Why Blizzard is a threat to ATI/Nvidia's high-end segment and high-end PC gaming

Goddam these game developers are putting the hardware industry to its grave!!!

...:rolleyes:
 
It makes sense from a business standpoint to make your product available to a wider market segment. However, neither Blizzard or Valve are slouches when it comes to making a game that still requires decent hardware. Half Life 2 required some pretty good hardware if you wanted to max it out. Sure their games "run" on practically nothing but they don't look a shadow of their full self.

Plus if it came down to just Valve and Blizzard making bland looking games, you can bet some upstart would come along and rekindle our love for pixelpushing.

Jakalwarrior said:
i dunno about you guys but when I was playing WoW I bought very few games, same for when I was playing D2 and SC. When I was hooked on them, they were the only games I felt like playing... Psht.. farcry? why would I buy that! ima go pvp on my zon!
Click to expand...

Very true I missed out on the last half of 2005 and most of 2006 because of WoW.

DeadSkull said:
What makes or breaks a game now is multiplayer and how well it is structured. If game has very poor multiplayer mode then it is going to have very bad re playability thus low sales.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry chief but I have to disagree with you. Relying on Multiplayer for your game is a great way to see it collect dust once the servers are empty when the next fad comes through. Replayability is where the SP and mod element takes over. Not that it matters from a developer standpoint, you've already bought the game.

damonposey said:
I heard it a lot more a few years ago. Now what's becoming more common is, I'm going to buy a console for so-and-so game, because console exclusive games are becoming more desirable. Heck it worked on me, a PC gamer since 87, didn't own a console since the SNES yet I bought a PS3 for gta4 and mgs4 alone.

The question is what games are PC exclusive on the horizon, AND are leaps and bounds above the graphics on consoles. I can count one. Crysis: Warhead. Alan wake, Mafia 2, they're all coming out on consoles. People need more of an incentive to upgrade their PC with so much competition from consoles in action titles.
Click to expand...

Exclusivity makes no sense from a business standpoint. If I was Crytek I would have started Crysis as a cross platform. Hit as much of the market as you can.

Personally I don't like cross platform games if they don't bother to play to each platforms strengths and weaknesses.
 
Topicstarter is right, in the D3 video you can see the models are very low polygon, but because the camera is at a distance and ALWAYS limited to just a certain field of play, the system requirements will be barely anything. And yet still, it looks great.

If you only enjoy watching nice graphics and boasting about your fat graphics card, you're not a gamer.

I upgraded in May after dumping my 3.5 years old pc, and if D3 is going to be released in 1 year from now, I definitely won't need a new pc for the next 3 years from now, at the least. I bought a 9800GX2 but I don't even think it was necessary, I could've played Age of Conan (it's the thing I mostly play now) with a 9800GTX or something too... a little bit of 'buyers remorse'.
 
A large percentage of the system users who are buying these high-end graphics cards to install in their systems are hardware enthusiasts and so it's never going to matter what system requirements are in some Blizzard game because they're still going to buy the same latest and fastest hardware for their personal system builds as they always have. They may not buy SLI and Crossfire setups but they're still going to purchase one of the newer and faster cards that fall into their budget. They aren't going to buy the lowest-end card ATI and nVidia release just cause it runs Blizzard games.

Games like WoW and Diablo 3 which have lower system requirements have always been around and nothing is going to change when Diablo 3 is released. Yes Blizzard will sell more copies than a lot of other game developers due to the fact more people can run the game on their low-end systems but that's not going to have any effect on those of us which choose to spend more on our hardware.

Simply put I don't foresee a large percentage of you going out and buying last gen graphics cards for your new system builds just because those older cards still run WoW and Diablo 3 fine. I personally have played very few of Blizzards games and what few I have played have never held my attention for very long.
 
I totally disagree with the op.

Blizzards games rely more on a certain art style than a higher polygon count. Realistically you could almost say thier games have better graphics just because of thier art style. Graphics aren't totally based on polygons and sprites imo.

Crysis is fucking terrible. Even if I had a Tri 280 setup with a 5 Ghz Core 2 Quad Extreme I'd still say its terrible. There are so many issues with that game... Yea I might be nit picking but it's my opinion.

