, instead of comparing it to other publications who may use different guidelines.

  • Destria #63 7 years ago

    And, sticking to the 'score' subject for a few more moments, many sites would be loathe to stray from the 'norm', because that'd bugger up the averages sites like Gamerankings. The site themselves might not care, but the publishers would

  • MoFo #64 7 years ago

    For those that can't be arsed. EG's 8/10 score means:

    "Eight is that tricky "almost brilliant" category, that for fans of the genre in most cases will still warrant serious recommendation to go out and buy, while even people into other genres will probably still draw plenty of enjoyment from. You should at the very least try and play the demo, borrow it or rent it first, but bear in mind that it's not necessarily going to appeal to every person who plays it."

    Funny that because I'm not really in to MMOs but after reading the review I'm quite tempted to give it a go. Woah! That's practically what is says above. Spooky.

  • SleepyMagpie #65 7 years ago

    Sorry it winds everyone that likes it up so much, but WoW is a newb kind of MMORPG. And the reason (among many reasons) it is - is because WoW awards the have my cake and eat it crowd. Ie: You get prezzies every second for playing, like some puerile-button thumping-reinforcement craving-Pavlov's dog.

    But you can't like WoW and STILL be called a hardcore MMORPG'r.

    Tough. Eat it! And be happy!

    LOL

  • richispsycho #66 7 years ago

    The best comment i can give about this game is simple.

    I only just read this review today & (most of) these comments because WOW is that addictive...

    I think the review is fair btw... Although the last two sentences confuse me. (i think they where supposed to).

  • terminalterror #67 7 years ago

    "Personally i'd say scrap the review score, and just have some sort of "Eurogamers Choice" badge for a game which is the best of its genre."


    Great idea!

    I know you stopped the EG shop 'we only sell good games' idea, but an 'EG choice' badge would not only add to the rating process, but you could also have a section on the site that just lists all the badged games, with their current price on simply games and a link to buy them.

    Failing that, would it be possible to add the current price to the 'Order yours now from Simply Games' link at the end of the review? If I'm not too sure whether I want the game, seeing a good price after the review might tempt me, and make you lot some commision.

  • Shakermaker #68 7 years ago

    I'm a total n00b to mmorpg's. I didn't even like rpg's that much; the combat was too mechanic for a fps-gamer like me. And then WoW came around. I decided to give it a try and I've been playing non-stop since. I agree with one of the posters who said: the fun-factor is very high.

  • dynarama #69 7 years ago

    Is anybody else disappointed at how non-interactive the world is? All the objects in houses etc. are just painted on, nothing can be picked up unless the game specifically wants it to be.

    Why are these things acceptable in a MMORPG but not in current single player games - it's like they're lagging 4 or 5 years behind.
    Edited by 1 at 21/02/05 @ 07:15

  • SleepyMagpie #70 7 years ago

    Blah wrote: "Oh no! What a disaster!"

    It's no disaster at all not being a hardcore MMORPG'er. Not at all. But WoW is NOT hardcore, it's for the reward a minute crowd.

    Blah wrote:"You're an asshat."

    For telling the truth? My.. really shows that some of the WoW newbs needed to leave the other games, they are nasty and spiteful, like spoiled brats, and bring things down. They are also not very eloquent it seems.

    I am glad they found their own playground.

    And to all those having so much fun with the rewards WoW lavishes upon you every second: Ever heard about inflation? Ever think these trinkets might soon feel worthless, like so much fluff?

    Oh, nevermind, carry on.

  • UncleLou #71 7 years ago

    Hehe, SleepyMagpie, it sounds as if you're just jealous of the fun the "reward a minute crowd" has with this game, while you're stuck with your "hardcore" MMORPGs. :D

  • SleepyMagpie #72 7 years ago

    UncleLou,

    Well, no. Really.

    I LOVE MMORPGs, and signed up for and tried WoW as a betatester, hoping it would be as slick and polished as everything else Blizzard does. And in many ways it is. But they also made a completely american, middle ground, tastes like chicken, everyone can like it - world out of it. I also really think it's staying power is limited, given the ease at achieving things and gaining levels.

