WOW was almost "a much darker game" News
MMO PC News by Oli Welsh
Speaking exclusively to Eurogamer, Blizzard's Chris Metzen and Sam Didier have revealed that early World of Warcraft concepts were more futuristic and "much darker" than the game they eventually made.
"For a good stretch of the early period of WOW, certain components of the dev team had pitched the idea of placing WOW a hundred years in the future of [Warcraft's world] Azeroth," said Metzen, the company's vice president of creative development, and story guru.
"The wars of orcs and humans were long-done, it was a much darker game," he said. "At the end of the day, there was a lot of cool art churned out - and this is a little-known story - but as we stood back and looked at it, we just felt that there was a disconnect. It didn't feel like Azeroth."
Art director Didier agreed: "We were pushing it a few years ahead, into the future of the world, or rearranging the way that some of the characters would look - and it just wasn't biting for a lot of people. It's like changing Darth Vader from a big scary death knight in the future into a small child. Oh, never mind, sorry, they did that already."
In the end, a return to the exact art style of strategy hit Warcraft III won out. "It was like, why are we trying to reinvent this thing?" remembered Didier. "Everyone loves Warcraft - let's just make this Warcraft. We don't need any futuristic spin on it, or scary versions of this character, compared to the Warcraft III one. Just make it Warcraft III - that's what the fans are going to love."
For more on how the biggest game in the world came into being - including lead designer Tom Chilton's confession that it was originally going to have few quests after the starting zones, and how little of the game was made just one year before release - check out the first in our exclusive, two-part Making of World of Warcraft feature series, published today.
Are you excited about World of Warcraft: Wrath of the Lich King on PC?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games
Related Games
World of Warcraft
World of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade
World of Warcraft: Wrath of the Lich King
Latest Features
-
World of Warcraft Interview [47]
-
World of Warcraft Review [120]
-
World of Warcraft Hands On [22]
-
World of Warcraft Interview [4]
-
World of Warcraft Interview [13]
Latest Videos
World of Warcraft: Call of the Crusade [1] 5 August, 2009
World of Warcraft - Ulduar [4] 14 April, 2009
Latest News
-
BlizzCon moving to Vegas in July? [2]
-
Battle.net now required to play WOW [8]
-
Blizzard keen on WOW micro-transactions [37]
-
WOW patch 3.3 in "coming weeks" [27]
-
Blizzard opens WOW pet store [19]
Latest Screenshots
28 June, 2008 [19]
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Comments: 1-27 of 27 in total
|
+5
"Why are we trying to reinvent gta 3/ halo2/ gears 2 etc etc?, lets just make the SAME GAME. /sigh. "
No, they are saying they followed the style and feel set out in Warcraft 3. To say Warcraft 3 and World of Warcraft are the same game because they look similiar is an incredibly daft thing to suggest, even more so when you consider two of the games you mention look extremely similiar to their forebears. |
|
+2
11m people all together play the smallest violin for the few who don't like the neon colours and cartoony look.
Also JCHilton, they're not Blizzard's words - you span them to imply something different to what they meant. You made it sound like they'd said "hey let's not reinvent anything at all" when in fact they said "let's not reinvent the style." Which isn't to say the graphics weren't overhauled - the style just remained the same. Again, 11m people seem to agree with them, -1 so far to you. Gutted. |
|
giant_frying_pan
11/08/09 @ 15:27
+2
And while those 11,000,000 are playing their violin, the other 6,695,993,152 couldn't give a toss!
|
|
0
The sound of 11,000,000 playing their violins is louder than the other 6,695,993,152 not giving a toss, so we win - however the collective noise of either side massively drowns out the fraction of either of those numbers who quietly whimper that they think it's a totally objective fact that WoW would've been a better game with darker, more realistic looks... Which was the point I think.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 11/08/09 @ 16:45
|
|
IronCladChicken
11/08/09 @ 16:11
+1
@JCHilton
Yes, I'm often getting RTS and MMORPG's confused. I reckon style != content. @JahB How does that work? Especially with WoW, I've read a lot of posts from people who were turned off by the graphical style. Personally, I've never been concerned with art direction, as long as it's consistent and of decent quality - I'd happy play a Mickey Mouse game if I thought the game was entertaining - By which, I mean just that the style isn't a concern to me. Why does the stylised look stop you from playing? |
|
optimusprym8
11/08/09 @ 17:00
0
The move to blocky, cartoony 3D with WCIII put me off so WoW style was never going to win me over. Guild Wars looked the same in early alpha builds, am so glad they changed it to what it is today. Whilst not a fan of the game, I do give Blizzard credit though for taking every element that worked well in other games, polishing it highly and sticking it all together in one title. Am looking forward to the second part that covers the launch and what the devs have to say about it.