The absolute top PC makers are strict PC type studios;

Valve (Half Life + mods, possibly Left 4 Dead)
Blizzard (Warcraft Universe, Diablo, Starcraft)
Infinity Ward (Call of Duty 1, 2, 4)

Every game they produce is pretty much like printing money, also note how none of thier games require a GTX 280, much less a 8800GTX. They look astonishing really, and they have an incredible amount of polish to them. The animations, scripting, back story, plots, etc etc.

Then you have your EA's, Crytech's, SEGA's, etc. etc. who create basically garbage. Sure they have thier once a decade AAA titles but they usually always have trash coming out.
 
Frostex said:
CS:S is more happenstance than anything, the original just happened to be very popular, my point wasn't how popular it was in absolute terms but rather the relative popularity of CS:S to the original. That's a typical trend you'll see where sequels rarely live up to the originals in the eyes of the gamers who loved the original.

No disrespect here, but I think buying a gaming machine for 1 maybe 2 exclusive titles which are going to appear on the PC 6-12 months later is a bit silly.

Most of us are well aware of the cost of the console, yes the hardware is cheaper although the games are severly marked up to compensate for that. Pick whatever quality you want, personally I cant stand the relative low quality of consoles, low resolutions especially, even when a console game does sacrafice enough graphical detail to run in 1920x1080, it's still 1/2 the resolution of what I currently game at.

Quality costs, consoles are a poor mans PC, that suits some people, and that fine, but others who appreciate quality and have large amounts of disposible income will always invest in the high end market. And there being lower quality alternatives out there is never going to ruin that, as long as theres a market for something, there'll be someone there to make money out of it, guranteed.
Click to expand...

as i said before i don't want to delve too deeply into console vs PC, since we do that enough in the gaming forum. game lineups aren't your concern, i get it.

6-12 months is a long time. and i doubt mgs4 will ever make it to PC. mgs3 hasn't even made it there yet. it's a shame, because a lot of elitist PC gamers are going to miss a truly great game(mgs4)
 
next-Jin said:
I totally disagree with the op.

Blizzards games rely more on a certain art style than a higher polygon count. Realistically you could almost say thier games have better graphics just because of thier art style. Graphics aren't totally based on polygons and sprites imo.

Crysis is fucking terrible. Even if I had a Tri 280 setup with a 5 Ghz Core 2 Quad Extreme I'd still say its terrible. There are so many issues with that game... Yea I might be nit picking but it's my opinion.

The absolute top PC makers are strict PC type studios;

Valve (Half Life + mods, possibly Left 4 Dead)
Blizzard (Warcraft Universe, Diablo, Starcraft)
Infinity Ward (Call of Duty 1, 2, 4)

Every game they produce is pretty much like printing money, also note how none of thier games require a GTX 280, much less a 8800GTX. They look astonishing really, and they have an incredible amount of polish to them. The animations, scripting, back story, plots, etc etc.

Then you have your EA's, Crytech's, SEGA's, etc. etc. who create basically garbage. Sure they have thier once a decade AAA titles but they usually always have trash coming out.
Click to expand...

LOL, say what you want about cryTEK, but at least inform yourself of the basic FACTS regarding the rest:

both valve and blizzard have announced development for consoles and Infinity Ward is a PC exclusive studio?

WoW and CoD with astonishing scripting and backstory? plots? wtf...

what color is the sky where you live?
 
mope54 said:
LOL, say what you want about cryTEK, but at least inform yourself of the basic FACTS regarding the rest:

both valve and blizzard have announced development for consoles and Infinity Ward is a PC exclusive studio?

WoW and CoD with astonishing scripting and backstory? plots? wtf...

what color is the sky where you live?
Click to expand...

Their main development platform is the PC (why not branch off to consoles to net more profit, they still focus/started primarily on PC), and say what you will about CoD4 or WoW but they basically destroyed anything your ass plays in sales and ratings. Why does everyone on these forums throw shit in other peoples faces when they don't agree with them? Seriously.