    Get me right; I think it's good people are having fun, just don't come here and think you can smackdown with the big boys.

    And of course I'm taking the piss with these outrageous statements about newbs, hardcore, big boys etc. But people actually take offense!

    That's pretty funny to me. (^_^)


  • Macross #73 7 years ago

    WoW has got some new things that it brings to the table, got some old things that it re-hashes.

    It doesnt matter though in the end because it is still FUN, unlike most other MMORPGs out there. In the end it all boils down to opinion, most people seem to like it, some people don't, its the same with any game. Just MMORPG fans seem to be more vocal about things.

  • UncleLou #74 7 years ago

    I also really think it's staying power is limited, given the ease at achieving things and gaining levels.


    This might be true, but to be honest, I couldn't care less. I am having fun with this game now, everything else doesn't really interest me.

    Get me right; I think it's good people are having fun, just don't come here and think you can smackdown with the big boys.

    Hehe, reminds me of the Baldur's Gate "big boys" who slagged off Diablo 2 and felt somehow superior, just because they wouldn't recognize a fun game if it hit them on the bottom with an enchanted hammer. Guess what? It was very well possible to love Baldur's Gate 2, and still thoroughly enjoy Diablo 2. Same with WoW - it's the Diablo 2 of the MMORPG game world, if you want. It's fun, and that's what games are all about.

    Never quite got rid of the impression these self-proclaimed "big boys" were all but that. ;)

    Also. It's fugly. There's no way it can be described as anything else, but people keep doing so. It's graphics and polygon count is as dated as the ones in the engine of Anarchy Online. Which first saw use in, oh, 2000?

    Don't be ridiculous.

  • Megapocalypse #75 7 years ago

    I really think SleepyMagpie needs to be quiet now. He's really not doing those of us who enjoy other MMORPGs any favours.

  • Bertie Verified Senior Staff Writer, Eurogamer.net #76 7 years ago

    Hum, I thought about that too, and then I disregarded it.

    I'd rather read a review from someone who's played other MMOG's, than someone who hasn't.

  • Bertie Verified Senior Staff Writer, Eurogamer.net #77 7 years ago

    You've got a good point about Blizzard making a game for people that haven't really played MMOG's before, it's certainly easy to pick up. Christ, one chap in our guild is level 40 after two weeks - the server houses some level 45'ers + at the moment, too. For me, time will tell; if Blizzard make necessary updates and changes with patches, and listen to the community, that'll make me all the more likely to continue with the game. If they don't, well, I probably won't.

    Heh. I'm giving Kieron the benefit of the doubt, I doubt he'd let something he's been paid to write a journal on get in the way of a Review. To me it adds to his credit that he's experienced another world with some great ideas. Wow seems to be a game made from many, the more a reviewer or player has seen of those worlds, the better qualified, I think, it makes them.

    Cheers

  • SleepyMagpie #78 7 years ago

    No, really, it's fugly to my eyes.

    To Blah: Never played Counter-Strike in my life, and - now that I see you insist on being base and offensive in your language, I am skipping whatever you have to say from now on. Somehow I don't think I will be missing out on any great insights.. o.O

    Megapocolypse: Whatever did I say to warrant your holier than thou attitude? I write what I feel about WoW, and I kid around a bit, but I sure as hell am not here trying to give credit to "those who like other MMORPG's". Great handle btw.

  • Megapocalypse #79 7 years ago

    Meh. That was how i read what you wrote. It that was wrong, sorry. :)
    Edited by 1 at 21/02/05 @ 12:32

  • Shinji #80 7 years ago

    but to address your point directly, wouldn't rather read a review by someone who HAS played MMOs, but hasn't actually been in the pay of another MMO developer?

    Um. To the best of my knowledge, Kieron was never paid by NCSoft for anything. Eurogamer has been paid to run marketing for CoH, and part of that involved us commissioning some diary features about the game. There's absolutely no way in hell that we'd include "oh yeah, and we'll slag off WoW for you, how's that?" in a marketing deal. Seriously, what do you take us for? Do you think we're about to piss off Blizzard and Vivendi like that? Are we morons? No.