|
|
+2
@IronCladChicken
because i don't want to spend hours with a game that is - in my opinion - ugly to look at. it may be consistent and high-quality as you said, but it's not my taste. when wow came out, i was hoping for something along the lines of diablo, but to me it looked like a saturday morning cartoon.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 11/08/09 @ 18:57
|
|
0
Blizzard has always been about one thing, take a good exsisting idea and then adjust it, tweak it, fiddle etc to make it the best it can be.
All industrys need different types of companys and personally iam glad that blizzard is the one to polish concepts rather than reinvent the wheel, as there damm good at what they do . Say what you want about them but they know how to make a good game. |
|
IronCladChicken
11/08/09 @ 21:48
+2
@JahB & optimusprym8
See - to me the characters look cute rather than ugly. I don't want to come across like I'm having a go, I just genuinely don't understand why some people are so against specific visual styles when it means so little to me :) As I say, I'm just as happy watching Pixar as I am raging bull - I'd be a little distracted if Robert De Niro was fighting Mr.Potato Head (voiced by Cheers John Deszo Ratzenberger), but within their individual context - as long as I'm entertained it's fine by me. It's not that I'm trolling, putting you down, thinking I'm better than you or that you must be a teenager (or judging from your Saturday morning cartoons comment, American ;) ) etc.. I'd just genuinely like to understand why it would have such a dramatic effect on your decision not to play a game? You say you were expecting Diablo style & it was different - What stopped you from readjusting your expectations?
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 11/08/09 @ 22:50
|
|
notmyrealname
11/08/09 @ 22:20
0
Waiting for similar headline in 2019:
''Diablo 3 was almost a lot less cartoony like WoW.'' *misses dark and gloomy coridors + nightmarish Diablo 1 act 4 sprites + music. |
|
+2
In fact warcraft III was more cartoonier than wow. I loved that. But now they´re stuck in "serious/cartoony" and with neon colors. Back in the old times the orcs wore pelts and crude armors, now they wear... glowing stuff. They should make a geiger counter for engineers, your character´s shoulder pads may be radiactive!
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 12/08/09 @ 00:48
|
|
+1
@IronCladChicken
now hold it with the low blows young man - i'm neither american nor a teenager. as to your question, to me, games are about immersion - i love a good story told in a fitting environment (e.g. Fallout 3 or Diablo); WoW tells an epic story, but it's set in such a ridiculous environment that any sense of immersion is absolutely impossible. to use your example, that's like taking Raging Bull's story and then choosing "A Bug's Life" for the setting.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 12/08/09 @ 09:39
|
|
optimusprym8
12/08/09 @ 11:00
+2
It's hard to put a specific reason why, it's like asking why you prefer a Turner over a Dali, it's just personal taste. It looks cartoony, basic and kiddie in my eyes. If it were that type of game, great, but considering MMOs are just glorified spreadsheets, it doesn't sit well with me in this instance. Maybe glorified spreadsheets need cute, charming graphics and I'm completely wrong but being 30-something, it's not what I look for. I love Katamari style as it fits the game. I loved WCII 2D style and the "zug zugs" etc but it just looked crap to me when it moved to 3D. But that's my opinion. I know 11 million gold farmers, ahem players think different or see beyond the style and enjoy the game and that's fine by me.
|
|
IronCladChicken
12/08/09 @ 21:04
0
@JahB & optimusprym8
Holy crap - Thanks for getting back to me - I was expecting posts telling me to f*ck off :) 'k - So, if I understand correctly, the issue isn't with the style itself - More the style with the context (of the game)? Working with JahB's Bug Life reference... If you went to the cinema expecting to see the seven samurai but got a bugs life (Pretending that the only difference between the two movies is that one is live action, while the other is computer generated) Then the style difference would be enough to put you off (expecting the starker imagery of the live-action piece and instead getting 90's CG animation). But, if you'd gone expecting a Pixar movie - Then it wouldn’t be an issue at all. Am I getting close at all? Or am I still missing the point completely? : |
|
optimusprym8
14/08/09 @ 06:36
0
For me that's pretty much it but then, expecting a Pixar movie you could get Toy Story or The Incredibles, two very different styles!
|
Comments: 1-27 of 27 in total
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