The main point of my post was to say those three studios create games that no one else can touch no matter how hard they tried, with graphics that any 3 year old card can run. If you could not comprehend that, that's your problem. When was the last time you have actually went outside to see the sky?
 
next-Jin said:
Their main development platform is the PC (why not branch off to consoles to net more profit, they still focus/started primarily on PC), and say what you will about CoD4 or WoW but they basically destroyed anything your ass plays in sales and ratings. Why does everyone on these forums throw shit in other peoples faces when they don't agree with them? Seriously.

The main point of my post was to say those three studios create games that no one else can touch no matter how hard they tried, with graphics that any 3 year old card can run. If you could not comprehend that, that's your problem. When was the last time you have actually went outside to see the sky?
Click to expand...

I don't shit on other people's faces when they don't agree with me, but when you can't get your basic facts straight, then I surely will call you out for your stupidity.

WoW's popularity notwithstanding, is known by anyone over 11 years old to have lackluster scripting at best, and Blizzard twists the plot every which way to suit more sales. It has *no* backstory to speak of, at least not one that any Warcraft franchise players recognize...the people who play WoW are a different audience than the ones who played the RTS series.

CoD4 is a linear FPS. It has no backstory, it has no plot.

Now one can argue these are opinions...and I won't belabor my points any further.
The reason I shot your post down was because you made claims without bothering to fact check...not for your opinions on the games.

Both Blizzard and Valve are developing for consoles. In fact, Blizzard has bought several console development studios in the past and releases under their umbrellas.

Infinity Ward not only currently develops for consoles already, each of the CoD versions you used in your example of "strict PC" games have been released for consoles.


Your point: "The absolute top PC makers are strict PC type studios;"
is utter bullshit.
It's got nothing to do with my comprehension of your points, it's more to do with your inability to express yourself and do your own research before opening your maw and making unfounded claims.
 
damonposey said:
as i said before i don't want to delve too deeply into console vs PC, since we do that enough in the gaming forum. game lineups aren't your concern, i get it.

6-12 months is a long time. and i doubt mgs4 will ever make it to PC. mgs3 hasn't even made it there yet. it's a shame, because a lot of elitist PC gamers are going to miss a truly great game(mgs4)
Click to expand...

If they ported it like they did with MGS2 Substance I would have to pass.:(
 
mope54 said:
I don't shit on other people's faces when they don't agree with me, but when you can't get your basic facts straight, then I surely will call you out for your stupidity.

WoW's popularity notwithstanding, is known by anyone over 11 years old to have lackluster scripting at best, and Blizzard twists the plot every which way to suit more sales. It has *no* backstory to speak of, at least not one that any Warcraft franchise players recognize...the people who play WoW are a different audience than the ones who played the RTS series.

CoD4 is a linear FPS. It has no backstory, it has no plot.

Now one can argue these are opinions...and I won't belabor my points any further.
The reason I shot your post down was because you made claims without bothering to fact check...not for your opinions on the games.

Both Blizzard and Valve are developing for consoles. In fact, Blizzard has bought several console development studios in the past and releases under their umbrellas.

Infinity Ward not only currently develops for consoles already, each of the CoD versions you used in your example of "strict PC" games have been released for consoles.


Your point: "The absolute top PC makers are strict PC type studios;"
is utter bullshit.
It's got nothing to do with my comprehension of your points, it's more to do with your inability to express yourself and do your own research before opening your maw and making unfounded claims.
Click to expand...

I said "The absolute top PC makers are strict PC type studios" and I'll stand by that. Your whole argument is from that quote. Your attitude comes from you simply having a problem with WoW, CoD4 or any other game you listed. Notice I said "PC type studio".

Type can mean a hell of a lot of things. In this case it means they STARTED and FOCUS on PC game releases. Say what you will of Infinity Ward, they again started on the PC and still release games on the PC platform.

Everyone knows full well both Valves and Blizzard's AAA games are GASP! .... PC Games.

Those studios are totally different than EA, SEGA, Bungie, yada yada yada.
 
lol @ "high-end PC gaming" :rolleyes:

At the end of the day, all game is, to the 98.5% of the ppl that plays them, is a way to waste time - hopefully in an enjoyable manner. Does it matter if you spend 2hrs playing minesweeper on your 386sx, or you spend 2hrs being all "l33t" fragging away on your ultra-OCed-2000 watt-dual-SLI-uber-flashing-blue LED rig that also doubles as a space heater?