    Personally I think it's fair to compare two MMO titles which came out a week apart in the UK. A lot of people will be trying to decide which one to buy.

  • rauper Verified Managing Director, Eurogamer Network #81 7 years ago

    As it happens we aren't planning on running further articles like the CoH diaries, but there definately isn't anything dodgy going on there... and we are running similar ad campaigns for both WoW and CoH on the site.

  • ave #82 7 years ago

    Some of the most high profile/critically acclaimed(by mass media) have "only" achieved an 8/10 on this site, so what's the whining(and make no mistake, it is whining) about it not getting higher?

    I usually find KG's reviews fair and honest, and while sometimes I disagree with the score, I can see why he scored it as he did.

  • otto #83 7 years ago

    Question: would this be a good game on which someone - er let's call him my cousin's best friend - who's never played online could cut his teeth? What's this 'RP' and 'PVP' that people are going on about? Is there any way to play a game like this and just have fun socialising, or is it obligatory to go around and fight things?

  • BremXJones #84 7 years ago

    Nico's points are worth addressing:

    1) Whatever arrangement with the CoH diaries was between Eurogamer and NC Soft, not myself and NC Soft. I'm not in NC Soft's pockets. I'll stress this by - oh, I don't know - saying Lineage 2 is literally everything I hate about MMOs and not worthy to lick World of Warcraft's furry boots.

    I'd appreciate if you can edit your posts later in the debate to remove references to me being bought and sold. Such misconceptions have a tendency to hang around in the idea-space of Gamers.

    2) I do actually describe CoH as a very much more Minor game than World Of Warcraft. I'm very much *not* saying that WoW should do everything like City of Heroes does.

    3) There's an entire more positively slanted article linked at the start. I did stress that you should read that, and I concentrated more on the downside just to avoid repeating myself.

    About the score? I can't give 9/10 for something I'm not actively in love with. I really, really, really like World of Warcraft. 8/10 with room for promotion to a 9 down the line is the best I can give it, I'm afraid.

    KG

  • SleepyMagpie #85 7 years ago

    WOW, what a rhuckus!

    I feel kinda uncomfortable inbetween the corruption/clean polemic going on, and my somewhat aloof remarks about WoW being for newbs and not being hardcore.

    While I do feel greater journalism has been found on the pages of Eurogamer earlier, Kieron seems able enough, and I don't think there is any warrant for accusations of being bought. If I were to criticize Kieron directly, it seems he is a bit too caught up in being the hip and cool Eurogamer writer, and comes off as a tad self-absorbed (clickable picon that links to a larger gallery shot of the writer, excuse me?!).

    A general accusation can be levelled against the entire games-journo community when it comes to being swept up in the tides of hype gushing from the larger publishers when their games release and the propaganda floodgates open. I guess it helps getting pre-releases, exclusives, and other publisher attention too, inching that score up a notch, eh?

    The Eurogamer writer of old; Gestalt, was remarkable in his integrity, and he could looked upon as a high water mark, he stayed above it all.

    Sadly, he was eaten by a grue.

    Another, much more apt observation can be made regarding the reviewing of MMORPGs. I really think one should wake up and see these “games” as much more than just. They are worlds. People go there not only to kill a few minutes before football practice or going down the pub. Very many log onto these games and leave the aforementioned completely (with the effect that has on your physique, I had to start lifting some weights and rollerblade so as to not atrophy completely). Therefore other standards should be applied to the reviewers of these worlds and the process of reviewing them. One should be looking for a Loney Planet/Rough Guide kind of traveler, that writes continuous blogs, and also intitial findings - exploratory reports. I actually wrote a mail pitching this idea to Eurogamer almost a year ago, but did not hear back. Oddly, Edge magazine, after their revamp, started a page devoted to MMORPG culture. Mind you, it does not cover any one world specifically or in depth, but it is a nice start, and lights the way.

    My absolutely last comments on WoW:

    I do not want to rain on anyone enjoying WoW now. Merely made some comments about WoW, some lighthearted and some not so.

    THE PROBLEM OF WoW (read woe)

    It could have been so much more. It is (to me) contemptable in it's bid to please everyone.

    Posits:

    If you get something very easily, it's worth will not be very much.

    If you get something very often, you will start to expect it, and your surprise/joy threshold rises. Making you increasingly hard to please.

    One loses interest quickly in a game or puzzle not requiring any acumen.

    So. From these posits I lead that, while you may be enjoying WoW today, tomorrow, and maybe even in three weeks time, I doubt it will last. A MMORPG should grab and hold your attention and bring you wonderment and opportunity to grow and achieve for maybe as much as 3 RL years.

    We have come to an age of good-enough, the mediocre, of fast food. How the heck are we gonna make anything brilliant that way?

    WoW: Score 6 (today, with room for improvement come new reviews), if the 1-10 scale was really followed. IMHO Half Life 2, as good as that game is, isn't even a 10. It's an 8.5 if the scale included decimals, or a 9 then. Ok.

    “We create worlds” was the slogan of Origin Systems, before EA came and ate them.

    Burp. Thank you may I have another?

  • UncleLou #86 7 years ago

    A MMORPG should grab and hold your attention and bring you wonderment and opportunity to grow and achieve for maybe as much as 3 RL years.

    This is your problem, and where you misunderstand the game. People are having fun with this game now, and if it doesn't interest them anymore, they'll cancel their sub in 2 weeks, 4 weeks or 2 months. Where's the problem? Yes, it does reward you constantly, and yes you can reach lvl 60 fairly quick. You blame the game for lacking cynical "let's make them pay for years by drip-feeding them" mechanisms, as other MMORPGs do.

    You somehow are a victim of your expectations how a MMORPG has to work, and can't accept it for what it is.

  • UncleLou #87 7 years ago

    I disagree with ste statement that a newcomer shouldn't join a PVP server. You are completely safe in the starting areas, and hardly have any quests that lead you into territory where you can be attacked until you're around lvl 18-20.

    Question: would this be a good game on which someone - er let's call him my cousin's best friend - who's never played online could cut his teeth? What's this 'RP' and 'PVP' that people are going on about? Is there any way to play a game like this and just have fun socialising, or is it obligatory to go around and fight things?

    It's definitely obligatory to go around and fight things, how are you supposed to gain any experience otherwise? :-)

    Fighting in groups is a lot of fun, imagine you're playing Baldur's Gate 2, but everybody in your party is a real person.

    It's very newcomer-friendly, too, the game takes you by the hand, leads you from quest to quest, and the UI isn't intimidating at all. If, um, your cousin's best friend has played any RPG before, he shouldn't have any problems getting into it.

    PvP means "player vs player". On these servers, eache area in the game is either "Horde", "Alliance" or "contested". If you're a Horde character, you can not be attacked in Horde territory, unless you attack someone first, or enable PvP with a simple command. You can, however, always be attacked in contested and Alliance areas. Like I said above though, you won't need to set a foot into dangerous areas until lvl 18-20. And death in WoW doesn't really punish you. You don't lose items, you don't lose XP, all it means is that you have to walk back to your corpse from the nearest cemetary.

    PvE means "player vs environment". Players of the other faction can't attack you anywhere, unless you enable PvP. That means that both parties of a fight will have agreed to fight, always.

    RP means role-playing server, where people are (in theory) expected to stay "in character".

    If, for example, your cousin's best friend would happen to live in Canada, and he wanted to play on a European server, he'd have to make sure he gets the European version. :)
    Edited by 1 at 22/02/05 @ 10:18

  • Megapocalypse #88 7 years ago

    "And another small - but important - aspect is the mobs themselves. In EQ2 you'll find yourself killing snakes at level 17. In WoW by level 10 I was killing beastmen. At the end of the day they're both mobs, but it's more satisfying to feel your character actually has some ability and skill beyond being the local snake catcher... "


    A bit unfair that. In EQ2 there are plenty of orcs/skeletons/knolls etc that low level characters are capable of fighting. Yes there are snakes but they fit the environments that they're in. There are also giant scorpians, undead warriors, packs of hounds, large groups of orcs etc. Theres plenty for soloer/groups to chose from.