There will always be ppl who likes to play minesweeper, and there will always be ppl who are hooked on the latest and most demanding game. Personally, I think it's the WRONG direction to take, you know that some of my fondest memories are sitting in front of my TV, playing Super Contra on SNES with my friend. "high-end" gaming? pfft. USER-EXPERIENCE IS KING.

There will always be a market for 600watt graphics cards. But lets hope that this is NOT the norm. I say, kudos to Blizzard that markets games to the masses. No matter how "high-end" or low-end it is, the end result is you spend xxxx number of hours meshing buttons, starring at a screen. Nothing more, nothing less.

cheers,

yass
 
if you are a true gamer you dont stick to just one platform. I for one bought the PS3 because after playing MGS 1 on my PC back in 2000 i cannot dare miss the final one of the series. MGS4 is like no other PC game ive ever played... And dare i say... looks and gameplay looks better than crysis

then comes the FF series and Gran Turismo. Jeebus you PC fanbois consoles deserves more praise than they should
 
I still play D2: LOD at 800x600 and I still find it more appealing than some of the other game titles out there that looks beautiful, graphic wise.
 
Leepox said:
if you are a true gamer you dont stick to just one platform. I for one bought the PS3 because after playing MGS 1 on my PC back in 2000 i cannot dare miss the final one of the series. MGS4 is like no other PC game ive ever played... And dare i say... looks and gameplay looks better than crysis
Click to expand...

Indeed! They did some amazing things with the graphics in MGS4.
 
Leepox said:
if you are a true gamer you dont stick to just one platform. I for one bought the PS3 because after playing MGS 1 on my PC back in 2000 i cannot dare miss the final one of the series. MGS4 is like no other PC game ive ever played... And dare i say... looks and gameplay looks better than crysis

then comes the FF series and Gran Turismo. Jeebus you PC fanbois consoles deserves more praise than they should
Click to expand...

Yeah cause you're sitting how far away from your lcd/plasma/whatever set? Put crysis on something that big and sit back 12 ft away. I'll bet you'll freak out when you realize how insanely life like Crysis looks.
 
DeadSkull said:
Yeah cause you're sitting how far away from your lcd/plasma/whatever set? Put crysis on something that big and sit back 12 ft away. I'll bet you'll freak out when you realize how insanely life like Crysis looks.
Click to expand...

You could buy one of those large LCD picture frames, mount it on the wall with a picture of crysis and you'll get a similar framerate.
 
damonposey said:
You could buy one of those large LCD picture frames, mount it on the wall with a picture of crysis and you'll get a similar framerate.
Click to expand...

So is that what you do in your spare time when you're not busy crying over the fact that you can't afford a $6k alienware crysis killing machine? You do know that you don't really need to buy that kind of rig to enjoy crysis, right?! I mean after all what exactly are you doing in [H] forums if you're still complaining about crysis fps. Here , take a look crysis is playable on $120-190 priced gpus now. So go ahead, please FAIL more.

edit:
That was kind of funny around 6 months ago but now with ati formidable competition and price cuts all around nv gpus you really don't need to drop that much to enjoy crysis. Unless you really want to game on a 30 in monitor with max res and everything cranked. Well technically you can't really tell that much of a difference after 1680 by 1200 but whatever. That is not exactly what sells top of the line gpus right now, is it.
 
Diablo came out in '97, Starcraft came out in '98, and Diablo II came out around 2000 IIRC... The GPU market didn't exactly crumble then nor did it face a huge downturn 'cuz people were suddenly hooked unto these games for a 3-6 year period, in fact, it kept growing as more and more games made use of 3D acceleration. WoW is part of a larger MMORPG phenomenon (though it's clearly responsible for the bulk of it at this point) that's been going on for a while now, and that hasn't forced a downturn on ATI/Nvidia either.

I don't see why you think the sequels to these games, which by no means are guaranteed to be anywhere near as big a hit as the originals were, are gonna have such a large impact on the industry.

There's never been that much of an incentive for the average joe to get a high-end card anyway, considering the average joe usually has a 19-22" inch display (or even 15-17" displays in year past, if not still to this day, I'm sure there's some good Steam statistics on this)... You've never needed a pricey GPU to play games at 1024 or 1280, and ATI/NVidia have never based their business model on their $400-500+ flagships.

'Sides, there'll be plenty of games people wanna play that will demand a somewhat beefier system, games like Supreme Commander had the gameplay to back up the requirements, and playing it on a nice system (w/two displays possibly) is a treat.
 
First of all, I don't know anyone who only plays WoW or CS:S or any of these uber-popular games. I know people who got their start on PC gaming through these games but now they all play other stuff too! And you know what? Some of them were really surprised when their box which played WoW perfectly couldn't handle SupCom or NWN2 or Hellgate or COD4 well at all.

BUT, most of the WoW/CS:S/other 'less hardcore' game players I know have upgraded their GPU or purchased a new PC within the last year and a half. Why? There are always going to be sweet, cutting edge games that anyone with a half-decent rig will want to get their hands on the moment they see. That, and with the GPU makers targeting the midrange so aggressively now there is a level of performance per dollar available today that is just ludicrous. I guess I don't expect to see any hit to high-end gaming because of these games, because I feel that they don't even target the high-end gamer in the first place. There will always be a game like Wolfenstein, Doom 3, FarCry, Bioshock or Crysis. The FPS calls for the highest degree of graphical realism in order to continue it's evolution and satisfy the players. This is not something I ever expected these more casual games to be responsible for. Their goal is to capture as many players are possible, not to take risks or innovate.
 
The Pharaoh said:
First of all, I don't know anyone who only plays WoW or CS:S or any of these uber-popular games. I know people who got their start on PC gaming through these games but now they all play other stuff too! And you know what? Some of them were really surprised when their box which played WoW perfectly couldn't handle SupCom or NWN2 or Hellgate or COD4 well at all.
Click to expand...

You may not know them personally but they certainly exist, I'm sure there's good research data to prove that once someone gets hooked one a MMORPG they often play few other games for a months afterwards (if not a few years)...

It may not be the case with everyone, but it's common. I played very little else for the 2-3 years that I played DAOC heavily for instance (another MMORPG, kinda PvP focused), and I used to try at 'least half a dozen games a year before that. CS never had that kinda sole draw on me though, I played it plenty but never exclusively, same w/any other non-MMORPG game.

I'm not defending the original poster's point, I don't think SCII or Diablo 3 however well optimized they are will have anywhere as much of an impact as WoW does, but it's hard to deny that WoW and other MMORPGs haven't had a big impact on the landscape, monopolizing a lot of player's time and money in many cases. Few of the MMORPGs are as demanding as an AoC are either, and if they are they don't sustain that through the game's lifespan.
 
Only on a hardware uber-nerd site could a company that produces widely-accessible games that look great and require relatively low specs be considered a threat :rolleyes: Look, nothing destroys Crysis yet, so it can carry the banner of pushing-the-hardware-envelope all by its lonesome until something else comes out. And it's not like Blizzard are the only game dev studio out there. There's plenty of (potentially) system-pushing 3D games coming in the near future: Fallout 3, Alan Wake, Far Cry 2, etc. The sky isn't falling.
 
MentatYP said:
Only on a hardware uber-nerd site could a company that produces widely-accessible games that look great and require relatively low specs be considered a threat :rolleyes: Look, nothing destroys Crysis yet, so it can carry the banner of pushing-the-hardware-envelope all by its lonesome until something else comes out. And it's not like Blizzard are the only game dev studio out there. There's plenty of (potentially) system-pushing 3D games coming in the near future: Fallout 3, Alan Wake, Far Cry 2, etc. The sky isn't falling.
Click to expand...

Far Cry 2 is the only PC exclusive game you mention. All the others will look similar on consoles. That difference in quality is there, but most people either won't notice or won't care.

There needs to be SEVERAL crysis-looking PC Exclusive games coming out for cutting edge PC gaming to survive. If not, then the mass exodus to console gaming and leaving the PC for web browsing will continue.
 
damonposey said:
There needs to be SEVERAL crysis-looking PC Exclusive games coming out for cutting edge PC gaming to survive. If not, then the mass exodus to console gaming and leaving the PC for web browsing will continue.
Click to expand...