    Theres also cows. :D

  • BremXJones #89 7 years ago

    Quale: I'm very sorry that I'm enjoying City of Heroes more than World of Warcraft. Next time I'll work out a way to say that which doesn't involve directly comparing the two.

    SleepyMagpie: "(clickable picon that links to a larger gallery shot of the writer, excuse me?!). "

    This is a joke, yes? If so, well... be careful. I get ideas easily.

    KG

  • Bertie Verified Senior Staff Writer, Eurogamer.net #90 7 years ago

    To be honest, you've probably got your pick with the PvE servers, as the majority of l33t folk are PvP. I love RP servers, I think as long as you take into account that it is an RP server and to value that, it doesn't mean that there isn't a time and a place where you can fall out of character into more general chat.

  • Skeeve #91 7 years ago

    "gestalt was a celebrated reviewer on Eurogamer who was famous for his ruthless criticism combined with a true and humourous insight in what gamers liked and disliked"

    Or an alternative description could label him as being a bitter, twisted game-hating reviewer and its probably the more accurate one. ;-)

  • ElephantMonkey #92 7 years ago

    Why doesn't it bring me a pizza hut when I write /pizza in WoW ?

  • Megapocalypse #93 7 years ago

    "In a group, yes. Or for no experience. I personally hated the balance of mobs in EQ2. They were either overly powerful for my level or under-powered and so gave little/no xp."

    I've pretty much soloed all the way to 16 and theres been plenty of blue/white/yellow single mobs for me to take.

  • otto #94 7 years ago

    Tell him hello from us. :)

  • ave #95 7 years ago

    So I've been playing WoW 2 weeks on my brothers a/c...

    Tried an RP server(argent dawn), pve server(azjol-nerub) and a PVP server (bladefist).

    So...

    I dont know it's called an mmoRPg, or it has RP servers.
    The game has no facility for roleplaying, nor does it seem like it will have for the forseable future.

    It takes much much longer to level up solo, and it's been almost impossible to find parties on all of the servers.

    Shitty backstory, fairly repetitive and bland quests(The Embalmer quest was ok though), mediocre graphics(why do reviews keep saying it has brilliant water effects? playing on max detail with a 6800GT), bland & boring class system.

    Really, terribly poor crafting system for this day and age, horizons, EQ2 and SWG blow it out of the water.

    No mounts until level 40 = you spend at least 50% of your time running(my average according to cosmos is 70% of 9 days total playing time JUST BLOODY RUNNING FROM PLACE TO PLACE).

    Trading and auction house system are also really, _REALLY_ poor, with just 2 auction houses per side(horde/alliance).

    Each area's is done fairly well, but all are hackneyed, and seem ripped almost wholesale from other games/movies.

    One thing that's really annoying me is that there isnt a single area in the game that doesnt have some sort of evil band of enemies, even the starting area for humans have Defias Traitors straight out of the bat, about 90seconds walk from the humans capital city.


    I'll say it again: A terribly mediocre MMOG that only has two things going for it:

    OMG BLIZZARD/WARCRAFT
    And it's polished nature(which doesnt stop frequent loot bugs, crashes to desktop and other miscellaneous bugs).

    6/10

  • Intera #96 6 years ago

    I'm baffled.

    WoW not enough?

    ....

    This site never fails to surprise me. Consistently rating critically acclaimed games lower than everyone else, like they have some point to prove. It's like the EDGE of websites (and no, that's not a compliment)

    I'll admit it, I'm probably a geek. However, I'm getting a little sick and tired of SUPER geeks moaning on about games like WoW not being "hardcore" Most people don't enjoy "hardcore" MMO's (like EVE) because most people don't want to work for a solid year before they can have some fun in the game. As far as I can see, these people are intelligent, and aren't held back from enjoying a game by some sense of superiority.

    Anyway, when you people finally get to enjoying your "reward a year" games, WoW players will already have a years worth of "reward a minute" FUN gameplay behind them. Who are the winners?
    Edited by 2 at 11/06/06 @ 23:50