You (and some other people) are forgetting one of the major advantages of a PC over a console, even with the same games... the PC interface uses a keyboard and mouse. I have a PC and a PlayStation 3, and except for GTA IV, I have never played another game on my PS3. I really only bought it as a Blu-ray Player. I much prefer using a keyboard and mouse over a console controller.

BTW, you don't need a PC for web browsing, either. I have a keyboard (Logitech bluetooth) for my PS3 and I could use it to browse web sites quite easily.
 
AndonSage said:
You (and some other people) are forgetting one of the major advantages of a PC over a console, even with the same games... the PC interface uses a keyboard and mouse. I have a PC and a PlayStation 3, and except for GTA IV, I have never played another game on my PS3. I really only bought it as a Blu-ray Player. I much prefer using a keyboard and mouse over a console controller.

BTW, you don't need a PC for web browsing, either. I have a keyboard (Logitech bluetooth) for my PS3 and I could use it to browse web sites quite easily.
Click to expand...

It's an advantage in terms of player performance, but that's it. Many people prefer the controller because it's more comfortable, you don't need a chair and a desk, and you can just relax and play. So it's subjective as to whether or not the mouse and keyboard is 'better'. Sometimes when I come home from work, I'm so tired I just want to sink into a soft couch and not lift my arms and play some games.

I prefer m/kb for online FPS games(valve games) myself, but I find myself playing my ps3 more lately. If you own a PS3 and you don't have MGS4 you should do yourself a favor and get the best game for the PS3 yet.
 
Personally i prefer a desk and chair to sitting on the couch or recliner as i'm still sitting up in either one. If i play a console game for too long my back usually starts bugging me because i have no back support compared to when i'm playing on my PC and have a good chair that i'm leaning back against.
 
veedubfreak said:
Personally i prefer a desk and chair to sitting on the couch or recliner as i'm still sitting up in either one. If i play a console game for too long my back usually starts bugging me because i have no back support compared to when i'm playing on my PC and have a good chair that i'm leaning back against.
Click to expand...

The more I lean back, the worse I become at the game. I have to sit up and pay attention or I feel the consequences.
 
Chombo said:
I'm sorry chief but I have to disagree with you. Relying on Multiplayer for your game is a great way to see it collect dust once the servers are empty when the next fad comes through. Replayability is where the SP and mod element takes over. Not that it matters from a developer standpoint, you've already bought the game.
Click to expand...
hmmm....bf2, cs, cs:s, sc, ra2 and various other popular games would like to disagree with you on that. Exactly what games do you play if for you sp is more important then mp.
 
Injection of <3 said:
gameplay > graphics

Great graphics do not make up for generic gameplay. Crytek needs to learn that.
Click to expand...

Thats pretty funny as seeing as WoW has about the most generic gameplay in history.

1.Grind to 70
2.Grind for mounts and money
3.Grind in pvp
4.Grind in raids for half your life
5.Start an alt and Re-grind


Anyone else seeing a pattern ? yeh.. wow is succesful because its accessible to a lot of countries its gameplay isnt earth shattering and most people i know play for social reasons. Maybe I am bitter but I get sick of people expecting that their pentium 3 should be able to run the latest stuff.
 
Blizzard makes very good game engines, that look pretty cool. WoW is still a tough game to run smooth, I get only like 30-60fps in-game, mostly 30-45 on average, and look at my sig I have a pretty beefy nice system too. A 3ghz C2D, and 1gb GTX-280 plus 4gb memory and it is still not enough to get a solid 60fps 99% of the time, like I would think this system should do in WoW.

Game settings ; 2560x1600rez on 30" Dsiplay, all options highest quality maxed out, and 8xMultiSample.
 
damonposey said:
Far Cry 2 is the only PC exclusive game you mention. All the others will look similar on consoles. That difference in quality is there, but most people either won't notice or won't care.

There needs to be SEVERAL crysis-looking PC Exclusive games coming out for cutting edge PC gaming to survive. If not, then the mass exodus to console gaming and leaving the PC for web browsing will continue.
Click to expand...

Farcry 2 is a 360 and PS3 game as well. In fact it was announced as a 360 game first, then revealed to be on the other 2 platforms shortly after.

I think the point of the OP is that people will start buying the "lower-end" product because it's not needed for the majority of games out now, slowing progress down since the heavy hitters sell less and less. I would guess a small amount of people(like 5-10%) upgrade their computers to high-end hardware for an anticipated release(like Crysis) to ensure optimal performance, because most everything else won't require it.

Blizzard and Valve seem to be the only developers on the PC that know they are going to have massive sales and make a pile of money, and they do it by releasing shit that's going to run and look decent enough on everything. if Crysis had the hype it did with a release on the PS3 or 360 it would have easily sold 4 or 5 million because everyone could play it. It really didn't do very good considering how anticipated it was.
 
I just looked through this thread and man there are some crazy stuff being said lol. I do want to make a couple of observations though.
1. To those of you that say WoW has NO story... There have been 5 books released with the story and background of the WoW world. The first two that I read where really good books. So your comments about WoW having no story line=Fail
2. I started playing wow about 3 years ago. Before wow I played every game I could get my hands on i would buy hardware to play all those games as much as I could afford. After getting WoW I have only played 2 maybe 3 other games. I built a new system about 16 months ago and haven't touched it after that. I HAVE upgraded my monitors a few times but nothing new other then that. I was going to build a new system but didn't because... I DON"T NEED IT TO PLAY WOW lol so at least there is one person that has "hurt" the hardware industry because of WoW.. ME :)

I also want to say 1 of the 2 maybe 3 games that I played was Crysis and yea it sucked (and I was going to use it as an excuse to upgrade but the game play and bugs kept me from doing that hehe)
 
Books detailing a game's back story don't really equate to the game itself having a strong story or any sort of story-based component imo... I'm pretty sure there's books about Doom and a dozen other FPS's story. :p Most MMORPGs have somewhat of a story regardless but it's really just an excuse to string quests and tasks together, the actual story is the collection of your in-game experiences with other players.

Whether you actually roleplay or not, if you play any of those games long enough you'd start to accumulate friends, experiences, and memorable stories; and that's the entire point obviously. If it weren't for that, MMORPGs would just be a horrible grind (though they can still be) with no point whatsoever. The number of truly awesome stories I still remember about my play time in DAOC is amazing, it accumulated tons of great PvP experiences for me, along with a few unforgettable memories and some nice friends.

That's exactly why some MMORPG players start to ignore other games too... If you really get into it, most other games just aren't as engaging. It took a couple of years for the actual PvP aspect of DAOC to get tired for me, but I had a great time. Once that happened it just wasn't as fun though, it wasn't really a grind (I had plenty of nice characters that I never needed to PvE on), I think that may be a little different across other MMORPGs that better reinforce that prolonged grind though, to really hook ya.
 
Thats pretty funny as seeing as WoW has about the most generic gameplay in history.

1.Grind to 70
2.Grind for mounts and money
3.Grind in pvp
4.Grind in raids for half your life
5.Start an alt and Re-grind
Click to expand...

No wonder you didn't like WoW. You weren't playing a game, you were grinding. Once I took the time to actually read the storyline with quests instead of just accpeting it and looking it up in thottbot, the game really opened up.
 
Reading a story-line out of a static NPC in between actually doing whatever you need to do to finish quests doesn't sound terribly exciting... In fact, it sounds like a really mediocre RPG. ;) I'm sure that's not the main reason a lot of people enjoy WoW.
 
TomGreen321 said:
Farcry 2 is a 360 and PS3 game as well. In fact it was announced as a 360 game first, then revealed to be on the other 2 platforms shortly after.
Click to expand...

Ok good, that just makes my point all the more valid. :D

In the late 90s and early 2000s we had all kinds of exclusive cutting edge action games for the PC. There were many reasons to upgrade. Now, what are the cutting edge exclusive powerhouses? Crysis?

Starcraft 2, Diablo 3, WoW, Spore, Sims. These are the PC gaming powerhouses now. You can keep your hardware you bought years ago and it will be more than enough for the best games PC gaming has to offer. Use that money to get yourself a new HDTV, and a console and/or a hooker.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top